 The radical. Fundamental principles of freedom. Rational self-interest. And individual rights. This is The Iran Book Show. Alright everybody, welcome to Iran Book Show on this Tuesday. Second show of the year already. We're rolling here with our, rolling here with our news, new news format and second show of the year 2023. Hard to believe. Tonight we'll do a show looking, making predictions about 2023, looking forward to 2023, big issues of 2023. So please join us at 7pm east coast time today in, right here, same place. So that's 7pm tonight. We'll be talking about 2023. What to look forward to. Let's jump in into our stories for today. You know, for years and years, well not that long, maybe 10 years. We've been hearing over and over and over again, no, well not 10 years. Right, mostly the last 5 years, 6 years maybe. We've been hearing over and over again about the monopolies of big tech, particularly Google, Evil Google, Evil Facebook and how they dominate. And you often ask people, well, you know, Google, yeah, it has a very high percentage of the search functionality in the world, but it's free. So what's the problem? And people will say, well, but they have a monopoly over ads. They dominate the ad space, and that's a monopoly. Which is interesting because Google's never had more than like 37, 38% of all the digital ad space. Hard to call that a monopoly. And then they would say, yeah, yeah, Google and Facebook, they dominate the ad space. In front of Congress, we heard this all the time when talking about big tech, Google and Facebook dominate online advertising. And as a consequence, they are monopoly powers out there and they are dominant. And you go, okay, so they have over 50% of digital ad space. That's true. But first, 50% is not monopoly, even if, you know, even by any definition of monopoly. And second, it's a marketplace and relatively unregulated. So if they don't do a good job, there'll be competition and their percentage of whatever industry they seem to dominate will decline. So I was surprised, I guess, and everybody says, no, no, this is monopoly. They're entrenched. This is the new winner take all world big tech is winner take all now. You have a first move advantage, you dominate a space, nobody can ever compete you away. That's it. You've won. It's finished. That is the new theory, I guess, economic theory when it comes to big tech that explains both the right and the left antagonism towards them and wanting to, what do you call it, wanting to break them up, regulate them, control them. So I was a little surprised to see this headline in the Wall Street Journal, I think was today. Yes, this morning. Google and matters advertising dominance fades. No, I mean, you can't fade. They are monopolies. They dominate. They're always going to be there. They're always going to be total. Everything, nothing. It turns out it's fading. It turns out that for the first time in many years, Google plus Facebook plus matter have less than 50% of the digital advertising space. It turns out that Amazon has been growing significantly over the last five years in terms of digital advertising. I never thought of Amazon as a digital advertising platform, but I guess it is. If you go to Amazon, you'll find ads there for products. I usually ignore them, single-minded pursuit of the thing I'm looking for and ignore what they're advertising. But it's there. TikTok is rising in terms of advertising. That's really scary because that's Chinese. And then we've got the whole streaming platforms, including Netflix and Disney, who are now going to add an advertising, you'll be able to buy a cheap subscription to Netflix, but you'll have to suffer through advertising. So that counts as digital ads, so ad Netflix and all these others. I don't quite understand how they define digital these days. I mean, almost everything is digital now. All TV is digital. Why isn't TV counted as digital advertising? And then their market share would be a lot smaller. That's part of the issue is what is the market? When you talk about monopolies, so-called monopolies, what is the market? What are you measuring? Do you measure substitute products or substitute products count for anything? Obviously not. So monopolies in a market, unless it's government-protected, unless the government is there to help them out, they just don't exist. Over time, what happens is that people, over time, what happens is competition drives the incumbents out. It always does. And if the incumbents are really, really good, then they stick around for a while, but it's very difficult to maintain a dominant market position for a long time. Business is hard. Being really, really good at business is hard. It's challenging. And to dominate is almost impossible over very long periods of time. It's just hard to keep that level of skill, ability, dominance going. I mean, look at American businesses. How many of them have stayed dominant without government help for more than a few decades? So just one more example. It'll be interesting to see whether this has any impact on the various antitrust programs, antitrust lawsuits, antitrust bills going through Congress, bipartisan bills, by the way, that want to break up the big tech companies. I doubt data, information, facts will interfere in the desire, passion of a wise leadership to try to break up big tech. So, you know, one more lesson in the millions of other lessons, one more example in the millions of other examples, markets work, protecting property rights