If we agree that being able to own shares in companies is a worthwhile public good, that doesn't necessarily mean that options and other derivatives hold the sa

If we agree that being able to own shares in companies is a worthwhile public good, that doesn't necessarily mean that options and other derivatives hold the same value to society. Many options trades have an expected loss of nearly 100% - the same cant be said of holding stocks. Society has decided its OK to own houses, which certainly can decline in value, but outlaw ponzi schemes that for a substantial number of people are virtually guaranteed to wipe out their investment. I don't think an age restriction is appropriate, other than 18/21/25, or some other reasonable definition of adult. But, I think it would be sensible to only allow options trades up to a certain percent of one's provable net worth - lets say 10% below $100k, 100% over $1M, or something like that.