(25-04-2013, 04:24 PM)Temperament Wrote:(25-04-2013, 03:59 PM)WolfT Wrote: i also buy term for my children at age 1. 300k with CI at 250sgd per year only.Actually i buy LI for my baby so that it is kind of "forced saving" for me for him. Only $34/mth. Though i know i may get better return if i invest the money somewhere. Ha! Ha! you are better than me, you include CI too. To me i think it's "funny" because the insurance actuaries will be laughing behind our backs.
Cheers!
Let me make it funnier for you. I bought $100k wholelife with CI for each of my kid from age zero. Thats my only gift to each of them. The rest they will have to wait will I meet my wife again somewhere else again. Whether this makes any financial sense, I don't wish to think about it anymore.
(25-04-2013, 04:18 PM)paullow Wrote: just wondering how does buying critical illness insurance protect ur assets?
unless one has outstanding loans to pay n the amt of critical insurance is pegged to that. but then, mortgage insurance will cover that. correct me i m wrong.
and if one's fixed assets account for a only fraction of his net worth, i don't know life or tpd or critical insurance will help how much.
The only way I think is that he or she can use thr payout to pay for any medicaL or non medical bills related to the critical illness and don't have to touch the assets.
(25-04-2013, 03:59 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:(25-04-2013, 03:38 PM)Temperament Wrote: Someone told me or i read somewhere else, the very rich buy insurance not so much for their life but for the protection of their assets for the next generation. So if you are at least 2 to 3 million in assets person, do you buy critical illness insurance to protect your assets or you think you think it is better to self insured as your assets should be more than enough to cover the calamity. Touch wood they say.
I heard similar story. IIRC it is to protect against the estate duty. Since estate duty is abolished, it is no more a concern.
Please highlight if my understanding is incorrect.
If look at the examples for Universal Life illustrations from various sources, they suppose to help to divide up the assets nicely between the beneficiaries. So that could be another reason too. But this not considered as insurance already.