Apr. 20, 2022
Dear Garebear, It has been brought to my attention that with this recent motion, the SEC is attempting to avoid potential market instability by alleviating the burden of payment for large organizations that are overleveraged. While I understand that this is done to preserve economic stability, it worsens an existing unbalanced power dynamic and reduces the fairness of a free and open market (which quite honestly, has been neither free nor open for quite some time). Banks and other large monetary organizations have been bailed out in the past in the face of economic instability and this has done nothing to fix the system. It is becoming increasingly apparent that this country's financial system is servicing the needs of and is providing security to the wealthy while ignoring the rest of this nation's investors, which outnumber the wealthy significantly. I would argue that continuing down this path would likely create more instability than the liquidation of bloated market makers as it will continue to increase the disparity between the haves and the have nots and illustrate truly how little our government looks out for us. Looking at history, we have seen that once this disparity hits a critical mass, a variety of instability can occur that would not be solely limited to the economy. It would be much more responsible for the SEC to ensure the fairness of the free market and withdraw this rule from consideration at this time. Thank you. Regards, -- Jared Kaplan, PT, DPT, MS