[j-walker]

Isn't the counter-point to this the stock price of PG&E? Look at its performance over the last 5 years, it's down to ~$11 from ~$50.

If the the whole market looked like this in the next year, people's 401k accounts would probably be demolished.

[Guest42]

Investing is inherently risky and prices ought to reflect a companies viability and performance. 401ks give a variety of options to reduce risk including money markets, bonds, and stocks in different sectors with diversification options

[paulhodge]

Just optimizing for 401ks is going about it wrong. $500b from the stimulus went to corporations, which indirectly boosts stock prices, which indirectly boosts 401ks. (unless the market still crashes). It's essentially trickle-down economics. If we wanted to improve individual's retirement savings then it would more effective to just divert more of that $500b to social security.

[bitcoinbutter]

The stimulus packages seem more focused on ensuring that asset prices remain inflated. The idea that the average person will see any major impact from the S&P500 dropping to 2000 points is laughable.

How many people do you know that truly had their lives ruined by the 2008 crash? Allowing the markets to find a bottom and recover creates opportunities for social mobility.

The people who don't want asset prices to drop are rich people. They are the ones who own the assets.

[mandelbrotwurst]

It isn't going to be every company. It's better in the long run for the health of the market if companies' financial success correlates with their asset prices - it isn't good for investor confidence to add in an X factor of whether companies are going to have the political capital needed to get bailed out.

[ericd]

There's a reason 100% allocation to equities is generally not recommended for retirement accounts...