Add new comment

While I sympathize with the point of this post, creating a re-market for life insurance policies does seem like it could be a way to enable people to liquify one of their least liquid assets at the time when they most need the money. Obviously, this is an area which could become ripe with abuse and exploitation, but if strictly and carefully regulated, allowing the policyholder to use the funds they have paid in rather than reserve it for their heirs seems like an excellent idea. People may pay in for years while they have dependent children, but if they then need that money for their own care later in life, having a secondary market to provide this liquidity may very well benefit the policyholder immensely. Thank you for bringing this shadow market to light, and I would be interested to know if your objections to the practice are based on an objection to the monetization of life inherent in life insurance in general or if there are specific abuses being propagated in this particular reinsurance field which are objectionable?