 Yeah, Lee. Yeah, you talked about the implicit good ideas, drive technology and science. That's obviously true. But there is the other side, which is, I don't know if it's implicit ideas, but leftist statism is going the opposite direction and has been doing so for 200 years. You have a little respite. Actually, Trump has done a few good things. You have to admit a couple of things to reduce the... They're hesitant. They're afraid. You can clap. You can clap. It's okay. I won't eat you. But the general trend is still leftist. With all the technology and all the science, we still have things like the FDA. That's why we don't have life extension. It's the FDA. And if that keeps going, all the technology and the science will not save us from 1984 and then Anthem. It seems to me. So what do you think about that? So I think we have a lot more... So part of my point is I think we have a lot more time. I think you might see some of these innovations that we're talking about happen outside the United States because there are less regulations there, because I think the world is waking up and there are places that are less regulated than the United States. So let's not be so America focused that we obsess just about what happens here. Although that's justified up until now because most innovation happens here, but I think that's going to change in our future. I also think that markets, as I said before, if you just looked at regulations of banking coming out of 1933, 34 securities laws, any rational person would have looked at that and said, there's never going to be any banking in the United States. It's finished. There's going to be no innovation in finance. These laws are so horrific. They're so horrendous. And you know what? People found ways around them. 90% of innovation in the financial industry is to get around regulations. Now it's not as efficient. It's not as good. It's not a good use of the human mind, but it's better than the alternative which is succumbing to the regulations. And I suspect that companies will find ways around these things and that there will be progress in spite of it. We're splicing the human gene. I mean, you know more than this and I do, but we're splicing the human genes. I mean, I don't know where that's going to take us, but that's amazing in my senses that people are going to do stuff offline without the FDA that is maybe going to revolutionize. So let me say this, long-term, yes, you have to make the implicit philosophy explicit, otherwise it will die out. I just think the long-term is longer and we are more innovative and flexible and can get around the bullshit than I thought in the past or that I think most objectivists think. I think, and this is the evidence. The fact is that we've always thought, oh, it's another five years and then everything will collapse and the cliff is just in front of us and it doesn't look like it is. Now maybe everything will happen tomorrow and I was all wrong, but I don't think so. I don't see it. And I don't think I ran SART like that. I think she had a much, she believed in America in 1980. Think about 1980, she did this interview where she said she still believed in America and she thought the future was good and everything like that. And think about what was going on in 1980 as compared to today, right? American hostages were being held in Tehran, 50 of them and America was doing nothing to save them, right? We had very high inflation and very high unemployment, stagflation. Crime rates were way higher than they are today. Way higher. You couldn't walk in Central Park. In daytime you couldn't walk in Central Park in 1980 and they got worse over the next decade and then they declined dramatically since then. So, and yet, I think in many respects the world was much worse in 1980. And yet she was still held the idea that good ideas will win out in this implicit philosophy that is embedded in much of modern life will survive long enough for those of us who wanna make it explicit to win out. Just let me add one quick thing to this. Stephen Pinker is a great advocate of what you're talking about. But what he misses because he's a leftist is he has shown that violence has decreased over the centuries. But what he hasn't shown about force, governmental force has not decreased and the leftists from the Berkeley times don't make that, don't understand that violence and force are the same problem. They don't understand that. And force is still, governmental force is still on the increase and we need those explicit ideas to reverse that. To reverse that, no question. But look, first let me say I strongly recommend Stephen Pinker's latest book, Enlightenment Now. I think everybody should read it. It's not all good. There were a lot of bad stuff in it. But the good stuff is so good that you should read it. Everybody should read it. I also think he's got deep philosophical problems beyond the leftists which are reflected in other books. They come out in this book as well. But you're all gonna catch that. Focusing on the good stuff, there's a lot of good material in the book that'll make your life better. But I would say that's true, but on the other hand, I'd rather live in a society, and this may be just me, where people are now murdering and raping and pillaging and there's regulation. So I'd like both to go away but the threat to my actual life of being mugged and robbed or slaughtered in Central Park in daylight, I'd rather that go away. And yes, I would like all of the force go away, but I think that violence probably has to go first. We have to live in a society in which we value human life so much that we're not willing to be explicitly violent. And I think again implicitly that hopefully, and we will help it through explicit philosophy, transition into the idea, okay, well, if that's wrong, then other forms of force are wrong as well. That's my optimistic view of that. People, and we must say thank you instead of putting or proposing to put a tax on them in order to give the money to the government who does nothing. The government doesn't contribute anything except impediments. But if we allow the oil companies to have the power which you say has come to them because we need the oil, it's a question of supply and demand. So if we approach this laissez-faire as I think you would like us to, free of government intervention, free of all the force and the regulation and the controls which you abhor. All right, now we've got Mr. Gigantic Oil Baron saying $2.50 a gallon. Now here's what happens. The blue collar guy who's trying to make a living and feed his kids can't buy gas for his truck, can't possibly survive in the free marketplace and suddenly he's on welfare and he's got to go for a handout, another feature of government that you abhor. You can't have it both ways. But all this is economic fallacies. To begin with, nobody in a free society, now we're talking about the free market in which the government doesn't interfere, nobody can become a monopolist. All monopolies are created by a special privilege for government. It's only by an act of government that you can keep competitors out of your field. Therefore, you couldn't become that kind of monopoly. The power you hold as an industrialist is not the power to use force. It's the power of producing something of value. That people want. And it's the people who literally control you because every purchase is a vote in the favor of some businessman and in a way against others. It's the public who decides what they want to buy and what they pass up. If, using your examples, you became this powerful tycoon economically, but you cannot force anybody to deal with you and you cannot force competitors out of your field, then every smaller man would be in that field because you would have established a price way above the market. You might last months, if that. So in other words, if I tried to be Mr. Big and charge outrageously high prices for gasoline, I would go broke in your view because in your leave them alone and let competition handle an approach to civilization, somebody with a smarter, with a better mousetrap, pardon my mixed microphone. No, that's a very good one. All right, would come along and undercut me. That's right. Sell at a cheaper price. But it isn't just my view. I'll do it, I'll buy them up the minute I see this bird. I'll buy them. I'll own him on Tuesday. And where will you get your money when you're not allowed? I'm already holding them up for $2.50 a gallon. But they're not paying you. You say they're all going out of business. They've got to get to work. We're married to a petroleum civilization. This has been done, you know. It isn't incidentally just my view. That is history. There are people who have tried to corner the market repeatedly and the result was that they went broke.