Ask ten people about term versus permanent life insurance and you'll get ten strong opinions, most of them borrowed from someone selling one or the other. Let's do it without the pitch, because they aren't really competitors. They solve different problems.
Term insurance is pure coverage for a set stretch of time. You pay a relatively small premium, and if you die during the term, your family gets the death benefit. If you outlive it, the coverage ends and nobody gets anything. That's not a flaw, it's the design. Term is cheap because most policies never pay a claim. For covering a mortgage or replacing your income while the kids are young, it's often the right tool, and I'll say so plainly when it is.
Permanent insurance is built to last your whole life and to hold cash value inside it. The premium is higher because part of it funds a growing pool you can borrow against, and the coverage doesn't expire as long as it's funded. When people talk about using life insurance as a personal banking system, they always mean permanent, because term has no cash value to work with.
So which one? The fair answer is often both, in sequence or side by side. Cover the raw risk with term so your family is protected today, and build permanent cash value underneath for the jobs term can't do. What matters more than the label is whether the policy is designed for your actual situation instead of the one that pays the biggest commission.
Something to note: this is general education, not advice for your specific case, and I'm a licensed insurance broker rather than your CPA or attorney. The deeper teaching on the permanent side lives at Lifetime LOC, and if you'd rather start with your monthly cash flow, Dynamic Banking is the place.