NATURAL ASSET COMPANIES / NYSE: This proposal has generated so many thoughts for me, the first being, "ARE YOU INSANE!!!!!" Not a question, a statement. Why doesn't the SEC just allow OXYGEN and NITROGEN as IPOs on the NYSE that list "God" as the owner of the company? Maybe someone can collect some massive royalties or residuals or taxes or stock options from that while pretending to want to "save the planet." I am sorry but it is really hard not to be sarcastic inasmuch as the SEC is even thinking of allowing what is being proposed. Definition of Ecosystem Services: "Ecosystem services are the many and varied benefits to humans provided by the natural environment and healthy ecosystems." Control of "Ecosystem Services" is what they want to IPO as "companies" and place on the New York Stock Exchange, with the SEC adopting listing standards, under the guise of "conservatorship." But I don't care how you slice it, taking "ownership" of everything they can grab and claim as theirs and pretending it's an IPO is NOT conservatorship of the ecosystem, it is claiming "ownership" of things that cannot and should not be owned. Are these people going to run non-profits and forego salaries? Donate all their stock and stock options to real conservancies? In my opinion, this can only be viewed as taking control of (aka stealing) ecosystem services, then making money, boatloads of money, from these "IPOs." So how much money is enough? How much power is enough? Where does this power grab end? Is the SEC going to enable this nonsense by allowing this class of companies on the NYSE? QUOTE: "Investors interested in ESG should keep an eye out for natural asset companies in the next few months. You might just be able to help keep a forest standing as you feather your nest." - Kiplinger ....as you feather your nest. QUOTE: "What Are NACs? Natural asset companies assign value to the services provided by nature...NACs will hold the rights to "ecosystem services," or the benefits people receive from nature, such as food, pollination, tourism, or clean water; such global benefits are valued at an estimated $125 trillion annually. Each NAC will issue an IPO tied to a specific tangible asset, such as a rainforest, a marine ecosystem or farmland. The proceeds will be used to manage the property to enhance ecosystem services – or in the case of farmland, to convert it to sustainable, "regenerative" agriculture." - Kiplinger. I get how these are being framed to try to sell them to the public: "Such a noble cause." BUT instead of a company making a tangible product, these are proposed companies that will claim ownership of the raw ingredients -- air, rain, land -- down to the molecular level, that make any product. So say I own 1 acre of land. What you're telling me is I can create a company claiming ownership of that 1 acre of land and ownership of every molecule on that land and offer it as an IPO on the stock exchange under the guise of "conservatorship" and do absolutely nothing with that land or any of those molecules? Right? If that is true, I foresee tens of millions of people creating these NACs and flooding the NYSE with their IPOs, much the same as has been done in the cryptocurrency arena. Curiously, the NYSE appears to have a vested interest in seeing these IPOs/companies listed on the NYSE. QUOTE: "The NYSE is working with, and has a minority stake in, the Intrinsic Exchange Group (IEG). The IEG has several years of experience tackling challenges to the NAC model, such as how natural value should be measured, monitored and translated into financial value." - Kiplinger. So the NYSE is asking you to change rules because it will allow the NYSE to profit, am I interpreting that correctly? In summary, the true definition of Pollution has been lost and what is being proposed is not about saving the planet from pollution under the guise of "conservancy." This isn't putting money into recyclables. This isn't about preventing garbage from being thrown in the ocean or overfishing. This is about controlling and claiming ownership of every molecule and then assigning a monetary value to it, which will be a tax or a fee or a royalty even if you veil it as something else. Do YOU personally want to have to pay a tax or a fee or a royalty on every sip of water you take? On every bit of air you breathe? And each time, your sip of water or breath of air is enriching somebody else, a somebody else who is not you. And exactly what would make these types of companies valuable enough to list on the NYSE? They are basically a handful of nothing: "I am going to maintain a conservancy on x or y or z so you should give me money, millions and millions of dollars, even though I don't do anything but let x or y or z just sit there year after year after year." Please prevent this lunacy and prevent this class of IPOs/companies from being listed on the NYSE. Side note: Even little children know the entire Earth needs CO2 to thrive and that all this baloney about saving the Earth from CO2 is a farce. We know it. You know it. It does amuse me that the food industry has been experiencing a CO2 shortage for the last several years while "OMG, we're gonna die from CO2" is being bandied about the airwaves.