The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing


Subject:  Re: Roth VS Traditional Date:  7/8/2004  7:53 PM
Author:  PosFCF Number:  41514 of 88492


I'm curious what the Fools think. Any comments?

I'll take a stab at this from a different angle than the other excellent answers you've gotten.

I'm an agressive investor. I want my money to grow much faster than seems to be possible by adhering to "conventional" approaches. I've taken the time to learn how to be a good investor and the learning process will probably only end when I do. I've gotten quite good at it and have rates of return I'm happy with.

That is all prelude to the approach I've taken to answering the Traditional vs Roth IRA debate.

If one is going to take a "slow and steady as she goes" route in investing the assets in the IRA, I think the advice of going with the Traditional has a lot of weight to it. I mean why pay 15-30% in taxes on an account that will likely yield much less than that in returns?

However, if one has the skillset, the personality, the risk tolerance, and the performance results that offer that person the likelihood of better than average returns, then the Roth IRA makes more sense to me. Especially so if one has a decent time horizon until retirement.

Another feature about the Roth that I like is that there is no mandatory age at which distributions must start and no mimimums that have to be taken out. If I don't need it in early retiremnet, I want it to keep growing tax-deferred.

I have all of my IRAs as Roths.

Don't recommend my approach for anyone, just throwing another viewpoint into the ring for consideration.


Copyright 1996-2018 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us