I urge FINRA not to further regulate the ability of investors to purchase complex funds including leveraged and inverse funds. Investors should have the freedom to choose their investments without judgment or approval from government regulators. The current regulations and disclosures of risk are sufficient. I am capable of understanding risks without government judgment of me.
Proposed rules
I, the investor, and not you, the regulators, should be the one to choose the public investments that are right for me.
This is a matter of basic principle, and therefore of first importance: PUBLIC investments should be available to ALL the public, not just the privileged, who are already more than privileged enough.
What you propose is part of an insulting trend: the "Nanny State
I not regulators should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged. I shouldn't have to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds
I am an ordinary investor, with a regular day job. I do not have time to take classes or tests or extra regulatory hoops in order to manage my portfolio, and yet I am perfectly capable of understanding that some investment vehicles are more risky than others.
As a regulatory organization, you are stepping over the line if you are stopping me from taking part in a legitimate investment fund
I, not dubiously motivated regulators should be able to choose investments that are right for my strategy. The majority of investment vehicles should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged considerating there are already plenty of investment products off limits to the public. I shouldn't have to go through any special processlike passing a test before I can invest in
It's just come to my attention that there is a proposal to impose restrictions on my ability to trade publicly traded securities that may come in the form of testing, having a certain net worth, getting special approval from my broker, having read certain materials or being subject to "cooling off periods" while investing.
I am an intelligent, volitional human being who
To Regulators,
Restricting investments to people who do not meet your income or asset requirements is again a way to try to control the average retail investor. Just because you think you are doing something good by preventing average investors for making risking decisions that may or may not result in profitable outcomes does not mean you are doing something that is right. Adults should be
I believe that retail leveraged funds, accessible to the public, are important to keep alive and available without additional regulation. If we take these away, normal citizens will be at a disadvantage compared with institutional investors (who will still have access to these, even if in different ways).
I do not believe that we should impose additional tests or hurdles for public citizens to
Why only block leveraged products? I say block the whole stock market for people with less than a million dollars in liquidity. Please create more and tougher hurdles for pleabian class people like us so it becomes even tougher for regular folks like us to climb the financial ladder.
That was sarcasm in case it wasn't obvious to you braindead politicians/regulators.
Now for something
I oppose restrictions on my right to invest in public investments such as leveraged and inverse funds.
I, not regulators, should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me. Public investments should be available everyone, not just the privileged, or those regulators deem suitable enough.
I do not agree that I should have to go through any special process or pass a test before
