Apr. 20, 2022
To whom it may concern, As a retail investor I do NOT support the adoption of SR-NSCC-2022-003; SR-NSCC-2022-801. At face value this seems like a rule intended to create another opaque layer of protection for bad players in the markets. As a retail investor, the content of this new rule proposal is extremely disturbing. It seems like this would effectively allow for continuation, and worsening of Failure To Delivers (FTDs), which can be, and have been abused by a lot of market participants. You speak of Free Market, and transparency, and what not, and yet continue to blindside everyone, and keep pouring in more complexities, as if there's more room for opacity in theses already messed up markets. How in your right minds can you even draft such proposal which is extremely short-sighted?!? I don't know and care who spends what amounts of money on lobbying such nonsensical proposals, but any rule proposals that serve to make financial markets more opaque should never even be entertained, forget about being put to comment. Are we really trying to head into a better future, or just turn the "Global Financial Markets" into the largest mafia known to humans??!! Retail investors, such as myself, make financial decisions based on publicly available information in an effort to improve our, and our children's circumstances in life. When the SEC even cares to entertain such proposals as this, it shows that who's side you're playing for, and it is extremely disheartening to see. Keep up the "great" work, and we'll see a significant portion of the retail investment (even some institutional) leave these blatantly corrupt, and criminal markets, and seek other ways to grow our capital in a fair, and equitable alternative. It is time to wake up, close the revolving door between SEC and Wall St, and adopt some level of decency, and as a regulatory authority who's sole purpose is to facilitate Free, Fair, and Transparent markets, and defend individual retail investors, actually work on your mission, and sleep better at night. To that view I strongly implore the SEC to discard this proposal, and I request that any similar rules to not be proposed in the future, as iterations of this have been rejected in the past, and continue to be rejected by educated investors every time they resurface. The repeated attempts for such a measure to be passed, despite multiple rejections, clearly points to the potential desire for malpractice by market participants. It is high time that SEC demonstrate it's commitment to the job it signed up for, and fulfill it's duties towards tax-paying country-people, and supportive international investors. MORE Transparency, NOT backdoor solutions that enable bad actors to escape their moral, fiduciary, and ethical responsibilities as market participants. I'm sure there is a majority of people working for and representing the SEC that share the same view, and are similarly frustrated at such clearly one-sided proposals. Please backtrack on this. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please honor your obligations to protect investors from predatory behavior by financial institutions. Yours faithfully, Retail Investor-Blue Collar AMERICAN Sent from my iPhone