It is elitist and violates freedom of choice to prevent an investor to do what he or she wants with his or her money, and why does FINRA pretend to know best, which is extremely paternalistic? The securities laws already preclude non accredited investors from participating in private placements, which provides more opportunity for the wealthy. All these preventative rules do that prevent is to further class division.
Why not provide investors with freedom of choice coupled with clear disclosure the disinfectant of sunlight as to how leveraged investments work and what their risks are?
Lots of publicly traded ordinary common stocks collapse and fail. They call to zero, or into the Pennies. Why are they any riskier than levered or inverse ETFs?
Or conversely, why dont you require the same level of sophistication, exams, trading restrictions and brokerage permission for any stock of a levered operating company, since understanding how to analyze publicly traded companies requires copious corporate finance and accounting knowledge coupled with investment theory? Without these tools, investors are gambling.
I am sorry, your proposal is paternalistic, furthers class division and makes no sense, particularly when compared to the dangers of investing in a highly levered common stock such as IBM.
Michael Harvey Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
It is elitist and violates freedom of choice to prevent an investor to do what he or she wants with his or her money, and why does FINRA pretend to know best, which is extremely paternalistic? The securities laws already preclude non accredited investors from participating in private placements, which provides more opportunity for the wealthy. All these preventative rules do that prevent is to further class division.
Why not provide investors with freedom of choice coupled with clear disclosure the disinfectant of sunlight as to how leveraged investments work and what their risks are?
Lots of publicly traded ordinary common stocks collapse and fail. They call to zero, or into the Pennies. Why are they any riskier than levered or inverse ETFs?
Or conversely, why dont you require the same level of sophistication, exams, trading restrictions and brokerage permission for any stock of a levered operating company, since understanding how to analyze publicly traded companies requires copious corporate finance and accounting knowledge coupled with investment theory? Without these tools, investors are gambling.
I am sorry, your proposal is paternalistic, furthers class division and makes no sense, particularly when compared to the dangers of investing in a highly levered common stock such as IBM.