 So I think quality of opportunity is, again, a very dangerous term because in a sense it necessitates some violence against somebody in order to equate the opportunities. What I'm interested in is maximizing opportunities. I want everybody to have as many opportunities as possible. Is it going to be equal? Never. It's metaphysically impossible. Some of you, I don't know, some of you might have gone to Eaton and some of you went to a public school. You're not going to have the same opportunities. That's just a reality. And there's no way to make it equal. So we can pretend, we can have a fiction, we can fantasize, but it's not going to be. So what I want to make sure is that everybody in society, which poor middle class has as many opportunities as they have, to do that you need economic freedom, the fundamental to maximize opportunities. Societies in which poor people have a lot of opportunities are free societies, unregulated societies, unconstrained societies. That's where you get maximized opportunities. Now let me say something I forgot to say in my talk and then I'll continue with the question, which there are a lot of. There's one sense in which equality means something politically. And that's equality of freedom, equality of rights, equality of liberty. We are all born free. You are not born a surf to anybody. You're not born a slave to anybody. You are a free human being. You should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want to do. As long as you're not hurting other people, it's none of anybody's business what you do. We don't live in that society. We live in a society where the government can force you not to do what you want to do. In spite of the fact that you're not going to hurt anybody and you haven't hurt anybody, whether it's licensing laws in California to shampoo hair, you have to get a license, which costs thousands of dollars. Who do you think that hurts? It doesn't hurt me. It hurts poor people who can make a living shampooing hair, but if they're going to pay $4,000 to get a license, they're not going to get at that job. They're never going to have that opportunity. So maximizing opportunities means getting rid of government intervention. It means economic freedom. It means freedom for everybody. Any attempt to equate opportunity or outcome to make them equal violates political equality, violates equality before the law. You're not equal before the law when you're paying a higher tax rate than somebody else. You're not being treated equally. One person is paying a lot and one person is paying a little. And it's not an issue of you did some harm because rich people don't do harm. They do good. I mean, assuming they're produced and assuming we live in a free market. It's about somebody who can make more money or generate more freedom just by a very natural fact about themselves. Give me an example. If you say you'll never be as good as LeBron James, that's because he's naturally or born a better basketball player. For the sound of it, you say you should be able to have that opportunity to... So clearly LeBron James was born with physical attributes that make it possible for him to be a great basketball player. Good for him. I was probably born with some other attributes that may be good at this, maybe. So the genes that we have, it's what we have. What maximizing opportunities means is means that once you have a certain identity, that you have certain genes, that you are who you are, you have the ability to make choices to make you the best at that as you can be. Now, a lot of people are born with LeBron James' physique. Well, I don't know how many, but quite a few. Some people work really, really hard at it. Some people use their mental and all sports as a mental activity. Those of you who do really at the top level of sports, a lot of it's up here. LeBron James, and I don't know LeBron James that well, but I know I've read about Michael Jackson. Michael Jordan, Michael Jackson. Michael Jordan worked incredibly hard. Watched tapes, studied his opponents, studied moves that he admired in other players, practiced them and practiced them and practiced them and worked unbelievably hard. Yes, he was born with some talent. Good for him. I was born with other talents. You know, we're all born with something. And the point is this. What you're born with is given. Make the most of it and let's create a society that allows people to make the most of it. Not a society that because you're born with some talent, we punish you for it. It doesn't have as much talent. Because we have to say that everyone is born with some talent. No, they're not LeBron James level. I don't consider myself LeBron James the best in the world. I'm not the best in the world in anything. But that doesn't bother me. You have to say to people who are just born at the worst, born very poor, are you starting just top luck. Including if you're born autistic or severely disabled in some other way. I mean, it's sad that they're autistic. It's sad that they're autistic. It's sad that they have some disability, whatever their disability is. But that gives you or them the right to take my stuff away from me. How is that moral? You talk about Morelle. How is it moral that somebody's need is a claim against me? Somebody's need is not a claim against you. You don't have unchosen claims. You don't have unchosen claims. There is no original sin. The fact that you were born with talent doesn't mean you owe society or anybody else something. You owe who you are. Your job in life is to maximize what you do with what you have. You don't owe other people stuff. Somebody who's autistic relies, I mean, autism is complicated. Somebody who's really physically disabled relies on the good will of people to help him. It doesn't make it right to force people to help him. If he deserves help, then volunteer to help him. But force should never be part of human interaction. When you introduce force into human interaction, you destroy. You destroy life. You destroy freedom. You destroy who you are.