This 466% number includes the additional contributions people have made into these plans over the past decade. Without that inclusion the gains in value would have been lower. I’m wondering, too, if it includes self-directed 401Ks which provide a tax haven to the very rich and have much higher contribution limits. These would have grown disproportionately to the 401Ks most wage earners have. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jrose/2018/07/17/the-1-account-all-wealthy-people-have-that-you-probably-dont/
I think more needs to be done here to try and differentiate how much of this increased wealth went to the small investor (typically working a 9-5 shift) and how much of it actually reflects gains at the upper end of the income level (perhaps the top 10 or 20% of the population). I fear digging deeper might only serve to demonstrate the growing wealth disparity among the population over the past decade.
All that said ... the domestic equity markets are up something like 300-400% since the bottom almost exactly 10 years ago, March 9, 2009. (Seems to me the DJI got close to 6500.) So, assuming all participants remained 100% in equities in their 401 K plans, the numbers have a semblance of reality. I doubt that’s the case however. Most diversify. Some borrow from plans. Some types of investments lag the S&P, etc.
-
@Derf - Good question. Here’s some crude calculations (from a non-math guy): Broad U.S equity markets fell around 50% during the bear market (‘07-‘09). So I’ll start by cutting in half a $100 401K balance. That leaves $50 by the time the bear ended. Than I’ll multiply the remaining balance by 466% to reflect its growth over the next decade. That results in a gain of 233% on the original investment (including new contributions) from just before the crash to roughly the present (a 12 year period). The resultant average gain in value is 19%.( But with compounding factored in it would be less.)

FYI: When insurance company MassMutual spent $150 million to acquire OppenheimerFunds almost 30 years ago, it could not have known how stunningly successful the investment would turn out to be. Now it’s on the verge of executing another transaction — one that reflects the more difficult reality that asset managers are facing today.
Regards,
Ted

Yes, that too, ty, but it is important to understand the evolving and challenging nature of comparative advantage, and first to understand comparative advantage in the first place, which is tricky, to fully assess all of these issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
Especially today, as everything is more complex and interrelated than cloth and wine.
@Lawlar's paragraph is simplistic, unfortunately. The calculus of cheap flatscreens and smartphone for all vs damaged families is immensely complex.
This does not exactly address that, being more about FDI (foreign direct investment) than trade as commonly bruited today by the "president", but is interesting for the weedy, a Q&A on China-US relations from a year ago, I think. ICAS-biased, obvs.

Pertinent among other things about the idiocy of win-loss positing.
@Lawlar, the point about FDI added value at around 12-13' might interest you. It is not as onesided as you appear to believe. USA, USA!
IPR violation at ~17'.
Here's the teaser for one of the courses in this area, from 3y ago, but much has changed in the gaseous-sphere, clearly; this was before the last election:
(sorry, not posting right:
put https:// before this, or not
vimeo.com/153105920

I include it in all of its bogo-drama only because it highlights the issues that need to be delved.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4246436-drops-buy-revisited
The More It Drops, The More I Buy - Revisited
Mar. 6, 2019 9:00 AM ETAMZN, BDC...174 Comments115 Likes
Summary
Once again, REITs recovered the majority of their losses after a painful end of the year 2018.
Historical data suggest that REITs will keep outperformance even in times of increasing interest rates.
Fundamentals are strong today with REITs enjoying solid NOI growth and historically strong balance sheets.
We share 3 Top Holdings of our “Core Portfolio" at High Yield Landlord.
This idea was discussed in more depth with members of my private investing community, High Yield Landlord.

@Catch22- Well, he's been busy here, for one thing:
Trump declares national emergency over telecom threats
"The order, which has been under review for more than a year, is aimed at protecting the supply chain from “foreign adversaries to the nation’s information and communications technology and services supply chain”, said the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross.
“Under President Trump’s leadership, Americans will be able to trust that our data and infrastructure are secure,” he said."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/787623/000119312519148019/d751316d497.htm
Update:
497 1 d751316d497.htm TRANSAMERICA MULTI-CAP GROWTH FUND
TRANSAMERICA FUNDS
Supplement to the Currently Effective Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and
Statement of Additional Information
Transamerica Multi-Cap Growth
The Board of Trustees has approved a reorganization pursuant to which the assets of Transamerica Multi-Cap Growth (the “Target Fund”), a series of Transamerica Funds, would be acquired, and its liabilities would be assumed, by Transamerica US Growth (the “Acquiring Fund”), a series of Transamerica Funds, in exchange for shares of the Acquiring Fund. The Target Fund would then be liquidated, and shares of the Acquiring Fund would be distributed to the Target Fund shareholders. Under the reorganization, Target Fund shareholders would receive shares of the Acquiring Fund with the same aggregate net asset value as their shares of the Target Fund. It is anticipated that no gain or loss for Federal income tax purposes would be recognized by Target Fund shareholders as a result of the reorganization.
The reorganization does not require shareholder approval, but is subject to the satisfaction of certain closing conditions. An information statement describing the reorganization will be mailed to Target Fund shareholders in advance of the closing of the reorganization. If the closing conditions are satisfied, the reorganization is expected to occur on or about August 2, 2019. Effective on or about July 24, 2019, Transamerica Multi-Cap Growth will be closed to new and/or additional investments.
* * *
Investors Should Retain this Supplement for Future Reference
May 15, 2019

