 So I'd like to talk about the use and misuse of the English language when it comes to the economics profession and how economics is portrayed oftentimes in the popular and financial press. Of course, Mises taught us that economics is a value-free science. In other words, that economic propositions don't necessarily imply any kind of value judgment. But yet, if you listen to the mainstream media and some of the terminology it uses, you will constantly be bombarded and inundated with these intensely value-laden expressions. But if you look at them a little more closely, you'll find that they're often completely meaningless and undefined. So of course, there's nothing new in this. The political class has been doing this since the beginning of time. But George Orwell wrote about it in his famous 1946 essay. It was called Politics in the English Language. So he termed meaningless words are of a kind that are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. And statements like this are almost always made with the intent to deceive. So I think that's a pretty powerful piece of writing that I think it certainly applies today more than ever. So I'd also like to recommend a book that's much in the same vein as Orwell's essay. It's called Junk English by a gentleman named Ken Smith. It came out, I believe, in 2001. And basically, this book is an amalgamation of English language misuse. And at the beginning, Ken Smith says, junk English is the linguistic equivalent of junk food, ingest it long enough and your brain goes soft. And I think what I really liked the most about this book was he has a whole chapter towards the end that he terms warfare English. And this chapter is basically just a bunch of euphemisms that politicians and governments have used over the years for war to obscure what they're really doing, which is bombing, killing, invading, et cetera. So back to economics, there's certainly plenty of junk English being used in the current economics profession and also in our popular culture and popular media. Let me give you just a few examples of what I would consider junk English in modern usage. The first one would be social justice. Of course, we all know this is just a euphemism, a code word for socialism. That's all it means. But yet it's this undefined vague term that a lot of people think means something good or benevolent. Another term that I think is junk English is sustainable. Well, if you think about it, sustainable just means centralized planning. It means some centralized group of bureaucrats or politicians are going to decide whether some economic activity this one wants to engage in is permissible. So sustainable means centralized planning. Another popular term is living wage. What does living wage means? It really means price controls. All living wages is some artificial floor established by the political class on what you can sell your wages for. It's no different than if the political class came along and said you cannot sell your house for less than $100,000 because we want to make sure everybody receives a decent fair price for their house. No different whatsoever. Living wage equals price control. Now this one's really in vogue lately income inequality or just inequality in general. What the users of that term really mean is taxes and redistribution. That's really what they mean at the end of the day is we're going to take money from some people via taxation using guns and prisons and jails for those who resist and give it to other people. That's a political process. It's also a process of use as force. But what do they say? They say income inequality. So when the political and media class use junk English, which means terms that are so meaningless, so vague or so undefinable as to be useless, we got to call them on it and we got to force the interventionists to say what they really mean in plain English. And I think most importantly of all, we should never accept or adopt or use junk English in our own lexicon, just as we shouldn't accept the premises of the state and the political class.