wagemonkey
Confused about dryer sheets
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9
Hello,
Here‘s the scenario:
I’ve had two Whole Life policies for approximately 3 years. They are similar in most regards(monthly cost, coverage, etc….). EXCEPT :
Policy A(USAA) has done surprisingly well (for an inefficient vehicle) and has built up cash value and paid-up additions quickly--it is worth about what I have put into it.
Policy B (NYL) is a total pig and has been ridiculously inefficient and expensive--high cost, commissions, etc…..
I really don’t need either of these policies, but I sure don‘t need both. In fact, I didn’t need them when I bought ’em since I am single and have a little bit of net worth. One was purchased in sympathy for an old friend the other was to prove what a rip-off the first one was.
I am well aware that this was not one of my best decisions. I fell for the “get coverage while you can” and “life insurance as estate planning” pitches. Also, six percent return didn’t sound so bad after the equity melt-down of 2000--02.
At the time, I was not in ER program mode and so the money I spent was not missed but now I am certain that I could put this money to work in a better place.
My guess is that most of you will say I should get rid of both of these policies, but………..
My question is this:
If I want to unload one of these, which policy should get the boot?
Should I cash out of the better policy that I can break-even on and keep the(thus far) inefficient policy B with all of the sunk-costs or should I keep the relatively more efficient policy A and cut my losses by punting the stinker?
If you need more details I will happily provide them.
Thanks in advance.
wm
Here‘s the scenario:
I’ve had two Whole Life policies for approximately 3 years. They are similar in most regards(monthly cost, coverage, etc….). EXCEPT :
Policy A(USAA) has done surprisingly well (for an inefficient vehicle) and has built up cash value and paid-up additions quickly--it is worth about what I have put into it.
Policy B (NYL) is a total pig and has been ridiculously inefficient and expensive--high cost, commissions, etc…..
I really don’t need either of these policies, but I sure don‘t need both. In fact, I didn’t need them when I bought ’em since I am single and have a little bit of net worth. One was purchased in sympathy for an old friend the other was to prove what a rip-off the first one was.
I am well aware that this was not one of my best decisions. I fell for the “get coverage while you can” and “life insurance as estate planning” pitches. Also, six percent return didn’t sound so bad after the equity melt-down of 2000--02.
At the time, I was not in ER program mode and so the money I spent was not missed but now I am certain that I could put this money to work in a better place.
My guess is that most of you will say I should get rid of both of these policies, but………..
My question is this:
If I want to unload one of these, which policy should get the boot?
Should I cash out of the better policy that I can break-even on and keep the(thus far) inefficient policy B with all of the sunk-costs or should I keep the relatively more efficient policy A and cut my losses by punting the stinker?
If you need more details I will happily provide them.
Thanks in advance.
wm