|
If I weren't lucky enough to have worked for a company that maneges it's 401(k) extremely well, I could have lost a lot of money. Thankfully, we have a good 401(k), in which we are allowed to choose where themoney goes, and I actually made 20% in each of the last two years (apartly because I chose wisely, partly becuase we have really good people on it). The other company in which i have a 401(k) was a brokerage firm, obviously highly regulated by the SEC, and thus we had only a few mutual funds to choose from in our 401(k) (and rightly so - I don't disagree with that policy at all, because that kind of SEC policy keeps everyone honest), and that didn't do so well. Only in the last few months has it finally shown a profit.
But, given that rocking of the stock market, I believe most would have done quite poorly.
But - I will say this - do not disparage the beauty of the 401(k) just beuause of Enron. I know of some people who eliminated their 401s because of Enron, and did so quite stupidly. Some 401s allow the owner to invest in whatever stocks or investments they want; some, like my first company, allow us to choose areas of investment (such as mid-caps, real estate, etc., but not specific stocks or spefific real estate), and some, like my brokerage house, or restricted by law to a very small set of investments; and some, sadly, probably still have 401s that invest solely in that company's stock. But the latter case is pretty damn rare any more, after Enron.
A 401(k) is still a DAMN good idea, especially if your company matches funds. But only if you can have some say in investment, and if none of that investment is in that company's stock.
But, man, I feel sad for people who stopped putting money into their 401s and into their IRAs just because of Enron. So much like cutting off your nose because your friend has a cold.
|