works, leaving companies alone work. Companies are not always going to be good. Companies will not always produce the best product. Company will not always give you the best service. But when they don't, there are consequences that they pay. And it might take time for them to lose market share, but they will lose market share. That is the beauty and dynamism of free markets. And even in the relatively unregulated markets, relatively regulated markets in which we live, there's still enough competition to discipline business in most realms. Maryland says Amazon does a bunch of targeted advertising on Facebook. Yes, Amazon also advertises on Facebook and Google, right? But Amazon also accepts advertising dollars to be advertised on its own platform. Thank you, Maryland. Alright, thank you, Armin. Armin just came in with $200 and got us almost to the $250 goal. So thank you, Armin. Really, really appreciate that. I was starting to wonder whether we're going to make $250, but wonderful. Alright, let's see. Yeah, quick update on the war in Ukraine. I mean, obviously on the ground there seems to be real stalemate, very little movement. There are fierce battles going on. I don't know if you guys are following this. It doesn't really make the news that often. But there are fierce, fierce battles going on in primarily in the East, both around a town called Kremlin, where the Ukrainians are trying to take the town and trying to... It's a strategic location. The Russians are really dug in and they are resisting. So Ukrainians are making slow progress, but it's bloody, it's slow, and it's horrific fighting. And the same is happening with Bakhmut. I'm probably pronounced that wrong, but that's in the Eastern, in the Donbas. That's where the Russians, particularly the Wagner Group, which is a group of Russian mercenaries, have been attacking that for months now. They have made slow progress, a meter here, a meter there, but have not taken the whole town. It's a town originally of 70,000 people. I don't think anybody remains there. It's basically completely in rubble. And there is massive fighting going on in Bakhmut. Indeed, Zelinsky, before he came to the United States, was on the front line in Bakhmut, brought some souvenirs back to the U.S. and gave them to Congress. But that is a place where the Russians seem dedicated, seem committed to taking this town. They've thrown a bunch of forces into the fight. And again, there's hand-to-hand combat there. It's very close and lots of casualties. It's almost impossible to estimate. But yesterday there was an attack of the Ukrainian military using U.S. Himmels, these missile launchers, launch missiles at a, I guess it's a former school, college or something, which was serving as barracks for new Russian recruits. The barracks were also right next to a arms depot. So a lot of explosives were stored there. They hit both the barracks and arms depot. Massive explosions. According to the Russians, 68 Russian soldiers were killed, according to the Ukrainians. It's probably in the hundreds. According to Russian bloggers, who are often more honest than the Russian authorities, it's hundreds of Russians have been killed. These are primarily young recruits. These are primarily conscripted soldiers from the latest round of conscription who have been sent to the center to engage in the fighting over the winter. These are young kids, young Russians. On the one hand, good for Ukraine. They struck a real blow against Russia. They're diminishing both the ammunition and the number of troops the Russians have. They're putting the fear of God into some of these Russian recruits, the fear of death into them. I think fighting is going to be much more difficult on the Russian side as these kind of casualties escalate. On the other hand, potentially hundreds of lives have just been lost. Hundreds of lives lost for what? Hundreds of lives lost for some mystical desire that Putin has. For some, you know, a crazy idea of a Russian spirit or his just desire to dominate Ukraine and to expand Russia into the Old Soviet Union. The powerlust of one individual has just caused the lives of tens of thousands of Russians, never mind the tens of thousands of Ukrainians, to be lost. Lives extinguished. Lives never, never to come back. Not to mention the tens of thousands of maimed individuals, of injured, of people who will have diminished lives because of Putin's war. We have to remember the mall blame for all the casualties in Ukraine and Russia sits before the Russian regime. This is on Putin. The blood is on Putin. The blood is on the people who enable Putin. Whether the missiles were launched by Ukraine and the missiles and drones are launched by Russia doesn't matter. The blood, the dead, the injured, all Putin's fault. You know, every time you hear that people have died in a war, you know, you think the good guys, bad guys and so on. But at the end of the day, the soldiers at the front, most of the soldiers at the front are neither good guys or bad guys. Most of the soldiers at the front are just there because they're being conscripted to be there. Many of them don't believe in the cause. They have no choice. There's a gun to the back of their neck, particularly on the Russian side. The Ukrainians might be fighting for something. The Russians are fighting for nothing. Some may be responsible to the extent that they have bought into Putin's propaganda. But many are just innocent young kids who are forced or who didn't escape fast enough or didn't have the