[HLRoku]

I don't really follow how having money in stocks, bonds and a house is somehow capable of being wiped away by the market when a savings account in a bank wouldn't be in dire straits with such an economic upheaval to render those 3 investments useless

[Laaw]

I'm sorry you don't follow, but it should be fairly obvious that stocks can crash, bond markets can collapse, and home prices can plummet, whereas money in FDIC insured savings accounts would only be lost in the event of a catastrophic, country-jeopardizing event, in which case we'll all have bigger problems.

I'm not meaning to attack anyone personally, I just think this survey is trying to suss out what percentage of Americans are in a position such that an economic downturn would hurt them severely.

I also don't know much at all about finances, so take what I'm saying with a jar of salt.

[morgante]

Not even the worst stock crash in history was a 99% drop.

Also, you are almost 100% wrong about the intention of the article. It's not that they're trying to make some point about people's poor asset allocation, it's just sloppy reporting.

If their actual point was that people had too much money invested, wouldn't the most obvious and actionable advice for the "What to Do If Your Savings Fall Short" section be to sell some shares and transfer the cash into a savings account?

It's on you to prove why your financially unwise viewpoint is correct.

[Laaw]

The attitude you're bringing to this conversation makes me entirely unwilling to continue. Sorry.

[morgante]

I think you're the one who might need an attitude adjustment. Instead of providing reasoning for why cash is necessary, you continue to belittle people who invest their assets.