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.
For the Public
FINRA DATA
FINRA Data provides non-commercial use of data, specifically the ability to save data views and create and manage a Bond Watchlist.
For Industry Professionals
FINPRO
Registered representatives can fulfill Continuing Education requirements, view their industry CRD record and perform other compliance tasks.
For Member Firms
FINRA GATEWAY
Firm compliance professionals can access filings and requests, run reports and submit support tickets.
For Case Participants
DR PORTAL
Arbitration and mediation case participants and FINRA neutrals can view case information and submit documents through this Dispute Resolution Portal.
Need Help? | Check System Status
Log In to other FINRA systems
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.