NYSE pulls Natural Asset Company rule
The NACs will not be made to trade there. Victory or red herring? And did you ever hear the unlikely story of Maurice Strong? What does it have to do with this?
Breaking news from a bit earlier today (thanks ken for the word!)
The NY Stock Exchange pulled their proposed rule at least for now (see previous post).
Marlo Oaks, Utah’s 26th State Treasure, talks below, and explains that maybe the next move is to still trade these assets but not on a public exchange, rather as General Partnerships privately. He does explain pretty well several ways that this can go sideways as it continues to strive to go ahead.
If you want to see comments FOR the piece, go to the earliest ones submitted, back in October, because of course the insiders supporting the “financial innovation” knew when the comment period opened up, while Joe Publics found out in the last few days and all our comments pile up at the end. https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyse-2023-09/srnyse202309.htm Every set of legislative public comments I’ve looked at has this trend. Officious supporters with polished legal language in the first days of the comment period, which shifts often into hundreds of short and indignant Hell No’s as ‘regular’ people find out about the thing through an organization ‘sounding the alarm’. The comments on the International Health Regulations were especially stark this way, but its true in Forest Plans or comments to the Ohio River Water and Sanitation Board or…
So, as some of the early “for” comments, and the Utah treasurer hinted, tho they aren’t sure exactly how it would be done— if this is done purely in private markets it may be less regulated, but it may also be less *vast*. So, however this continues to play out, and whether this was meant to sneak through the SEC with no one noticing and “WE” have FOILED “THEM,” or whether this is just another feint in a plan to make the commodification of nature to take the shape that some hidden hand prefers… For now Natural Asset Companies are not about to be traded on the NY Stock Exchange. Back to the drawing board or on to Plan B for the Intrinsic Exchange Group. How will we FIX the "$830 billion funding deficit" in financing for nature conservation towards 2030? Perhaps by determining that such a deficit is fabricated. That particular $830bn number came from the Task Force on Nature Markets and the UN Environment Program.
Meanwhile, in an unusual turn, I found some people talking about Maurice Strong, the first head of UNEP. I want to share the piece, from CHD. Thanks to James Corbett and Meryl Nass <https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/what-is-climate-agenda/>.
I got curious and mind-blown about his biography a few years ago after I returned to a book I had picked up in a free box around Temple in Philly, “Gaia a way of knowing” by Lindisfarne Press and looked into this Lindisfarne organization. I was smitten with the Gaia self-regulating system hypothesis and excited about the feel of the mystical celtic isle with the disappearing landbridge for which the organization was named. And then I learned that a tar sands developer had secured the land which was now their home on a massive water reservoir/indigenous sacred territory in Colorado, which I later found out was bought from Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi in the 70s. Hm. Strange that. In any case his influence is still quite strongly felt in the conservation narrative we face today. Better find another way to hustle up that missing $830bn for conserving, ‘cause doing less with less is hardly a viable option…