Commissions on whole life premiums are too high?

This is a follow up to my last post on whole life commissions.  If I don't answer your question here, then go to the prior post.

Another interesting thought about the claim that whole life commissions are exorbitant is that why pick on whole life commissions?  Why not car sales commissions?  Why not term life commissions, which are also high? 

And, perhaps more importantly, what is so important about the percentage? 

Let's take a really extreme example:

There is an investment where you make 30% per year guaranteed and the commission on the initial sale is 90%.  So, rounding off, that means you really begin with 10% of your initial investment.  At 30% per year, it would take approximately 10 years to break even, but your investment would grow incredibly after that.  Given that a guarantee of 2% would be very good right now, let's just compare our 30% guaranteed return with a 90% commission versus our 2% guaranteed return at no commission. 

It takes ten years to break even, but after twenty years our 30% return investment is ten times the 2% investment even if you paid no commission. 

Now, I'm not suggesting that whole life insurance will return 30% per year.  My point is that a commission has to be compared mathematically to the overall picture.  If a properly structured whole life contract is a good deal, even with the commission, then you shouldn't care about the commission.  In fact, you should be glad that you've paid the commission for the good advice.  If the whole life contract is not a good deal, then you shouldn't buy it, even if the commission is essentially nothing.