Font Size: AAA // Print // Bookmark

Comment for Proposed Rule 76 FR 4752

  • From:
    Organization(s):

    Comment No: 38592
    Date: 3/24/2011

    Comment Text:

    Stephen Macko
    1203 W. 5th Avenue #406
    Spokane, WA 99204-3296


    March 24, 2011

    David Stawick
    Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre
    1155 21st Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20581


    Dear Mr. Stawick:

    At the end of this e-mail is a proof of mathematics that I hope will help with proving a more accurate proof for number and meaning.

    God bless.

    Stephen John Macko, B.A.
    Spokane, Washington
    a Citizen of the United States of America

    ===

    Excessive speculation hurt the economy in 2008 and, once again, is harming the economy in 2011. According to data recently released by the Commission, speculators have raised their positions in energy markets by
    64 percent compared to June 2008, bringing speculation to the highest level on record.

    We need meaningful, effective speculative position limits to restore balance to commodities markets and ensure that they are connected to market fundamentals, so that they fulfill their price-discovery function properly and without distortions caused by excessive speculation. In particular, I:

    • support the Commission's immediate adoption of spot-month speculative position limits; • urge the Commission to adopt effective back-month levels that will accomplish the legislative purpose of curbing excessive speculation; • urge the Commission to adopt single-month limits that are no higher than two-thirds of the all-months-combined levels; • urge the Commission immediately to adopt a position-accountability regime for the nonspot months in place of its proposed position-visibility rule; and • urge the Commission to adopt lower speculative position limits for passive, long-only traders.

    Time is of the essence, and I urge you to act quickly. Our pocketbooks and the broader economy depend on it.

    ===

    The following FOR HUMANITY proof shows how a percentage of 10 percent could show how 1 person out of 10 persons is proven (a small number) or how 10 people out of 100 persons could be proven (a larger number):

    A result of proof.Mathematics
    Thursday, March 24, 2011 A.D.

    An economic number is sometimes the result of a mathematical proof:

    -1 x 1 = -1 per 1

    1 x -1 = -1 per -1

    Yet: -1 per 1 does not equal -1 per -1

    Therefore:

    1 = 1

    Multiplication = Division

    Division = Multiplication

    And

    With rules of multiplication that follow rules of division, results of mathematics are more accurate.

    This is the proof:

    2 / 1 = 2 each (times) 1

    1 / 2 = .5 each (times) 2

    Yet: 2 each (times) 1 does not equal .5 each (times) 2

    God bless.

    Stephen John Macko, B.A.
    Spokane, Washington
    A Citizen of the United States of America

    Sincerely,


    Stephen John Macko, B.A.
    5098637038


Edit
No records to display.