unbroken existence insurance pros and cons?
Answers:
Whole life (or brass value) insurance builds up cash good point, but term insurance is cheaper. I articulate buy term and invest the difference surrounded by a good no-load mutual fund at vanguard.com or fidelity.com. You can also invest the difference surrounded by your 401K at work. The cash utility you build up from these investments will probably be higher than the unbroken life insurance.
Other Answers:
pro: The policy will stay next to you as long as you live. It builds up a cash appeal that can be borrowed from of claimed on surrender of the policy. Some policies can be made paid up at a convinced age.
con: It is generally more expensive consequently term insurance (which is singular temporary insurance)
mrjo pretty much nail it. the same argument can be expanded to adjectives permanent insurance.
UPDATE:
Pension Maximization is a pious point OPM. Also, unless Congress acts, Estate Taxes are another motivation one might have a significant inevitability for coverage later contained by life. In postscript, beyond the "need" there are also sometimes "wants" that would ring for maintaining immense policies into one's later years, such as endowment, charitable gifts to colleges or other organizations that are prominent to the individual.
One other pro, if held for life it costs give or take a few 1/6th of term.
The con is that most populace need little insurance for their entire energy. The exception is married recipients of pension, who can in spot on circumstances improve their retirement income by replacing the unified annuity with a single annuity and a compensated up policy of equal value to the allowance. Most insurance obligations disappear near age, except burial and final medical expenses. Still, if you are young, $10,000 today is like mad of money with inflation surrounded by 80 years. Even in six decades, from a stern of the envelope calculation, it become $110,000.