 Fy ydych chi'n bwysig fod yn ddweud y bwysig, ychydig yn gwybod yn ddweud y siwer a'r effaith yn bwysig? Mae'r ffordd yn bwysig i'r ddweud a'r iawn i'r ffordd yn cynghorol sy'n gweithio'r rhaglen y bwysig. Mae'r bwysig yn ddweud? Mae'r bwysig yn bwysig sy'n gweithio'r rhaglen y bwysig? So, the children and the poor, so we've got it up, right? Yes. Yes. Well, though, in single matter, if they were poor, they would be helpless. Do you have children? Yes. No, look, children have, you know, their parents, in a sense, hold their rights in... Trust? Yeah, they have trust in a sense. Children don't have. They don't embody the four rights because they're not fully rational in that sense. They're not capable of dealing with the world, and parents, that's their responsibility. Responsibility is to help them get to the point where they are, you know, where they're adults and they take care of themselves. In a case like that, in an objective society, I have no doubt that a charitable entity would come in and help those kids. And take care of them. I think it would ultimately be up to private charities to take care of the poor, of the helpless. You know, you can imagine something born of a poor, clean kid. You know, just can't take care of yourself. Then it's their family that'll take care of them, or it'll be charity that'll take care of them. What isn't legitimate, what isn't legitimate is that I be forced to take care of them. I can be approached and, you know, I can be reasoned with. I can be, you know, people can ask me to help them. But they have no right to pull out a gun and force me out. And as soon as you have government doing that, then you're basically... The only role the government has in getting it to defend it is right. If the parents are using the kids, then government has a role to step in and stop at abuse. Because right to be violent and trust that the parents are holding is being violent. But if the parents, if the kids run away from home, if they're just poor, if they're just... Dad is an issue for charity, it's not an issue for the state. I'm supposing you had somebody who'd support themselves because of someone... They couldn't get charity and nobody would have helped them. Then they would have. But I don't think that would happen. I don't think there's any evidence in American history. Or even in the history of other places that have approached freedom. Everybody's just approached it, they've never attained it. Even in a place like Hong Kong, as brutal a little bit of a place it is, as poor a place it was, at least for some people, but free, people weren't dying in the streets. People taking care of it. They were charities even in the poorest of places. There was no welfare state in Hong Kong for many, many years. And they had people by their millions, by the hundreds of thousands of people. Emigrated in, right? People were escaping to get the welfare of other countries. People were coming in. I mean, that to me should indicate something. In every free country in the history, to the extent that they are free, people want to move it. People are not climbing. I mean, some people want to come into the welfare state. But people certainly are not climbing with climbing to go to the Soviet Union. People are climbing to go to North Korea. They won't ever go into Europe. I mean, there's an indication of a legitimate country in the illiterate countries, a proxy. The degree to which people want to move it. People want to go to Japan even though the Japanese won't let them in. People want to go to South Korea. People want to come to America. They want to come to the UK. They don't want to go to North Korea. They don't want to go to Iraq. Arabs want to come to Israel. They don't want to go to West Bank. They don't want to go to Jordan. But if Israel opened up its job market to Arabs from all over the Middle East, it could attract millions and millions of Arabs to come and work in Israel. Because if Arabs in Israel are freer than they are in any other country in the Middle East. And indeed, and this is not what you're talking about today, but indeed, just the historical fact. Between 1890 and 1948 when the State of Israel was established, the Palestinian, so-called Palestinian, the Arab population of Israel grew dramatically. Not because of both rates, but because of immigration. From Syria, from Lebanon, from Jordan, and from Egypt, and from Iraq, and from everywhere. Why? Because those nasty Jews were building industries, they were building businesses, they were building roads, they were creating civilization, they were creating activity. And all these Arabs wanted jobs. So they can't, all the Palestinian problem, the so-called Palestinian problem that exists today, is all the fault of the Jews for building up a 73 countries to begin with. Because those Palestinians could have been slaves in Syria and Jordan and anywhere else today, and they wouldn't be so-called refugees in Palestine. But capitalism, freedom, individualism, creates prosperity. And so prosperity, again, is a proxy for freedom. And with people that do it poor, I can guarantee you they're also unfree. Recallation, travel a little bit around the world that you can see. You done? Thank you. It's always a privilege and a very, very stimulating experience to hear and speak. I do want to wrap up quickly because we have to fill this room by 9.30, so we've got 45 minutes for drinks. Just before we do that, we would like to present to you your own with a copy of Douglas' book, which he's kindly signed for us at the start of the evening. So thank you very much. Thank you to you on what's more. So thank you again Douglas, thank you again to all of you. Drinks are in the room behind you. There's always been a room by 9.30, you go by. Thanks very much.