deepblueli
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2004
- Messages
- 655
- Reaction score
- 34
IMHO, there's some very serious stereotyping -> Whole life = Mixing Protection with Investment.
If the intention of buying a whole life policy is for investment, that's obviously not right. The primary purpose of insurance should be for financial protection in certain designated events. Hence for people who are buying whole life insurance, the intention should be to have a protection for life.
And this bring me to the second point. Different people have different perspective on insurable interest. Some wants to be insured for every possible thing and some don't even view an IP shield plan as necessary. By simply saying once a person has retired, one should already have invested and earn that pot of Gold, have no more dependants etc is also simplistic. If things are so simple such that everyone can follow this blueprint and emerge successful, there will not be any poor people in SG.
So in summary, primary purpose of insurance should be for financial protection in times of need. One must take responsibility to understand how much, how long and for what events. There is no one size fits all but generally the undisputed consensus is H&S is a must and a finite term plan covering death/tpd is essential. Anything else will depend on individual's circumstances and pocket.
Yes, and hope that you don't need to do any claim at all while alive!