@johnN: I be interested in knowing what the % of rise from just before The market started to TANK !!
S&P 500 Jan1 2000 = 1499
S&P 500 July 1 2007 = 1527
S&P 500 April 1 2009 = 919
S&P 500 Recently = 2856
Close to doubling !
Have a nice day,Derf

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/05/15/cashin-traders-think-president-got-mondays-market-message.html?&qsearchterm=Art Cashin

Hi @Ted: Thanks for posting the Bespoke Trend Analyzer updates. Good information. Old Skeet's market barometer, based upon its metrics, scores the S&P 500 Index (SPY) at fair value with a reading of 154. This is just short of entering undervalue on the barometer's scale.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-average-401-k-soared-466-over-the-past-10-years-194608825.html
Fidelity’s latest quarterly retirement savings update had something special to celebrate the 10-year anniversary of “the bottom.”
Keep buying...

What is truly important is not the bluster (LSummers counsels exhaling, or something like it).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/theres-a-revealing-puzzle-in-the-china-tariffs/2019/05/14/75df04de-7675-11e9-b3f5-5673edf2d127_story.html
... even when nations have objectives that are in conflict, it is important to seek compromise, to avoid inflammatory rhetoric and to confine rather than enlarge the areas where demands are being made.

Please correct me for any of this write.
--- My brief overview of the tariffs.
1. Item "x" arrives from China and has a 25% tariff applied and paid for by the importer.
2. The tariff duty is paid to the Customs Dept., a sub bureau of the Dept. of Commerce. This money finds its way to the Treasury/general fund. This money is apparently available for whatever use.
3. Item "x" may be a finished product such as a plastic toy; and may be a machine part such as a ball bearing or an assembled bearing set that is part of a front wheel spindle set for a John Deere grass mower built in the U.S.
4. At some point, the importer has a few choices. Eat all of the higher cost and impair their profit margin; eat some of the cost and hope to retain enough of a profit to continue their business model or pass through the higher cost to whomever purchases the item.
5. If the majority of the higher cost is passed to the next purchase level, at some point these folks will have to determine how much of this cost is passed along and eventually becomes a new, higher cost item at the consumer retail level.
Another consideration based upon a 25% or whatever price markup, is a consumer will pay more in excise, possible other federal, state and local taxation on the new retail price. The new, higher price has now risen a bit more.
In spite of the verbal crap being spewed; the end user/consumer will pay the tariff.
I'm sure I'll think of something else as soon as I return to yard work. Oh, well.
Your thoughts please.
Take care,
Catch

Thank you @davfor
I recall this tariff implementation with President Reagan's actions to save a dying Harley Davidson in 1983. HD in the '70's had become known for quality problems and were having their butt's kicked by quality bikes from Japan.
A snippet from the NYT article, and the full article, should be readable from this link.
--- The action, which becomes effective in 15 days, affects large highway motorcycles with an engine displacement of more than 700 cubic inches,the only market in which Harley-Davidson now manufactures. It would raise the current tariff of 4.4 percent to 49.4 percent in the first year of the five-year program. ---
THIS tariff is of the type that had the common usage of protecting a company, no matter the reason. One might look at this as the old fashioned tariff practice.
More later........chores call on a warm, sunny spring day in Michigan.

From that article:
Last year, the U.S. government established a program meant to provide economic support to farmers affected by the trade war. A spokesman for the Agriculture Department confirmed the total amount paid out by that program as of Monday was $8.52 billion, with payments most heavily going to producers of soybeans, corn, wheat, cotton and sorghum.
But here we see the calculus laid bare: Farmers get $8.52 billion of the $18 billion paid in tariffs by consumers through April.
Seems pretty straightforward. So where's the BS?