courage or the forethought to escape to Kazakhstan or to Tbilisi. And they didn't know how they could make a living there. And they were allowed themselves to be rounded up and conscripted into the army. But here they are dying for what? Again. For a monster's powerlust. And Putin should be viewed as a monster. And he should be viewed as a monster by Russians more than anyone else, given the number of casualties that he has inflicted on, quote, Mother Russia. In the meantime, Russia is trying to devastate Ukrainian cities, trying to knock out the electricity, make them freeze to death every night. Drones and missiles are being launched into Ukraine to try to destroy as much of its infrastructure as possible. Success on the battleground just doesn't exist. And therefore what Putin is trying to do is destroy Ukrainian morale. But that's not going to happen because Ukraine is in the right. Ukraine is defending their home. He will fail. He will fail as monsters often do. It's just what happens is that those monsters, those monsters, they fail. They live miserable, pathetic lives, but they take the lives of thousands with them. So sad tragic. Sad tragic. All right. That was a quick update on Ukraine. Finally, on 60 Minutes, I think it was New Year's Day, they decided, 60 Minutes decided on an uplifting note to have a segment of the show dedicated to, you know, one of the great ills of the world over population. We did hit 8 billion people this last year. And to discuss this imminent catastrophe, they decided to speak to Stanford University biologist, Paul Ehrlich, who is now 90 years old and has an incredibly distinguished career of forecasting doom and gloom and disaster only to be proved wrong over and over and over again. And yet it doesn't stop 60 Minutes from interviewing him again, again, only on the same topic that he's been wrong over and over and over again. And, you know, when he starts thinking maybe they don't care about the accuracy of his predictions, maybe this isn't driven by science or by evaluating somebody's, you know, authority in a particular area, expertise in a particular area. It's clearly Paul Ehrlich has proved himself completely incompetent. Maybe this has to do with a broader philosophical agenda. An anti-man agenda, an agenda that believes that we are plague upon the earth, an agenda that believes that human beings are evil and bad and destructive. An agenda that believes that the standard of good is what's good for, quote, nature free of man, that man is not part of nature. And then, you know, the best they could do is to find an old 90 year old biologist and present him as some distinguished scholar to reinforce this agenda. Facts, not on their side. Now, for those of you who are not familiar with Paul Ehrlich, Paul Ehrlich became famous in 1968 by publishing a book called The Population Bomb. The beginning of the Population Bomb reads like this, quote, the battle to field all of humanity is over. In the 1970s, hundreds of millions of people were starved to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date, nothing, nothing can prevent a substantial increase in world death rate. Well, if you look at the world's crude death rate per thousand people, from 1965, 70, it was about 12.9. In the late 60s, it was about 12.9 deaths per thousand. From 20 to 25, 2020 to 2025, it will fall to 8.1. That's a 37% reduction. Oh, my God. There was no increase in world death rate. How is that possible? I mean, could Paul Ehrlich had been wrong? Famines, which he was predicted, hundreds of millions are going to die. Famines, which were once common throughout the world have disappeared outside of war zones. I mean, most of us, a lot of us who were born with mothers who insisted on guilting us in order to finish our dinners, those of us who grew up in the 60s and early 70s and maybe earlier, I think earlier, because I've talked to this with older people and they have experienced the same thing, all can remember their mothers saying, finish your dinner, there are people starving in, fill in the blank. And based on that blank, you could identify how old a person was because that's when the famine, you could identify the famine that was, you know, it was a Bangladesh, it was certain parts of Africa, China in the 1960s, there were famines, famines were common. Now, famine in China was man-made. Most famines ultimately are man-made in the sense of most of them are either war or communism or some kind of collectivization or farming caused them. But famines just don't happen anymore. Even famines as a consequence of war almost never happen anymore. I mean, there is a record amount of food today, even with, even with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, even with the hysteria that occurred during much of last year about the hunger that this war was going to cause. Somehow that hunger didn't materialize, partially because Russia allowed Ukraine to export some of its grain, but also partially because other countries stepped up and there was a massive quantity of food out there. So hundreds of millions of people turned out did not die in the 1970s because of hunger. It didn't happen. Starvation is not a major cause of death in the world, hasn't been. And this is all at the time when the world population, I mean the number of people dying and the number, and just the fact that there's no hunger and people are not dying of lack of food, all of this has happened at the same time as the world population has gone from 3.5 billion to 