Which of you has disability insurance?

I can only recommend to everyone to apply for legal protection insurance (of course with a different insurance company) at the same time as their disability insurance. I work as a specialist nurse for intensive care / anesthesia in a large hospital in RLP and repeatedly hear from chronically ill patients that the disability insurance refuses to pay (they almost always find reasons!). Only after years of legal disputes did many receive payment, and you have to have the money for that first.

I canceled my disability insurance and invested in capital assets.

I find your post a bit undifferentiated,

First of all, it would be interesting to know how the occupational disability presents itself in the individual case; a chronic illness is not a free pass for insurance benefits. Furthermore, it always depends on the individual policy what exactly was agreed upon. Is the insurer allowed to refer abstractly/concretely, meaning could the affected person still perform other jobs (even if only theoretically)? What prognosis period does the disability define, do you need a certificate for 3 years or only 6 months? Is a reexamination allowed later? Or did the applicant maybe not do things properly when signing up (keyword "health questions")?

Here it applies that a "cheap policy," which was best concluded casually via a comparison portal, usually causes a lot of trouble in the event of a claim, just as investors should be cautious with exaggerated return promises (see e.g. "Prokon" or "German Pellets").

The next question then is how much you want to invest in which type of capital investment in order to even approximately reach the amounts needed to compensate for the loss of your income over years?
There is an average of about ~750 euros "reduced earning capacity pension" if you cannot work longer than 3 hours/day in any job (with insurance, this would be called "abstract referral" again). If you are still younger and have not paid enough into the pension insurance, or theoretically can work more/do something else, there is even less or nothing at all. And that only until reaching the regular retirement age, where there is even less because you have not paid contributions for a long time.

Of course, you can accept that and prepare for a life with social assistance, but then you also don't need a "capital investment" anymore, or only such that falls under the term of protected assets. In the end, only the state benefits from that, because a property can hardly be maintained with the income and any private retirement provision merely ensures that you do not become a burden on society upon retirement.

By the way, those who do not have money for a legal dispute receive "legal aid" in Germany.

At an annual income of 40,000 EUR, there is about 1,100 EUR EU pension. 40,000 EUR annual income does not quite correspond to 2,100 EUR net. However, one saves one of the two cars, so at least 500 EUR per month. The gap is about 500 EUR per month. Wow. I would say a little less money to save. There are additional tax advantages for the other spouse due to joint assessment, so the gap is even smaller. If there were any professional expenses, these also no longer apply.

Otherwise, karni is right: There are two things, being right and getting justice. The BU only covers the case of being occupationally disabled but not totally disabled. Yes, those who have burnout, if anyone should acknowledge it, are not suddenly healed just because they work as a warehouse worker instead of as an office drone. And yes, I know, the BU also pays in case of full disability, but for this case you have the state EU pension.

I think you can also live well on a salary and if an EU pension is added, then that is a bonus. In most countries in the world, there is no such thing as BU insurance at all or at most as a niche. Many professions in Germany are either not insured or only insured at horrendously high rates. Many BUs are also only temporary, i.e. you are BU for a few months and then either healed or dead. The case that someone becomes BU in their 30s and the insurance then pays mid five-figure amounts every year for over 50 years is extremely, extremely rare.

Well Grym ... that's exactly what insurance is for; a protection against a risk with a very low probability of occurrence and a high damage value. The collective loses money on every insurance because the insurance company itself makes a profit.

I also doubt the high damage value. I also think that with an income, life is great (+ joint assessment = tax advantages + possibly other income besides employment + EU pension - minus car costs - minus other work-related expenses, etc.).

A disability insurance is sensible for a surgeon in the USA who earns half a million upwards and relies on special physical abilities. Not sensible if you earn 2,300 EUR net and insure yourself so that you do not have to work in a lower-paid job for 1,900 EUR net. Or that you fall from 2,300 EUR net to 1,300 EU pension, but at the same time have lower expenses and tax advantages for the spouse.

And on top of that, yes, correct: the probability of occurrence is very low. At least that you are permanently unable to work from a young age into old age but do not die. According to this logic, you should no longer drive a VW Passat but always drive a full-sized SUV or truck/own bus or similar because mortality is lower in these vehicles. According to this logic, you should never ride a bike again, never be on foot or driving a car without a helmet, etc.

So, living on one income is not easy for us, and I want to have that cushioned. Especially since my insurance pays back a significant portion of the contributions...