Joined
·
973 Posts
I guess this question is mainly for folk that are married or have kids. How many of you ride the road without life insurance? I don't have life insurance yet, so I am staying off the road and on the paved trails for now.
brock said:If someone I loved was dependent on me, I would get life insurance - whether I rode or not. The decission to stay on paved trails instead of the road seems trivial, I don't think I'm signifficantly more likely to get killed on the road than on a trail. If you're into micromanaging risk, stay out of your car.
I actually find it a h*llofa lot safer on the roads than on the M.U.T.s: all the accidents/close calls that I've had w/bozos & their cars have been at either crosswalks, or driveways that intersect the M.U.T.s very seldom out on the open roads (excepting the idiot who intentionally takes his rear-view w/in inches of me).shades9323 said:I guess this question is mainly for folk that are married or have kids. How many of you ride the road without life insurance? I don't have life insurance yet, so I am staying off the road and on the paved trails for now.
One season of MTB: Partially torn ACL, knocked out all my upper front teethshades9323 said:I am not into micromanaging risk or anything. I am currently shopping around for life insurance and decided to stay off of the road and on the paved trails until I have a policy. I think that riding the road IS significantly more dangerous than a paved trail.
While shopping around and being new to roadbiking, it struck me to ask the question. I know there are some people out there that don't have life insurance for whatever reason. I was just wondering if anybody out there rides without it.
I will gladly pay whatever amount I need to to have proper coverage to pay off my mortage. If I died, my wife would have to sell the house and move to a more affordable(single income) home. If something happened to me, I wouldn't want my wife do be burdened financially. The emotional toll would be too much for her already.skulls said:Now, I don't ride that much (certainly not as much as I'd like), but I really don't see the need for life insurance, whether you ride or not. Sure, there is a chance that something could happen, but that's the case anywhere anytime. Everyone has their unique situations, but for me, commercial life insurance doesn't make financial sense -- I think you'd do a lot better self insuring - just setting aside the money that you pay to the life insurance company in case something does go wrong. Of course, it wouldn't be nearly as much as it would be if you got killed somehow and youre family collected on the policy, but that is unlikey to happen.
It's my opinion that life insurance is a financial product whose time has passed. 50 years ago, people used to die at work with alarming frequency in industrial accidents, or get shipped off to war. Life insurance made a great deal of sense then, because if the primary breadwinner in the family (usually the father) did die, the mother was often ill equipped to enter the working world and provide for the family. Life insurance acted as a buffer that would mean a family would not be put out on the street if the father was killed in an accident at work - something that was a very real possibility for my parent's generation.
Now, things are much different. Deaths from industrial accidents are much lower, because of better safety regulations and the fact that fewer people work in dangerous occupations. Also, many more women are working outside the home, or would be able to find a job if they needed to. Furthermore, you have a much more developed network of child care services that would help a suddenly single parent cope with working and raising kids than what existed in the past.
It is true that if I did die in an accident or for whatever reason, a life insurance policy would be highly convenient for my wife and kids. Like the other poster, I think I have about $100,000 coverage through work automatically - not a huge amount, but it wouldn't hurt. But I think that for what life insurance actually costs (which to me seems like alot!), you would be better off just setting your money aside - that way you still have it even if you don't die!
Of course, people who work in extremely hazardous situations or who draft semis for fun may want to consider a little more carefully....
Statistics for 2004 (from Insurance Instute for Highway Safety web site):shades9323 said:I will gladly pay whatever amount I need to to have proper coverage to pay off my mortage. If I died, my wife would have to sell the house and move to a more affordable(single income) home. If something happened to me, I wouldn't want my wife do be burdened financially. The emotional toll would be too much for her already.
Of those deaths, most are either kids or people riding on the wrong side of the street or in some other unconventional way. Few of the 800-or-so cyclist deaths each year are regular adult road cyclists... Some are "roadies," and we've had an awful spat of 3 here in Oregon recently, but I bet fewer than a couple dozen are roadies each year. So life insurance isn't the concern, unless you actually think you can win a lottery this year....Mark McM said:Statistics for 2004 Cyclist deaths: 719
Score: thinking 0, facts 1. In fact, MUTs are more dangerous than the road. This is borne out by repeated studies. Contact the League of American Bicyclists for more info (bikeleague.org).shades9323 said:I think that riding the road IS significantly more dangerous than a paved trail.
skulls said:Now, I don't ride that much (certainly not as much as I'd like), but I really don't see the need for life insurance, whether you ride or not. Sure, there is a chance that something could happen, but that's the case anywhere anytime. Everyone has their unique situations, but for me, commercial life insurance doesn't make financial sense -- I think you'd do a lot better self insuring - just setting aside the money that you pay to the life insurance company in case something does go wrong. Of course, it wouldn't be nearly as much as it would be if you got killed somehow and youre family collected on the policy, but that is unlikey to happen.
It's my opinion that life insurance is a financial product whose time has passed. 50 years ago, people used to die at work with alarming frequency in industrial accidents, or get shipped off to war. Life insurance made a great deal of sense then, because if the primary breadwinner in the family (usually the father) did die, the mother was often ill equipped to enter the working world and provide for the family. Life insurance acted as a buffer that would mean a family would not be put out on the street if the father was killed in an accident at work - something that was a very real possibility for my parent's generation.
Now, things are much different. Deaths from industrial accidents are much lower, because of better safety regulations and the fact that fewer people work in dangerous occupations. Also, many more women are working outside the home, or would be able to find a job if they needed to. Furthermore, you have a much more developed network of child care services that would help a suddenly single parent cope with working and raising kids than what existed in the past.
It is true that if I did die in an accident or for whatever reason, a life insurance policy would be highly convenient for my wife and kids. Like the other poster, I think I have about $100,000 coverage through work automatically - not a huge amount, but it wouldn't hurt. But I think that for what life insurance actually costs (which to me seems like alot!), you would be better off just setting your money aside - that way you still have it even if you don't die!
Of course, people who work in extremely hazardous situations or who draft semis for fun may want to consider a little more carefully....