8, which is impossible, according to Paul Ehrlich. And yet this absurdity is what, you know, is what CBS chose. CBS, yes, CBS, 60 minutes chose to bring forward one of the consequence of Paul Ehrlich's book and activism during the 1970s was the one China policy, the one child policy in China. One child policy in China was instituted after a Chinese scholar visited the West in the late 1990s after Mao was dead and picked up a book by the thing of Rome or what they call something of Rome that was inspired by Paul Ehrlich that predicted mass starvation, mass death over population and all of that. He brought that back to China, he presented it with a bunch of research, Club of Rome, thank you, Club of Rome, and presented with a bunch of research, all that Paul Ehrlich had to inspire. And as a consequence, the Communist Party in China passed the one child law that is actually crippling China right now in terms of we probably have 400 million people less in the world because of that policy. And China is facing a real demographic challenge moving into the future because of that policy. I mean, the reality is that fewer and fewer people, fewer and fewer intellectuals, fewer and fewer economists actually believe the nonsense of Paul Ehrlich. I mean, there are economists, Nobel Prize economists and politicians, even from the left, somebody like Lauren Summers or Jason Forum, who Paul Woma, Angus Dieter and Michael Creme, economists who don't believe this stuff, plenty of people who don't believe this stuff. And yet this is what 60 Minutes chose to address. The claim that the world, the claim that Ehrlich made in 60 Minutes that the world is consuming too much stuff ended with threatening the biosphere. Life expectancy put aside COVID, life expectancy is at all-time highs. Death rate is falling. Population has increased 129% since the population bomb. We're doing just great. Our biosphere has never been better. And if you care about, quote, nature outside of human beings, well, we have 15% of the planet's land surface is now protected area. By the way, a lot of this I'm getting from Marion Tupi from Human Progress, which is a great resource, humanprogress.com. Check it out. Follow Marion at Human Progress on Twitter. They've got a book called Toop Abundance, which is terrific. I encourage you to read Toop Abundance. Anyway, we've set aside huge quantities of amount of nature for, I guess, animals and stuff. The world is urbanizing, so people are moving into cities. So nature is left alone for animals and other stuff, right? Animals and trees and plants, other stuff, right? Because of farming efficiency, I think I mentioned this on the New Year's Eve show, we have reached peak farming use. So from now on, the amount of farmland being used in the world is going to decline, has already started to decline, is going to decline further, which again frees up huge quantities of land. The world has never been wealthier. We have never been richer. We have never lived longer. And the environment in that sense, the human environment has never been better. I mean, what all this reveals is really not science. What all this reveals is not a look at reality, a fact. What all this reveals is really a real deep-seated hatred of man that people like Paul Early have. And that 60 minutes of CBS reinforces sanctions and promotes. And it's pretty disgusting. It is pretty disgusting. In a world in which we now have the capacity to deflect asteroids. I talked about this story on the New Year's Eve show. We've launched a spacecraft into space, slammed it into a moon of an asteroid and changed its trajectory dramatically as a test to see if we can deflect a real asteroid heading towards Earth. I mean, that's pretty cool. I don't think 8 billion people are a problem, particularly if those 8 billion are free and actually free to use their minds. So pretty sad. Pretty sad. I mean, Paul Ehrlich will probably live another 100 years to see his further predictions decimated. Paul Ehrlich famously lost a bet with Julian Simon in the 1980s when Julian Simon said that abundance is going to be abundance and therefore commodity prices would decline. And Paul Ehrlich said no, there would be shortages because resources are finite and therefore resource prices would all go up. Julian Simon won the bet easily. And when he offered to reset for another 10 years, bet again, Paul Ehrlich backed away the coward. All right, let's jump into, thank you. Thank you, everybody for getting us to where we need to be instead of where we need to be in terms of the, right? All right, let's see, Brie. Brie says, the number one bookkeeping YouTuber made the same videos I did a month ago. She has a near monopoly on beekeeping, oh beekeeping, bookkeeping, I don't know what I said, God, I can't even read. The number one beekeeping YouTuber made the same videos I did a month ago. She had a near monopoly on beekeeping videos, but still seems to watch smaller content creators for new ideas. No monopoly is safe and apparently she knows it. All right, that's why. Bee is Brie. Brie is threatening the beekeeper monopoly of this other person. So cool. Good for you, Brie. Keep up the beekeeping video work. All right, all right, I got in trouble with this guy, chicken. I've never understood why the people who choose a slow death to their own lives always want to take the lives of the living. Well, because the reason they choose a slow death to their own lives is because they have a fundamental hatred of life. That is the reason they