What you purport to be contradictions are actually false dichotomies created by you.
let me spell it out for you:
The following refers to an IRA:
My point is people may make more rational decisions (profitable sell decisions, anyway) in an IRA because they will not worry about tax considerations in selling bloated stocks.
Whereas the following refers to a taxable account:
So many have a big gain and don't want to take the "tax hit", so the market takes the paper gains away. People on Cisco thread brag of owning stock since 1990. I say so what, you lost 75% of your gains.
And the following, in the context of an IRA, refers to realizing capital gains, juxtaposed against the difficulty many people seem to have in realizing evanescent gains in a taxable acct., before those gains go to Money Heaven:
In an IRA, I think it is psychologically easier to take the money and run, with only cost being spread and nominal commission
Whereas the following, also in the context of an IRA, refers to deferment of taxes, the benefit of which is that taxes on withdrawals can be metered as needed for expenses (or required by actuarials), whereas taxes on windfalls (as can occur in a taxable acct.) allow no such incrementing:
Besides, not being taxed till withdrawal is kinda nice.
So your contradictions are but dictions contrary to what I wrote and intended. You follow up with:
Your contortions prove my point which wasn't actually what you believe it was, but rather that not being taxed 'til withdrawal is an illusion and is not kinda nice.
You have shown no such thing. What is illusory about not being taxed till withdrawal? Please spell it out. |
