Comments on: YOU do not need life insurance…story 1

By: CA Sukumaran

CA Sukumaran — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:13:55 +0000

Param you are right and so is Subra. The moral hazard of insuring the life of a non earning housewife is far greater than ….letting a …

By: Param

Param — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 04:01:11 +0000

suggesting a way to beat the system… take term insurance while wife is working. after she quits, will the contract still be valid – or is it contingent on her earning the same till she dies???

By: subra

subra — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:43:56 +0000

no income being earned no term insurance is the correct stance. the moral hazards of a wife being insured is too high.

By: Param

Param — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 07:08:04 +0000

Agree with you, except for housewife part… My wife, even if not working provides a critical support that enables me to be a earning member. In her absence, I might have to either quit my job or shift to a reduced hours schedule, that would impact my earning significantly. The other option would be have a full-time maid/nanny/home-teacher (single person or multiple folks) at home, that might cost about 5-10K a month depending on where you live. I think life insurance on your housewife should be relevant considering this. It is unfortunate that insurance companies in India ignore the indirect earning potential of housewife and refuse to sell term plans, or push low SA (like <1 lac) or whole-life & endowment policies only. It is even more infortunate that you indirectly seem to support that stance.

By: Indian Thoughts

Indian Thoughts — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:08:09 +0000

Hey I reading for quite long now.
I agreed with you 100% for the first time
I always get confused when i see people buying insurance without any need.