choose to die slowly is because they are horrified and upset at life itself. And it makes sense that if you hate life and if you hate living, if you hate living and you hate life, then you hate other living being as well. And you want to take everybody else with you. So the source of all hatred of others is the hatred of self and the source of hatred of self. I mean, a deep hatred of self is hatred of life quality. So it's completely consistent. It's also another shout out to the real to real great Kent Lansing. And yes, sorry, I forgot Kent Lansing, but then I forget names, right? I mean, you've seen this on the show regularly. You saw it with the with just a few minutes ago with the Club of Rome. I forget these things and it's only going to get worse. So I have I have news for you guys approaching 62. I have a feeling that this inability of my brain to hold names and to remember them and to remember and to be able to bring them forward. Or to be able to remember context for them is only going to get worse. I fear I'm waiting for those memory pills. So anyway, yes, Kent Lansing is one of the few people certainly early on to recognize the genius of how to work in the fountain had is a hero for that. He is one of the first people to commission work or to help organize a commission for him. And as that as such, the ability to recognize genius is and recognize ability and recognize the integrity of a hard rock and to recognize artistic brilliance, static brilliance. That walk shows that is rare and unique in the world in which we live and in the world of the fountain it sadly. So to do it so early is particularly extraordinary. All right, let's see. Amen. Thank you. Amen. Wow. I mean, single-handedly got us to the goal today. I heard tens of thousands of Ukrainians have been taken by force to Russia. Is there a larger story there? Is there whereabouts known? There is a larger story there. I don't think we have all the fact yet. So I hesitate to report too much on it because I don't think we know enough. But suppose the tens of thousands, some of them probably went willingly. They are certainly ethnic Russians, Russian speakers in Ukraine who want to live in Russia for a variety of reasons, mainly collectivistic tri-borns. But then there are others who will move there by force. A lot of those are children. So a lot of children were taken out of certain provinces that the Russians occupied and moved into Russia. Some of them were adults. We don't know numbers. We don't know what's happened to them. We don't know where they're going to be. I assume that any peace deal in the future will involve Russia at least returning the children, if not returning the adults or the adults taken by force. I don't know. It's hard to tell. So on top of the many crimes Russia has committed, the main ones starting this war, and just the killing of tens of thousands of Ukrainians, soldiers and civilians alike, and the killing of its own people for no reason. It is also guilty of this massive dislocation of people who knows maybe these people are working in war camps, or maybe they're a form of slavery, or maybe they're just... I don't know what's happened to them in Russia. I don't know. I don't know that anybody yet has a full story on it. Thanks, Armin. This is a real tragedy and a real issue that I think we will learn a lot more about over the next few years. We know of the atrocities that the Russians have committed in some of the occupied territory, just horrific, horrific scenes of atrocities. But this is another atrocity, and particularly if they've taken children, very young children who won't even know where they're from. And yeah, it truly is a massive tragedy. And one of the shocking things about it, the thing to really contemplate here, is this is in the heart of Europe. Now, funnily enough, yesterday I was talking to my wife when we were talking about the language of Romanian. Romanian is the fifth romantic language. Romanian, from Romania, is actually related to Latin. It's similar in many ways to Italian, which is related to Spanish, French, and Portuguese. And the question is why? And so we were digging into that, just curious, and we looked up the history of Romania. And that turned out into looking into the history of that whole region. And God, if you read the history of these places, like every 10 years they get occupied by somebody else, there's another war, there's another prince, there's another, this tribe comes in from Asia and takes them over, and then the Ottomans come in, and then these guys, and then those, and then that prince. And constant war, constant, for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years. All of those libertarians out there longing for the days of Middle Ages, monarchies. Oh, my God. Oh, my God. You know, the Hungarians show up, I guess, almost all people who enter Europe from a certain, I mean really from the beginning of time in some sense, or from a certain point in time, all come from the steeps of Eurasia. They all come from southern Ukraine, southern Russia, all the way out to Mongolia, I guess, the steeps. And it's super interesting, all the way from the Turks, who ultimately occupy Turkey, but the Hungarians, of course, the Mongols, the Huns. But also, as I said, the Hungarians, the Bulgarians, the Albanians, all of the peoples, their roots are all in those steeps in Asia. Something about those steeps generated some forms of overpopulation or movement of people or pressure to find different lands, maybe was changing