Subject: File No. SR-NYSE-2023-09
From: C. Alan Allshouse

Thank you for the opportunity to publicly comment on this important issue. A Controversial Proposal to Control and Profit from Land - Is This A Satire? Imagine a world where the air you breathe could be used as currency. That may sound like something out of a science fiction movie (Just watch Spaceballs to get the point), but it could soon become a reality under this proposed rule called Natural Asset Companies (NACs). These companies would hold the rights to ecological performance, allowing them to control and monetize natural outputs such as air and water. These NACs aim to leverage climate change as a mechanism for controlling and profiting from land ... Without Actually Owning It. To me, this sounds like making money on someone else's inventory without participating in any of the risk of ownership. By quantifying and monetizing the management of both public and private lands, these "companies" would have unprecedented power over our natural resources. I ask you to consider: Does this sound good for you and your family? While proponents argue that NACs could help combat climate change by incentivizing sustainable practices, critics do warn about potential threats they pose. One major concern I have is their impact on agricultural production. As NACs gain control over large tracts of land, small farmers may find themselves at a disadvantage when it comes to property rights and access to resources. I currently support small local regenerative farms for much of my food and prefer to continue doing so without interruption. While the idea behind NACs might seem innovative on the surface, we must carefully consider its implications. It has the potential to consolidate power in the hands of few corporations while transferring wealth on an international scale. Again, this does not sound like a good deal for a massive majority (say 99%+) of the population. It's important that we strike a balance between protecting our environment and ensuring equitable distribution of resources. The implementation of NACs should not come at the expense of small farmers or local communities. I humbly ask you to consider the implications to everyone before permitting anything remotely close to the current proposal. Thank you and have an excellent year!