 I'd like to pick up where you stopped before the break. You said something about culture. Basically, what you were saying was that high culture was going down the drain because nobody is supporting it anymore. And during the break, we discussed a bit more explicit. And you said it's especially dire in the Netherlands, whereas in Germany, high culture is more supported by the government. And there is something called Bildungsburetum. And my question to you, and maybe also Philip can answer this, is why don't we have a thing like Bildungsburetum in the Netherlands and in many other places, countries in the Netherlands, in Europe? And do we need it? Do we need it? Do we need Bildungsburetum? Yeah. Well, if you're asking me, hello. Wrong answer. Wrong answer. I'm sorry. Let me start over again. No points. They're actually trapdoors under our chairs. If they say anything really wrong, we're gone. Well, I hesitate to bore you with historical platitudes, but it was the way, of course, it was a way of German nationalism originally. There was no political union. The union was only in the language and the culture. And culture has stayed, I think, half of all opera houses in the world, in Germany. That is a pretty extraordinary exception. It has created a strong sense of identity, I think, but it is also, and there is, again, an elite problem here, because there are many people who don't participate in that. And until the Second World War, that was seen as unproblematic, I think today it's quite problematic. I also think the fact that the state runs many cultural institutions isn't only good because it tends to sort of drift towards a professionalized kind of taste. A taste of curators and directors who make decisions for other curators and directors. So, you know, it's the opposite of the American model, where you have hugely rich donors, not only giving money for production, but also the taste. So, you know, there are two extremes, and perhaps neither of them is ideal. But do we need this, you ask? Well, of course, that's the greatest utopia, decent education for everyone. That would perhaps be something to build up something like a European institution, like a European identity as well. But just to come back to that, because I find it really important, how much I feel Europe has failed to try even to build that up. In very simple things, let's say we have, in many countries, military service or civil service. Now, first of all, it's patently absurd that only young men do that, not young women as well. And you could say, okay, as a trade-off for your free education, you do your year's social services somewhere, not in your own country, in a different European country. Go somewhere else for a year. That is something small and something practical, but it's not just Erasmus for, again, the kids of the elite. But that would be something for everyone to see. Europe is a reality everywhere. People are remarkably like my family. They have the same problems, the same fuck-ups, and actually, some of them are really nice. You know, that would be a way of building Europe, but that sort of thing has never yet happened, and I think that's where we fail terribly to build that up. The Germans and the French have done this for a long time. They're still doing it. And now in France, they want to do it. But not in a large program that really grips everyone. But if we want to teach, to make people feel that there actually is something like belonging together in this Europe, we need to think harder. And we need to think harder about something that is part of ordinary people's lives, not just something for the elite, which is European anyway, and has always been European. And another thing, when you earlier said, people now no longer fight with weapons, but with words, well, we're rich. We don't need to fight with weapons. We all have enough. Wait until real poverty returns to Europe and see whether people will only fight with words. I agree with you. I agree. And that, of course, is also why this is not just a nice sort of ornament, the cherry on the cake of European culture to create this European identity, but why it's necessary. Because we've all grown up and lived, most of us, in a time of wealth and security in Europe, indeed an unprecedented one. Now, whether that is only due to the European Union or not, I think it's a very debatable point. But it is not necessarily what the future will look like. We will all be poorer in the future. We will all face more challenges. And we need to create something that can. I am so sure that we will all be poorer. Is this something, is this like a law? Is this why? I think it's slightly, it's something like a law, for instance, because of climate change. Because work process will be increasingly automated. Most people, more than half of the people, of the people will lose their jobs in the next 30 years. But then we always, we all know from history that all these innovations also create new jobs. Well, not all of them. And also you can see, that's a very optimistic vision. But we are facing up to huge challenges and changes in the next generation. And we'd better have something to counter them with. We'd better think into the future. And I think at the moment, we're sort of administrating our wealth, and that's great. But it won't be enough. Yeah, could I just make an economic point here? I don't, I do agree that we will probably be poorer over time if we continue to measure wealth just through GDP. Yes, a very important point. That's very important. I mean, you know, if we start using welfare measures rather than GDP measures as actual GDP, the kind of GDP represented by commercial transactions between people declines as a share, other forms of activity will rise. And so, I mean, we need to re-examine our concepts of wealth, welfare, sufficiency, all these things that are barely on the horizon yet of political discussion.