I object to proposed rule #22-08. I believe it is the investor's responsibility, or in other words, my responsibility to choose whcih investments are best for me. I shouldn't have to go through a special process to dietermine if I'm allowed to invest in a publicly available investment. This rule appears to me to restrict certain investments to select few that meet
1. i sh0uld be able to choose public investments not regulators.Leveraged&invers funds are imp. for my investment.
{I should be able to invest my money where, when and with whom I deem necessary. The government should stay out of my rights. They take enough tn taxes.
I feel strongly that FINRA's proposed rule (#22-08) is incorrectly applies 'investor protection' as FINRA's stated purpose is, specifically with regard to leveraged and inverse products. As a user of such products, were these rules implemented, I would be forced to potentially re-create the same sort of exposure on my own which is a far greater risk to my own
quit screwing with the american people and out investments.
I am strongly opposed any additional regulations to leveraged and inverse securities. All investments have an element of risk; by requiring a list of pre-requisites to trading these securities, you decrease the investor base with access which could add to increased volatility as well as making the acquisition and disposition of said securities much more difficult. Additionally, further
There is no reason to outlaw these products further, elimination is not helpful. People should have the ability to trade these products if the marketplace can provide them in a product structure that does what it says it will do. Perhaps warnings are needed, that's fine. But a repeal of already approved products makes no sense.
Can we get a tax deduction when the dollar looses value?!
Stop assuming were stupid
