Recommendations regarding “pension compliance”

The following reccommendations aimed at preparing the way to assure that any use of or engagement in what has thusfar been termed “cryptocurrencies” or otherwise “digitized” data meant for monetization or as a currency are provided with a foundation for assuring that it is no longer facilitated in a mindset of normalization to or valorization of vice and the sorts of behaviors that sustain vice activities.

- Licensing for brokers/representatives involved in securities/finance need to be better regulated. An April 20-21, 2019 article in the Wall Street Journal discussed that various states are considering revisions to their laws in order to assure more stringent standards than the federal recommendations that have been thusfar proposed and moved forward on. It’s important to evaluate these state proposals as a countermeasure to federal efforts with an eye to assuring that variant state securities licensing and issuance laws are not merely being manipulated to effectuate a new type of unverifiable and unaccountable pension or other finance scheme. In fact, the differences between state-level securities laws is one of the primary areas that needs to be addressed. I propose no trading without official broker/representative license should be allowed, including in the futures market, which at this point has less stringent licensing requirements. Appropriate licensing is a means by which to assure one is formally engaged in a verifiable process to be legally compliant with official requirements.

- Compliance requirements and audits of certification standards for Information Technology/Inspector/Technician/Engineering personnel should be monitored and adhered to with appropriate registration and consistent periodic validation. That also means cross-referencing with the standards bodies that are accrediting the certifications and performing inspections of schools and other places where the training for certifications are provided.

- Audit standards/requirements on financial reporting/auditing should include 1) addressing concerns regarding “off ledger accounting” practices to guard against illegal hedging and 2) 103 changes to the federal auditing codes that currently permit organizations that receive funding from more than two federal departments to obscure forthright reporting of numbers and spending. These code changes also need to preclude the ability to “key” or “code” audits via specific metric assignments for use in derivative or occluded finance schemes. No use of symbolic metrics in specific columns should be permitted. Instead, we should develop accounting standards in reference to “benchmark” or “metric” swapping/matching between “cooperatively competitive” funds/organizations/operations that can be consistent and not used to obscure allocations.

- Address derivative contracts regarding access to human needs resources and human beings in as much as biometric/movements/intangible or intellectual property/estates are used.

In regards to companies with technical expertise/proprietary technical/engineering info and FAA/other department requirements regarding “compliance” for safety standards: How to regulate or “secure” securities affiliated with technical data/technicians involved is a primary concern. There has to be a standard on “grounding” securities from specific companies that are backing them and their financial instrumentalities as well as connected to work/data provided by people associated with them. If implemented, then concerns regarding the “pressure” on innovation that deprioritizes certain safety considerations will be decreased. Ie., have there be a regulated verification process for reporting/grounding/referencing the securities which can be used in conjunction with financial institutions or regulatory bodies as a sort of “grounding node” for considering the rest of the company’s proprietary inspection/compliance standards. This can be a part of addressing the concerns around securing proprietary data and making common standards for federal/other governmental compliance requirements that do not encroach upon proprietary processes.

Crouse for President

- Proofread and corrected on Nov. 16, 2019