[beguiledfoil]

>Your 401k is 100% yours. There is no risk of your 401k account "going bankrupt" because too much of it was given to others.

Systemic risk is present either way. You're just playing category theory sleight of hand and drawing distinctions between forced savings plans that aren't meaningful.

[thereare5lights]

I don't see how actually having control over where you invest your money in a 401k vs having none whatsoever in a pension is "category theory sleight of hand" or a distinction lacking in meaning.

[beguiledfoil]

Do you index or do you actively manage your 401k?

[thereare5lights]

So your argument is that, choosing to index instead of actively manage is the same thing as not having the option at all?

[beguiledfoil]

The risk is systemic either way. Those in this thread feel good about themselves for contributing more than others, but long run they're in the same boat as those 'others'.

You never escape systemic risk. The reality is that guaranteed pensions have a track record of getting people to save for retirement. Those programs are gone now and people don't save. The clever reductionists in this thread blame the workers, but placing blame is an exercise that bears only schadenfreude. Personally, I'm interested in lessening systemic risk - and that doesn't mean buying more bonds with shit yield.