 Welcome to the Knuckleheads of Liberty. In California, the idea for fighting inflation is to throw more money at it. So Gavin Newsom is going to start sending out checks to all of us. And, you know, I guess we're living here, so I suppose we'll be getting those checks all of us. But, you know, gosh, it's, you talk about just wrong-headed ideas for fighting inflation, just, you know, ruining more price signals and sending out, you know, $1,000 checks to people to get through the inflation. It's kind of like the whole school debt issue. You know, oh, God, school's getting more expensive. What are we going to do? Oh, we'll throw more government money at it. That'll solve the problem. What do you guys think about this? Well, I did a lot of research preparation for this. Well, as much as I had my time allotted to find out where does this money go when, you know, it's in surplus. And, you know, is there an account that it goes to, you know, what type of an account, so on and so forth? Of course, there is something. And, you know, those checks get cash and they're put into the general fund or the coffers of the California state government. I don't know where that is. I can't find it for the life of me. Maybe Leon knows off the top of his head, but the point I was trying to do to make about this whole thing is, first of all, this is already tax money that they confiscated from us. And so it's free in that respect. I divide money up into two types. I don't know if it's free money, brand newly printed with no, you know, of course, all fiat currency, but I mean is brand new printed money, new stuff that's never been printed before and then boom, it gets spent by the government right into whatever it is. Now, in California, they don't have a printing press. They don't have a central bank, so they can't do that. However, they received $26 billion in federal funds. I don't know if that was just last year or the year before. So you can say that all that money was brand new money. So you can say that they're returning some of that brand new money, or you can say that they're just returning the old money that was already in the possession of the taxpayer before it was taxed away from them and into the state coffers. So in that sense, it's non-inflationary if it's the old money, if it's the new money it is, but it's already been, it's just new money that's already been factored in to the, or its effect has been felt by the inflationary pressures on the economy already. And it's just finally making its way into the hands of the people. So, you know, this is a roundabout way of saying I'm kind of on the fence as to whether this is truly inflationary or whether it's just simply changing the possessor of the money back to its original person that earned it, that taxpayer. What do you think, Leon? Well, to the extent, I see a point, Tim, but to the extent that money is fungible because California do receive, does receive quite a lot of federal funds, and you are right, they did receive a chunk of money. I think it was last year, actually, about that 26 billion you were speaking about, they did receive that from the federal government, which was newly printed. So, if you think about money as being fungible, you can see where the inflationary effect could occur, but you are right, there's the only one saving grace in all of this, that California itself does not have a printing press where they could be printing dollars, right? Thankfully. Yes, we will thank the good Lord for that. But that money could still have a inflationary effect because money is fungible. It doesn't matter that this dollar came from the federal government or that dollar came from the California taxpayer. But this is just socialism at its worst to start with, okay? Because they're taking money away from us, they're working, and well, maybe some of them in the middle class too, and yeah, maybe some of them poor too. And they're just returning it, they're just distributing it to everybody. This is socialism, okay? This is socialism. We don't need, we don't need another stimulus check to suppose, to supposedly, you know, oh my goodness gracious, we're going to go spend it money and all everything is going to be nice and wonderful. This is going to increase demand anyway, increasing demand. It's going to have some inflationary effect from the increase in demand. If demand is increased and there's no change in supply, of course, then it will have some price effects and that price effect will be inflationary. So they're not doing anything for us, okay? They're not doing anything except buying votes. That's what they're doing. Well, so you're saying that if it was for sure exactly that person's tax money that was returned to them, then you're okay with it. But in this case, it seems like, you know, the predominant payers of California state income tax is the rich. So you're saying they're transferring wealth from the rich to all the general population, mainly poor people in, or lower income people, you know. That's what they're doing. That's what you're saying? Yes. If you look at the description of what they're going to do, there are limits on income limits on who could get this so-called stimulus. You're right. In that sense, you're absolutely right. But I still am on the fence about its inflationary aspect. And again, it's only, in my mind, it's only due to whether it's old money or new money. So for example, you take old money, some rich guy earned something. A rich guy had a business and he earned a bunch of profits and then California state taxed away a portion of his profits. Okay, that's still old money. Okay, then they turned around and they gave that money to poor people and just say, okay, we're not going to spend it on infrastructure or the schools or any of our pet projects. We're going to give it back to these poor people. So in that sense, you would say that the poor people have a tendency to spend it right into the economy. So in that sense, it would be maybe partially inflationary because it's going from someone that would invest it somewhere else, probably more of a long-term investment like in a stock or such. And somebody that's going to go out and spend it on groceries and gas and things like that. So in that sense, it might have that inflationary push, even though it's all old money. It's kind of a distortion in the economy because what it's doing I think is it shifting it towards the goods that everybody is concerned about going up. And that's literally what they're trying to give them the money to buy more of. The idea is that the price signal is telling us to conserve if it's going up, right? I mean, that's kind of literally what it's trying to do is tell us there's something that's... And so maybe we have to tack on whatever that is we're using instead of, hey, let's shovel some more money into your hands to go buy more of it. So I don't know. But yeah, I agree with you, Tim, though in principle because it's the state and they're not printing money, it's not changing the net amount of money. Maybe the speed of money is changing a little bit for one reason or another. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness always and forever.