Here is a little info from "Trump is taxing Americans to support farmers struggling from his trade war" that may serve to generalize a couple of the comments:

....here we see the calculus laid bare: Farmers get $8.52 billion of the $18 billion paid in tariffs by consumers through April...It’s important to remember that farmers are central to Trump’s political rhetoric and a key part of his base.

Hopefully this link works for those who do not subscribe to the Washington Post:
https://washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/14/trump-is-taxing-americans-support-farmers-struggling-his-trade-war/?utm_term=.56ac1cc45d2a

Well, after all, Uncle Sam needs income from whatever source possible to send money to @Ted for not growing stuff. $15 billion here, $15 billion there... pretty soon this starts to add up.

FYI: Tacking onto the past week's losses, yesterday was the first decline of over 2% in more than five months for the S&P 500 (SPY). Currently, every major index ETF has now declined over 4% in the past five days. Small caps and mid caps, in particular, have gotten hit hard as each one has fallen over 5%. Meanwhile, the Nasdaq (QQQ) has more dramatically underperformed, currently sitting just under 6% below where it was last week at this time. QQQ has still outperformed all other major index ETFs on a year to date basis, though. There is also no longer any major index ETF sitting above the 50-DMA. Whereas last week the group was entirely overbought, they head into trading today at either oversold levels or neutral and on the cusp of oversold. As seen through the long tails across each name in our Trend Analyzer, the movement towards this lower end of the ETFs' trading ranges has been rapid. But this pullback provides a good timing opportunity considering each one is still in an uptrend over the past six months
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/interactive/posts/think-big-blog/trend-analyzer-5-14-19-oversold-shift

The below chart is for the etf EEM beginning Oct. 31, 2007. I used this date, as this is near top + or - a week or two for a lot of equities worldwide; prior to the full market melt in 2008. The total return for EEM during this period (through May 13) is -7.9%.

What this shows is just that emerging markets have done slightly worse than, but in line with, developed foreign markets.
Try this plot, where I've added EFA into the mix.
FNMIX, EM Bond, EEM, EFA total return (Oct 31, 2007 through May 13, 2019)
Developed and emerging foreign markets seem to track pretty closely, at least from the visual. According to M*'s chart, EEM lost a total of 4.38% ($10K became $9,562), and EFA gained a total of 8% ($10K became $10,800).

Dear Mr. Brett Arends,
Your brief "bio" indicates some of your educational background includes Cambridge and Oxford, with my presumption being the well known higher education schools in England.
From Forbes, and an apparent self-bio: Contributor
Brett Arends
Most people are surprised that I used to be a management consultant at McKinsey & Co. So am I. (So were some of my colleagues at McKinsey, for that matter). Today I'm a columnist for the Wall Street Journal and MarketWatch. I've appeared on 60 Minutes, the NewsHour on PBS and numerous other radio and TV programs. I've also been a Fleet Street tabloid journalist, a research assistant at the London School of Economics, a Chartered Financial Consultant, and an extra on the stage at Covent Garden. I was educated at Oxford and Cambridge universities, and I’ve written three books nobody has read.
I reviewed his current twitter feed, and another article he posted in about the same time frame as this dribble writing about what the implications of tariffs are and would be to the U.S.; is a write about diets and the health benefits.
I can think of several folks here who are able to write a precise overview of tariff impacts with the same number of words.
His write blames the media for misdirection and yet he doesn't mention the misdirection from the verbal statements of Trump, Kudlow and other associates.
Sidenote as to the real tariff impacts: A budget minded married couple I know had to replace unreliable 15 year old clothes washer and dryer. This was in November of 2018. I happened to discover this and noted that they should do this now, if within their budget; as the new steel tariff was going to cause a price increase. When arriving at their local appliance store; the owner had already posted a large sign on the door stating that most appliance prices would increase 10% after Jan. 1, 2019. Their $1,200 dollar purchase was indeed going to cost $1,320 after Jan. 1.
Lastly, I won't be taking his investment advice any time soon. @Ted . This is your normal copy/paste with a link post. Have you no comment to add about the validity of this misinformation???
Take care,
Catch

Interesting reading. Jim Cramer (of all people) wrote another piece discussing "the other side of the story" complete with short term investing ideas for people so inclined...

President Trump has decided that the U.S. simply shouldn't do business with China and if you do you are going to have to pay the price.

https://realmoney.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/jim-cramer-you-better-strap-yourself-in-14957959