Being 37 I agree. But had I worked 40 years, retired, and lost 55% of everything I contributed over 40 years, the balcony looks a little more tempting
I see your point, but I'm gonna play devil's advocate here.
If people had contributed for 40 years, they didn't lose 55% of their contributions, maybe 55% of their gains (if they had shitty advisers). And, within a year, they would have re-cooped around 30%. And now, even with inflation, would be back to almost where they were before the crash, assuming they continued to take the same distributions. If they left it alone, they'd be at all time highs.