This is just one paragraph from a post by nisiprius at the bogeheads.org site. This LINK should take you to the page if you want to view the entire post but if you want to do so and get to the post you will have to scrowl down to read the post. nsiprius is specifically talking of a single person immediate annuity but what he has to safe is equally appropriate to a two-life annuity with T-C.

 "Some points I think most people will agree on is that 1) SPIAs are primarily of interest to people who don't have enough assets to do without them. 2) For apples-to-apples comparison of equivalently safe income sources, SPIAs really do yield more income than a truly "safe" withdrawal rate from an individual investment portfolio. 3) That additional income is directly at the expense of ones' heirs. 4) If one is going to use SPIAs the sensible use of them is to cover hard-core truly needed expenses, expenses that really can't be compromised without serious consequences. Investment portfolios will do better on the average, and are appropriate for the portion of one's expenses where it is possible to cut back to adapt to a run of bad luck in the markets."

I personally disagree with his first point 1) as my interest with one is to provide a secure base income level for my wife by possibly taking a two-life payout with a 20-year guarantee period. I like his point 3) because I think in goodly (but not entirely) explains Sy's aversion to annuitizing, it would reduce the estate that will eventually pass to his considerably younger wife. This is not a problem for me and so it does not affect me but the point is correct.

Hope it is of some value to others.

Ray