Yep. So glad I saw the writing on the wall, or finally went more conservative, or whatever in 2006 and 2007. I finally realized I am old and unemployed and went from 95% equities to about 75% equities when prices were good. (Still way more daring than the “experts” would suggest for someone my age), but I totally disagree with conventional wisdom of 50-50 stocks and bonds. I own no bonds. Stocks and cash equivalents for me. If 75-25 stocks and cash is not good enough, life is not worth the hassle anyway.
2008 decline is not near as painful as 1987, when I was 100% invested. I have about 7 years spending in cash equivalents, even more if I live long enough to start collecting my socialism security checks this November. If I die too soon, some little red guard enlistee (draftee?) will enjoy the fruits of my 38 years of “contributions” to FDR’s socialist dream.
I have felt way more secure since I paid off my first (and only) house mortgage in 8 or 10 years, 25 or 27 years ago, and got my second son through college five years before I retired in 1998 at age 52. I would not have considered retirement when I still owed on my home or had dependent children.
Just from my observation, that is the problem people I know made or are making...they are getting older, but aren't moving investments from the volatility of stocks to the relative stability of bonds. I guess it comes from the illusion we all have that we're still "young". :)