I know this isn't the usual bidness and investaments question but I was wondering what everyone recommends.

I had a couple of Modern Woodman policies and one is about to expire and I need to re-up. the one policy that will still be in effect will pay a premium at the end. I'm not all that educated in this part of planning and need some advice.

what does the Hive recommend.

Do you have a wife? Kids? Age? Do they depend on you? If not, I wouldn't get anything.

If you do, and you want to "replace" your income, buy some term life from a good company with good ratings. Lots of sources on the internet. The historical teaching is you should get a policy of 10 to 20 times your annual salary to replace you income. The theory there is your survivors can invest the benefit in conservative channels and live off the gains. That is usual done by investing heavily in safe stuff (i.e. government and highly rated municipal bonds). The return on these has been around 5% (so at 20 times 5% per year, you get your salary every year in return). Having said all that, the bond market and the stock market are absolutely awful (FBHO) and returns are extremely low (and actually NEGATIVE (think about that for a while) in some countries). If you REALLY need it and relatively young and healthy, I might buy more then usual, maybe 30 times your annual salary.

Give me some more info and I'll to to help you. Not a insurance guy BTW, just background/education in finance and interested in it.

Also, be careful with insurance agents. You are swimming with sharks. The good thing is there are lots of alternatives. Unless you are in a very rare situation, avoid any whole or permanent insurance products. They will try to sell you the moon because they make huge commissions on these products.

at the minimum I need a 250K policy and would like a 500K.

Ok. I would check out some online companies. You may want to look here: https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/life-insurance-biggest-companies/

Personally, I would pay a little more to get a good company, at least A+ rated. I have a hunch many may not survive our economic state for long. The good companies that have been around a long time should be fine.

Term life. Buy the length that they would depend on you. If you need more later, you'll pay a lot more for it. Avoid most add ons. Simple term life. Nothing else. It should be cheap.

One more thing, I would really, really think about getting a will. The insurance policy supercedes a will but it frequently becomes a problem. Specify that your kids (and wife) conservatively invest it. This is where lots of people go wrong. A few hundred bucks with a good lawyer can be priceless.

Don't sweat this too much. It's really pretty easy.

 

 
Hmmm. Are you an insurance agent???

Blaming "advice like this" on why people dislike insurance agents is circular cause and consequence fallacy. The reason people dislike insurance guys is because life insurance agents do not have a fiduciary responsibility to their clients, i.e. they do not have to act in their client's best interest (unlike a doctor, dentist, lawyer, CPA, etc). It is a fact life insurance agents, in general, make substantially more profit from permanent life insurance than term policies. They often act in a selfish manner and sell their clients products that are not necessarily appropriate for them in order to maximize their own earnings. That is the reason they get, and rightfully so deserve, a bad rap.

Anyway, back to the OP, I agree with the rest. Buy term. Enough with long enough term to protect you family if the depend on your income. There are very, very few situations I think anything other than term is in your best interest (and unless you make a lot of money, hundreds of thousands per year, have lots of wealth, and/or are in a profession with extremely large risk of big pay-out lawsuits, or you lack enough discipline to save for retirement (but you will earn far less than with a very simple retirement account).

Am I an agent? I guess I wear that hat when the situation calls for it. More importantly I am an IAR working under an RIA, do you need me to get into the nitty gritty of what those acronyms mean (doesn't sound like you're in the industry, but rather some poor guy who might've got burned in the past). Due to my occupation, and in addition to the DOL fiduciary rule, I am REQUIRED BY LAW to act as a fiduciary and in the best interest of my clients. You have no idea what youre talking about.

 

The fact of the matter is that sometimes permanent life insurance policies fit, and sometimes term policies fit instead. Everything boils down to someones situation and the suitability of a specific service or product.


Show us where the insurance agent touched you son.

Sensitive? Did I hit a nerve? I provided a factual, non-inflammatory, non-confrontational response where you are insulting me and telling me I am giving "bad advice."

Look, I'm not trying to fight with you or anyone else. I'm just trying to help a member. You may be fiduciary obligation, but many/most do not. I also never told him it was always a bad idea to buy a permanent policy, but it is overwhelming more likely to be the case. I even included some exceptions in the parentheses.  

OP, if you are thinking about permanent life, do lots of homework.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/life-insurance-agent-wont-tell-you
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paladinregistrycom/fiduciary-or-suitability_b_8133960.html

One last thing, I've found in life when someone gets very passionate or tries to overcomplicate something, it is likely they are personally gaining something from it.

 k

I have to agree with splancnic here...

Generally Ins. agents try to push the products they get more commission on (why not? we're all just trying to make a living and retire). The good ones will listen to their client and truly take care of them in the best way for them.

I too have had a rocky road with life ins. agents in the past. I can't say if all the blame should fall on the agent or not because it's hard to say who is actually at fault for the "balls that got dropped" but the agent didn't seem willing to do much about it. I prefer not to get into details but lets just say the agent was busy or lazy, didn't keep on the horn on some follow-up paperwork, and my wife and I both came back as high-risk (really high rate) even though we were both in our early 20's, didn't smoke or do drugs, no concerning medical issues what-so-ever. It was simply paperwork that didn't get filled out and returned in a timely manner that caused us to come back high risk. I never felt more betrayed; by a guy that acted like my best friend when we sat down and talked.

In a nutshell, term is usually the way to go. There are exceptions: my sister is a surgeon with a high income and high liability. She has a whole life policy and it is probably the right choice for her. She also has large disability and term policies. There are other situations in which whole policies make sense, I just cite her as an example of someone who can benefit from a whole policy. I, on the other hand, am an attorney, which is a career with some but much less personal liability potential, and I make a middle income. I have stepped term policies, such that my family will collect roughly 20x my salary should I die before my kids reach 20 years old, and 10x if I die after they are 20 but before they reach 30. I am fairly comfortable with that amount. Given interest rates, I consider that amount the minimum to protect my family. ETA my wife is also an attorney, though she currently stays at home. She could go back to work and make decent money if something happened to me.