No. of Recommendations: 3
For better or worse, modern society is not a collection of atomized individuals who are separated by distance because we're primarily agrarian homesteaders and yeoman landowners. It's not like colonial days where you if you had a "work/save or starve" choice, it was only you that suffered if you ended up with "starve." That's not where we are any more. That's why we have these systems that impose some constraints on individual freedom - because we've lived through what happens when you don't, and the consequences are rarely limited just to the people who make the bad choices. So we don't let people make every bad choice they might possibly want to make.
*Looks around*
Did somebody argue for zero social safety net? I must have missed that, because it wasn't in anything I typed.
As far as I know, if you put all of your 401(k) into risky startups and they all go bust, there is no bailout mechanism. Now, for this reason a lot of people use what are called "Target funds" in their 401(k)s and IRAs that "Target" a year to retire in. The risk level is adjusted depending on how many years away the person is. But even with those, the risk level is generally kinda moderate.
If somebody wants to park 100% of their retirement savings into crypto, are you willing to fund a bailout if it goes sideways on them? Because I'm not.
