 So Cato's doing a lot of work on immigration. They've been doing it for a very long time. They've got some really good scholars working there. What is it that you hope to add to what Cato's already doing or to the debate about immigration, to the discussion about immigration? So yeah, Cato's doing a great job. They have Alex Norasta and David Beer particularly. I follow them and I read everything they publish. They do excellent research and they're really good at debates and raising awareness of the issue. Now, what I see in general in the immigration debate that is lacking is a philosophical framework to the discussion. So what I see most is the anti-immigrant side has like a bunch of alleged facts, right? And then the pro-immigrant side, they rebuke those facts, which is like the pro-immigrant side has the realities on their side, right? But there's like a whole philosophical debate that needs to happen. Because when you get an objection, like, well, immigrants displaced Americans and they take American jobs. They take the jobs away from Americans. Like if you respond, well, that's not true. Here's the data. You're kind of conceding the premise in the first place that the Americans have a right to a job. And like, I think one, in that particular instance, for example, what needs to happen is to address, well, yes, we'll give you the facts and realities on our side because morality is on our side. Like say, well, do you, what makes you think that anyone has a right to a job? They have a right to work. They have a right to be hired if someone wants to hire them. But no one has a right to a job and to be exempt from competition. So that is the type of, I think, that of debate that we need at this point. So there's certainly an issue of this notion of a right to employment that the opponents of immigration use all the time. There was a long in economics, of course, right? Because immigrants create jobs. They don't take jobs. I mean, the economics of it is pretty clear. The data, both empirical and theoretical work that has been done on immigration shows from an economic perspective that immigrants create more jobs and they don't take and they certainly, and they don't have a negative impact on wages. What are the other kind of philosophical issues that are relevant to the entire immigration debate? Because at the end of the day, this is a philosophical issue. It's an issue of rights. Yeah, so there are several things that make up this debate. One of them is, there are a lot of issues. Basically every objection to immigration can be addressed philosophically and I think should be addressed philosophically. So for instance, you have the question, you have the objection to immigration that says, okay, well, immigrants abuse the welfare state. And that can be addressed. Of course, I can mean, if someone is paying and taxes and they get such huge amounts of money drawn from their paycheck every single month, they don't want to see someone that just crossed the border or just got off the plane taking that money that they contributed. This is not to say that I'm in favor of the welfare state in the first place, but I can see the irritation from people. And well, you have to address the welfare state in general. But if you can't do much about the welfare state, what you can do is say, well, instead like Alex Norasta from Kato Institute says, instead of building a wall around the country, build a wall around the welfare state and don't let immigrants get any welfare, which they don't in the first place largely a myth, but we can talk about that later, but you can frame that and make people understand from a more philosophical perspective, a more abstract perspective that immigrants shouldn't have that right to get welfare. They don't. And well, you can address the welfare state more broadly too, but other issues are, for instance, okay, no one has a right to come here to America. It's a prerogative that we grant them. Well, there is a right of movement and there's also the right of Americans that are violated when there are so many restrictions on immigration. Because I like to say that every restriction immigration is a restriction on native born Americans because they are unable to hire whoever they want to invite to their home however they want. They have to ask permission from the government to live in America with their spouse if their spouse has been, was born abroad. So there are so many issues that are philosophical in this debate and we need to, I think, bring that context, that framework a little bit more.