AJ,But that's different than the 'no risk' you have touted.AJ, this is the 3rd (or 4th? 5th? I've lost count) time you've flipped around on this, and I have tried to be polite each time... I am beginning to wonder if you have some... non-organic?... reason.I have *NEVER* (not once, ever... go pore through all my posts) *EVER* said using fixed-reset indexing as a strategy, nor using statutory reserve insurance companies as account providers, has "no risk."I have repeatedly said that fixed reset indexing (available in wrap account, index annuities, and indexed life,) has no MARKET LOSS risks.I have repeatedly pointed out that there remain systemic risks... and that by the nature of the structure, the majority of the vulnerabilities such companies incur trail behind vulnerabilities to naked securities strategies, by the fact they are hedged on those same securities, and secured be reserves funded by those securities.In English, anything that can take down a statutory reserve insurance company is going to destroy a whole lot more unprotected securities positions (due to simple lack of sufficient reserves) before the hit on the reserved companies.Carry on. I'm sure that all IULs will be perfectly safe, and nobody will ever lose their money or get shafted by insurers changing terms, so your risk management plan will cover all bases.As Poz says on MeTaR... your absolutism will not serve you. Not even in jeste.I wish you well.Dave
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra