 So, we have got to stand up for the idea that morality is about your life, morality and this goes back to her view of morality is about kicking dogs. The view of morality is how to make your life the best life that it could be, how to make a flourishing life, how to be productive, how to create a career, how to build a successful life. That's what morality studies, that's what morality looks at, that's what being a moral person means. Focusing on a good life for you. If we accept that morality is about how you treat other people, particularly how you sacrifice to other people, how you benefit other people directly, again, we lose. And I know the altruists, what they try to do, the ones who want to be pro-markets, what they try to do is they say, but look, markets are good for everybody, but they're not. Not equally. Markets are good for some people more than others and why should they be? If the needy deserve and the needy are not getting as much as the non-needy, then that's morally offensive. It's not about wealth creation because it's not about pursuing your own life. It's about wealth redistribution and capitalism doesn't redistribute wealth in the way that our morality would like. It doesn't redistribute wealth equally. We have to debunk the whole idea that equality is some kind of virtue. Equality is a vice. Equality of outcome, equality of opportunity, of vices because they require the violation of some people's rights. The use of coercion and force on some in order to so-called provide opportunities to others to provide wealth or money, it's not even wealth, money to others. We have to be able to make that moral claim that inequality is a feature of freedom, not a bug. A feature of freedom, not a bug. And that when economies are free, they get rich. And when they get rich, everybody who's productive gets richer, not equally. But when economies are free, they get rich and everybody who's productive, stand of living goes up. And to some extent, even those who are not productive, they stand of living goes up. Just because the stuff around them gets better. So inequality is not a problem. Inequality is a feature of freedom. It's a feature of wealth creation. It's a feature of a rising tide. It's a feature of good things, good things happening under freedom. And this is where I'll also just say as an aside, as an economic side, that the whole idea that the middle class is stagnated, the wages have not gone up, it's just bogus. It's just not true. And one illustration of that is just the idea that everybody has one of these today, and a computer, and all kinds of other goodies that we have. And the economists can't measure that. They can't measure the value of these things to our lives. They can't value the way in these things have improved our lives in significant ways. All they can measure is the amount of money in a sense we have in the bank. But if that money is actually buying us better things, things that contribute to our life more, they don't have a measure for that. They don't have a way to calculate that. So even if, and I'm not even sure this is true, well, I know it's not true. Even if by some monetary standard, people have stagnated in terms of the quality of life, in terms of their standard of living, in terms of what they can do with that money, I would argue their lives have actually improved. Now let me just repeat, you can get all of this in great detail, and proven with charts, and numbers, and history, and lots of data. In my book with Don Watkins, Equal is Unfair, which I encourage everybody to go and read, because I think it really provides a big chunk of the moral answer to what is going on here. Lastly, I think that one of the crucial things that has to be done, if we're going to defend capitalism and stop the tide of AOC and Elizabeth Warren, stop the tide of class warfare, stop the tide of the American people blaming all their problems on the rich. I guess we've run out of Mexicans and we've run out of Chinese, because Donald Trump has fixed all that. Now we'll run after the rich. But notice it's the same mentality. Republicans want to blame the Chinese and the Mexicans. The Democrats want to blame the rich when it's none of those people's fault. Problems we have today are our fault. They're the faults of the people who have established the system that we have, the mixed economy that we have. It's the fault of the people who advocate for, and who vote for, and who enact the mixed economy. So the thing we have to do is defend billionaires. We have to show how billionaires are moral. We have to show how billionaires are productive. We have to show how billionaires create value. We have to show that they have earned every last dime that they make. Now if there are billionaires that are truly crony, that they're essential characteristic that they have is cronyism, then attack the cronyism. Attack the subsidies, the government favors. Don't attack the billionaires. Even when they're lefties, in their capacity as billionaires, defend them, show how you cannot become a billionaire in a free society without creating real values. Real values for hundreds of millions of people. Real values that change the world for the better. That you cannot become a billionaire without applying your mind, without thinking, without working hard, without figuring stuff out that nobody else can in order to solve those values. I mean, we have to defend Bill Gates even though sometimes he says horrible things. We have to defend Juan Buffett, who is disgusting in many ways because he made his money honestly. He made his money by producing. He made his money by making the world a better place. For all of us, you cannot be in the 1% unless you've created something, you've added something, you've made something of yourself. There's no way. Because to be in the 1% or the 0.1%, which is a lot of what this is going after, is the 0.1%. To be in the 0.1%, you've had to come up with some innovation. You've had to create something that people really want and are willing to pay you for more than what it costs you to produce. And not a few people. Millions and millions and millions of people. And then they're willing to buy it over and over and over again because every business has massive costs. You have to make a profit over and over and over again to become a billionaire, which means you have to create great products that lots of people want because they make those people's lives better over and over and over again. And the achievement of that, the ability to shape markets, the ability to bring products to market, to bring ideas to market, to bring services to market, to reshape the world, to add value to us. That is an amazing ability. And what a billion is. They're the people who bring that to us. They're the people who stand for living a quality of life. Depends on them. Without the entrepreneurs, without the inventors, without the innovators, without the capitalists. We're all in mud huts. We're all fighting ringworms in Alabama, wherever it was. All the stuff that we take for granted is stuff created by that 0.1%. So we have to defend them. We have to defend the financiers among them, the technology innovators among them, the internet entrepreneurs among them, the Walmart's among them. Think about how Walmart has benefited the lives of millions and millions and millions and millions of Americans. And they're the villains somehow. So we have to distance the world in which we live from capitalism. One, we have to argue against the idea that inequality is a problem. Two, we have to defend billionaires. Three, and running as a threat through all of that, we have to reject the morality of altruism. Who the hell are you to take 70% of my income? What business is it of yours? How much money I make? My wealth is mine. You're gonna take 3% of it? I wish, I wish I was a billionaire, right? I don't wish you could take 3%, but I wish I was a billionaire. Who are you? By what right? By what moral right? I'm a productive, honest individual. As I said in the show I did a few weeks ago about the progressive income tax. Taxes should be regressive because the billionaires of the world have contributed so much already. The whole world stands on their shoulders. Now we're gonna penalize them for the contribution that they've made. We should be rewarding them. So we have to reject the idea of altruism. We have to reject the idea that your life belongs to the collective. We have to reject the idea that your life belongs to the needy. We have to reject the idea that politicians own you and get to decide what you should do with your property and your wealth. And until we're willing to do that, Elizabeth Wan and AOC and their various minions and maybe a more charismatic version of them are going to win. Are going to win because they check all the right boxes. They've got a story about blaming capitalism. They've got a story about inequality. And they use the altruism to justify all that and more than anything, they use their altruism to blame the billionaires.