Hi,

I completely understand levered ETFs, and would only suggest you limit inverse ETFs. Looking at levered ETFs such as the S&P and others show a historic long bull that average investors like me cannot achieve unless I park my money in here.

This is just another ploy to keep wealth in the hands of the elite and prevent the middle and lower class from obtaining passive income and/or improve their social standing. This is absolutely appalling and unsuprising consider the wealth inequality in the US. If you could stop crippling future generations with a shrinking middle class, that would be phenomenal.

I believe investors should be able to make their own decisions based on the opportunity to invest in innovative technology. Many investors dont have the millions or billions of dollars to invest in start ups or big private equity deals like all the multi billionaires, VCs andPE firms do and by limiting the average retail investor to only buy proven mutual funds that are a basket of stocks you will never give them the same opportunity to invest in early innovative technology that give a much better risk reward than an S&P fund.

I don't believe you should have the right to limit the choices I make with my money, even for my own good. Some of the successes we get might be just luck, and sometime knowledge is your worse enemy, but in the end what I do with my money is my choice. History shows that what we think we know is not what is so, Washington mutual bank, MCI and others closed their doors overnight and yet they were deemed large and solid. If I want to go tomorrow to Las Vegas and bet all my saving on Red, nothing keeps me from doing that.

I should be able to choose any investment I would like without any special tests or testing. Investing in cryptocurrencies is a very important aspect in the diversification of my investment portfolio.

How is owning a security a bigger threat than owning a firearm? Currently I dont have to take any tests or demonstrate any knowledge to own a firearm or ammunition, and any risks involved with gun ownership the government considers acceptable. So how exactly does these new rules protect me? I dont see how the government can tell me Im competent enough to own a firearm and ammunition but not a security.