climate, maybe was, I don't know what it was. But it's really those migration patterns, if you look into ancient European history, those migration patterns from southern Asia, southern Europe, the steeps, what they call the steeps. I have to read up more about that, but anyway, the Balkans, all these little tribes, all these tribes all come from the same, around the same areas. And they've all been killing each other and fighting each other forever, forever. And they keep resurrecting those fights, and of course the Russians, I guess, are part of that, the Ukrainians, to some extent, are part of that. And then Kouda Baba corrects me that it's pronounced steps, yes, the steps. I don't know why I call it the steeps, the steps of Asia. And of course, we talked about Kosovo and Albanians versus the Serbs. Same people, I mean, not the same people, but tribes, different tribes in the same area 1,000 years ago still fighting the fights that they engaged in, I guess, on the steeps a long time ago. It is steps, not, yes. Got it. All right, Jason, last question. Thoughts on postponing the Bill Bingers game yesterday? I think it's the first that happened in Saka. Look, I think when somebody is basically about to die on the field, it shakes everybody up. I think it's a major issue. I don't blame anybody for postponing the game. Particularly football, when you don't know exactly what happened and given the violence and the violence inherent in football, the amount of pain and impact and so on that happens. He's still in critical condition. I don't blame them. Whatever happened in Saka, I don't know. People have dropped dead in a variety of sports, really in the middle of the game or in the beginning of the game, really has that happened. So I don't know what happens in other sports. But football is unique in that it is so violent in a sense. There's so much physical violence between the players that I can understand why you would want to stop it, at least until you had a little bit of more knowledge about what exactly happened and what caused it. So, yeah. It's human life. It's human life. He didn't just collapse. It had to engage in 10 minutes of CPR and then the ambulance arrived. It was obviously in really, really bad shape. I'm not a big no more. I used to be a huge football fan because it's a great game of strategy. I love that it is a game of strategy much more than any other sport. It's the ultimate strategy sport because it's so slow. In terms of physical activity, it's only like 12 minutes in a game. But the more I realize the impact of all this violence on the human body and on these athletes and what it does to them and the consequence of it over many years, I find the game hard to watch because I think about, God, these people are basically willing to make a lot of money now but almost guarantee themselves in certain positions. Unbelievably, physical hardships and in some cases brain hardships for much of their life. And that just seems like a devastating trade-off, actually, a sacrifice. All right. Thank you, Jason. Thanks, everybody. Really appreciate it. Let's see a few things before we quickly remind you we're sponsored in a show by the Iron Rand University. Check out the Iron Rand University, the best place where you can learn about objectivism, learn about Iron Rand, learn about a philosophy. So do that. I'll be mentioning that every show, we've got a sponsorship from them. Let's see what else that I want to say. Yes. One of the best ways you can support the show is through a monthly contribution. Go to Patreon, subscribe star, PayPal, Venmo, however you want to do it. Please become a monthly contributor that is incredibly valuable for the flourishing of the Iron Brook show. I've got a goal of increasing monthly contributions by 50%. I should have a timeline on that. But let's say over the next year, that's a huge challenge. It's going to be very difficult. It means some new people are going to have to become monthly contributors. We're hoping many of you become. And some people who are already monthly contributors will have to increase their monthly contribution. Think about it. If you can, that would be fantastic. If it's consistent with your values, to do so, if you could increase by 25%, that would be amazing. 50%, if you can, that would be even greater. But anything you can to get the numbers up would be greatly, amazingly appreciated. We've got the super chat, I think, now down. I don't even have to ask that much anymore. And we've got it down. Hopefully that will sustain. Now we need to get those monthly contributions up and just need to get the numbers up. Just a final word on that, numbers. December was weird. For whatever reason, subscriptions were like flat to down. It was just a weird month. I kept losing subscribers. The last week or so, end of September into now January, nice gains of subscribers back to kind of normal rhythm, normal patterns. So whatever weirdness was going on in December seems to have gone away and we can expect the Iran book show to continue to grow now. So I guess we lost all the people we're going to lose anyway. All the people really don't like the show who I offended somehow by speaking my mind. They're gone and now the rest of you are here and we're picking up some new people and it's everything is cool. And one of my big goals is to grow subscribers significantly this year. All right everybody. I will talk to you tonight, 7pm East Coast time. We'll be doing 2023, 2023 predictions, goals. Bye everybody.