So why have any bonds AT ALL during the accumulation phase since one does not need AT THAT TIME the safety Bonds provide?
Is your assumption that in the long term stocks are safe? Do you have a guarantee that all your investments and earnings will be there if you simply hold until you are X number of years from retirement? Just how many years is that by the way?
Just asking a question about allocation always leads to a lengthy discussion about risk because every investor has a personal point of view and it cannot be changed by an internet discussion because it is in our genes. Some people even have a risk-taking gene and others don't. One thing is clear though, the 100%ers should not be suggesting an all equity portfolio to anyone else because that someone else is probably not a full-blown risk taker, and if the recommendation is taken, the someone will sell in a crisis.
100%ers seem optimistic without due reason to me, but what do I know, I'm somewhat risk averse and and therefore have respect for the potential outcomes that risk can dole out. I simply cannot understand the risk 100% are willing to take. Of course they argue there is no risk.
I'll never understand it and I don't even try any more. But what if something does occur that causes a major loss without recovery in your allotted time frame? Your only reaction will be, I didn't know (add what happened here)... I guess us risk averse folks simply believe it's not all mapped out, something we have not thought of could certainly happen. I don't see how 100%ers can argue with that.
I guess those investors who know that they are at least somewhat risk averse are aware that one can drown in a small lake with an average depth of 4 feet. We apply Pascal's reasoning regarding God to stock risk. Pascal's Wager - Blaise Pascal was a 17th century french philosopher, mathematician and physicist. This is his famous wager: the argument is that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if God exists, since the possibility of eternal punishment in hell outweighs any advantage of believing otherwise. OK, I know it's an extreme example, but I think it conveys the point. We moderate risk just in case...
Finally, there is no way to get all Bogleheads to agree what the right answer is when it comes to risk taking. Furthermore, new, untested investor are likely to misjudge their own risk limit until they are truly tested. On the other hand, it's likely that an investor with the risk-taking gene may come right out of the box with 100% equity and never be seriously bothered by volatility. But of course, the risk-aware will say volatility is not actually the problem you need to be concerned about.
Know your goals, and who you are, and then set your allocation accordingly. Be aware that when you ask for allocation recommendations, the answers will vary according to the respondent"s own personal view, which may not be in sync with yours.
When times are good, investors tend to forget about risk and focus on opportunity. When times are bad, investors tend to forget about opportunity and focus on risk.