Hacker News Reader

Or a custodian steals the money. Or the beneficiary selects poor investments. Or their employer doesn't do a generous match. Or the retiree switched jobs a few times and never fully "vested" in employer contributions. Or the market doesn't make the "math + time" formula work quite right. Or they couldn't contribute at various times due to family or health emergencies. Or all of these things.

View on HN

Most of these points apply to pensions too. Getting laid off two weeks before your pension vests is an all too common story. Companies go bankrupt and the judge rules the opposite of what he did here. Pension plans themselves can go bankrupt, and although they're insured, it's only up to a certain limit.

And most of your 401k is going to be the money you put in, not the match anyway. So it sucks when you aren't able to vest or your employer doesn't match well, but that doesn't kill the concept.

The formula is proven to work in other countries. My point is you can't refuse to use a defined contribution scheme and then complain it didn't work.

"my retirement is safe and secure, I've invested with Crypto401K"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com