SizzlerWA

SizzlerWA t1_j82bdgh wrote

I appreciate what you’re saying, and thanks for the analysis, I think it’s fair.

I just don’t condone doing an end run around the legal shields that corporations provide, otherwise everyday employees could be sued for their involvement in non-criminal work outcomes that people disagree with.

1

SizzlerWA t1_j7y7ikq wrote

Yeah, this feels silly to me. They should be protected by their employer unless they actually did something criminal. Otherwise what’s the point of incorporating?

What’s next if this is allowed to progress?

I’m in favor of addressing climate change even if it costs $, but this is an unfair personal attack if you ask me. The end does not justify the means here.

−1

SizzlerWA t1_j3uux5e wrote

You can invest your 401k in US Treasuries, which is what I believe Social Security invests in. So you could engineer your 401k to have the same investment risk as Social Security (much less risky than stocks).

You can also buy CDs and other risk free investments.

Im sorry that your aunt’s 401k took a nosedive. But investing in a 401k can be as low risk as you want it to be …

−1