For this one, they swith the rules, to fuel it even more.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/states-challenge-na...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-intelligence/ai-tech-brief...

https://fortune.com/2026/06/04/spacex-anthropic-massive-ipo-...

I'm guessing this is worse due to the super high valuations of these companies? Mag7 make up like 1/3 of the S&P 500. Even if you buy a low cost index fund with the goal of diversification, your portfolio still includes a lot of this stuff.

no because not every bubble primarily involves companies that make up a large portion of the S&P500

presently the Mag 7 alone make up 33% of the S&P500 total market cap

in 2007, the _entire_ S&P Financials sector (banks, insurers like AIG, brokerages, real estate firms) was only about 22% of the S&P500; the top 10 banks (with Lehman at #10) only made up 9%.

the S&P500 is now a dangerously non-diversified asset but still used by retirement savings inventors as a diversified one

>Similarly, thanks to recent efforts by the Trump administration, the $15 trillion held in private sector workers’ retirement accounts is now, for the first time in history, available to be invested in private funds.

The argument is that retirement savings are being invested in different ways than before.

And things that are not bubbles.

The last bubble was funded by home equity, so no.

Unless you want to claim that all your assets eventually become retirement assets... but then it's vacuous.

[dead]

They want to make it sound like a bunch of older people on fixed incomes are getting scammed. "Retirement savings" to the post-war generation is often millions in securities, real estate, and other assets