Readers voiced their opinions this week on everything from PPACA to Amy Grant. Check out some of our favorites, and then submit your own comments on any story on LifeHealthPro.com.
In response to Working with Seniors: Make Sure They Understand Annuities
“How can anyone with any form of mental impairment (no matter how slight) be of sufficiently sound mind to enter into a legally binding contract with certainty? How can anyone with any form of mental impairment be reasonably expected to completely understand and remember what (s)he has agreed to? Do you really think that the judge, jury or general public will accept that contract later as legitimate or legally binding, or will it be seen as a form of coercion on the part of the insurer and/or material misrepresentation on the part of the applicant that (s)he is of sound mind?
“If the applicant’s family is necessary to join the contract negotiations to support a mentally impaired person’s agreement to that contract, wouldn’t it make more sense for the family to own the policy themselves and simply make the mentally impaired applicant a beneficiary? Isn’t a fair and honest deal supposed to rest on the full competence and good faith of the parties involved?
“The best interests for all concerned is to keep anyone with the slightest evidence of mental impairment from being a party in any kind of legally binding contract. Extensive time and effort spent in defiance of this fundamental truth will bring nothing but sorrow, regret and woe to all the parties involved, guaranteed.”
In response to This Looks Like a Job for…Amy Grant?
A.P. Hill said:
“Agree 100%. The increasingly erratic behavior of the NAIC brings closer the day when regulation will be a federal responsibility, not the states. What are they thinking?”
In response to The Key to Unlocking Referrals to a CPA’s Clients
“I’ve been trying to crack that CPA nut myself in my health insurance/employee benefits practice. Every CPA admits that what I deal with is their client’s 2nd or 3rd biggest fixed expense, but even when I present them innovative solutions for their clients, I can’t seem to get them motivated to take an action on behalf of their client’s best interests.”
Benjamin Ramsey wrote:
“Anecdotal, but in my own experience looking at people’s 401k options, it seems that average fees might be around 1%. Usually folks have an option to choose something with fees under 1% as well, so really I think the current situation is not too bad. I agree with the sentiment, and even more transparent fees will help too. The growing popularity of low-cost ETFs and index-tracking funds are driving down fees across the board as well.
“I’m not convinced of a need for a new, overarching ‘guaranteed retirement account’ program. I do think it could be helpful to have some minimal mandatory savings, or at least make 401k savings the ‘default’ when you start the new job, with opt-out requiring some deliberate effort. Natural human psychology leads all too many to save far too little, so some bit of guiding hand there would be in all of our best interest. But let the system itself remain privately run.”