I don’t think your question conflicts with WCI’s advice from the post you linked – he’s right in that it is less important to have the older you get.
Here’s a quick analysis to help you think about 3% vs 6%. Yellow cells can be changed to fit your situation, the rest are formulas. Send a message if it doesn’t make sense.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8lto6xa6td3lbym/3%25%20vs%206%25%20COLA%20Analysis.xlsx?dl=0
Thanks so much!
That spreadsheet is super nifty, and I was able to plug in my exact values.
I guess you are thinking about it very differently than I am.
I realize that the AVERAGE disability claim is for 3 years.
However, my thinking is still about the CATASTROPHIC claim. For me, the "additional cost for 6% COLA" is $9,244.76. That's a lot of money, but only ~3.4% of my pre-tax income for ONE year. I realize that the chance of CATASTROPHIC disability is likely low. On the other hand, that is the MAIN reason that I am purchasing this policy, honestly. As such, it seems like ~3.4% of pre-tax income for ONE year is a low price to pay for inflation adjustment that keeps up with the CPI-U in case of catastrophe.
Otherwise, insurance is, with the probabilities, naturally going to be money-losing, as I am sure they are charging based on probabilities so that they come out ahead, no?
Leave a comment: