Apr. 20, 2022
I am writing as a retail investor, very concerned about the implications of the rule you proposed. This seems like it is designed to change investment rules that benefit hedgefunds and corrupt institutions while penalising the 8 million+ retail investors It does that by increasing possibility for avoidance of true market price discovery through continuous lending. It also significantly lessens the infinite risk of naked shorting. That practice, as I am sure you are aware, is by nature very risky and for a good reason. Without that risk, the institutional investors are free to essentially gamble with taxpayers and retail investors money, posing systemic risk to the integrity of US stock market. What we need is more transparency in how stock market works to level the playing field between retail and institutions, especially considering the widening wealth gap and soaring inflation, among other problems our society faces. The proposed rule acts in the opposite direction. I consider that transparancy essential for a fair and sound economy, as well as for the democracy. Having said all that, I sincerely hope that whoever this concerns, will reevaluate their position and withdraw that ruling completely. It doesn't make sense to mess with 8 million peoples money to benefit a small rich class of people kindly, Dan Crippen