May 8, 2009
It would make sense to reinstate the uptick rule. Why? The reason is to curb the casino action in the stock market. It is really unfair to the small investor who needs to save for retirement. I do not have the luxury of a pension when I retire. I am on my own and do not trust a brokerage or mutual funds to make the wise decesons to support my own retirement. We can certainly attest to what happened in the last 6 months.
People lost half there retirement because of a number of reasons. One reason is a few institutions, mainly hedge funds or of the like, can target a company, and bring it down to its knees if so desired. They get together and gang up to lower the price of a stock by shorting. There is something wrong with this concept. I want to invest in a company and grow along with it by buying their stock. Long term investing is for suckers. This concept has faded into the twilight. Now the gamblers have taken over. Is this what you really support?
The other option if I can not retire from my own savings, then I must burden the government in my retirement. I have saved all my life I am 61 and had the savvy to bypass the last six months. Reinstating the Up tic rule would curb the gambling and help everybody out except for the very rich. They can change their ways by not shorting a company into receivership just to lower the price of the stock. This affects many peoples lives who work in these companies let alone the investors. This does not make sense and is unethical business practice. I know I have simplified my concern, but I belief this rule has to be reinstated regardless of the immense pressures from the very wealthy.
Please re-instate the uptick rule. It is best for the majority of people and supports the business ethics that has been in a decline.
Thank you for reading my comments. I hope this letter can make a difference.
.