Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86
The cost of coverages increases when you're more likely to die, not when you're more likely to need it. I'm just about to turn 30, have a mortgage, a baby, and a wife staying home with the baby. If I die today, they will need a material amount of money to replace my income. If I die in 25 years from now, the kid will be done school and out of the house, the house will be paid off, and my investments will be sufficient to pay for full retirement for me and my wife. At that point I won't NEED any life insurance at all, even though it's more likely that I'll actually die, which makes the coverage more expensive.
(It's probably worth adding here that the term I have I bought through Slava, and it was a great experience, so no offense is intended to him)
|
None taken, and we're on the same page. I guess I just meant more likely to use the coverage. Odds of dying in your 30's are slim, but financially it would have a greater impact than someone who dies say at 70 (more likely and of course not a hard and fast rule). For the vast majority of people they need far less insurance at 70 than they do at 30. My position is that rarely do people want/need none because of tax issues and things like that, but a lot of people self-insure at that point and are good with that.