And part of this hesitance is that younger people dont really know much about markets or wall street except cartoons, right but markets are so valuable. They are. A gift to us and we think of them as a gift. But if we go way over to the left away from wall street socialists think of the markets as a gift too because theyre logical proposition is given colon a 20 or 30 trillion dollar economy. We will spend the money thus and thus and redistribute it the market the money the wealth is assumed by everyone. But markets are like souls the economy is like a soul. Theyre like humans and they can make a choice a market. Can choose to come back or it can choose to stay away and that . That problem the fragility. Of markets that the decision to stay away. Thats our problem. Nationally. We have to keep the markets here and we have to keep the markets happy. Um, whats an example of that . Ill just mention one example, because again, all live among caricatures. An example is saturdays off. We think thats a given right . Were americans we get saturdays off, but it wasnt always that way americans used to work six days. What changed . How did saturday become hours . How did saturday become saturday saturday became saturday because of a cold capitalist concept . Called the productivity game. Suddenly factories could in five days make what they used to make in six. That it sounds cold, but its very personal and it wasnt just the plutocrat or henry ford who made that decision. Was it dave . It was the actual statistical productivity game. Well all this is kind of hard to translate so its my its special and happy honored to introduce my friend david banza. Here today, he can explain why markets come and why they go he has a special and rare talent. There are a lot of Financial Advisors in the world. Dave is a Financial Advisor who can translate what markets are doing to . People even not just to clients not just on television, but even to children. And this book is a special book daves book . No free lunch. Most economic books are tomes with charts . This book doesnt have a single chart. It just takes Market Insights from the stages. And helps them along brings them forward. You can see dave with his sharpie yellow highlighting at night texts from the sages that are useful to you and me he communicates them 250 economic truths here for the reading very short. I think its no accident that these 250 truths plus a little explanation from dave read a bit like devotionals. Habit is part of life. Not just the life of faith, but also the life of family and the life of markets so i commend to this book one reading a day. Its my honor to introduce dave his colleagues and his book. Theres no free lunch. Im an ask dave 12 questions, and then were gonna open it to you. So wonderful opportunity to to get into daves brain dave. The first question is the title of this book. Theres no free lunch. We know in your life as a Financial Advisor as a wealth creator, youve said that over and over again. Where does that title come from . Well, i thought when i was titling the book, theres no free lunch 250 economic shoes that i was stealing it from Milton Friedman who it wrote a book and 1975 that said there aint no such thing as a free lunch, and he used that language in quite a high volume of speeches and articles and essays. But i did in my Research Find out that it was the by the way your looking today at one of the great economic historians in our country particularly in the era of the Great Depression the 1938. There was a newspaper in el paso, texas trying to make a point about opportunity cost is the First Published record of the expression. Theres no free lunch, and it was meant to be a reference to the idea of opportunity costs, which of course Milton Friedman expanded upon and i love the definition. It was great. Mancow said it was an advisor in the George W Bush administration all theres no free lunch means is that to get something i want i have to give up something i want. Its that simple and ive and ive tried to talk about it in the interviews. Ive done thus far about the book in the context of tradeoffs that economics in a lot of ways because were studying the allocation of scarce resources. We are studying tradeoffs ergo. Theres no free lunch. You know, im going to break our rules and advance a question dave. Okay, because i i do think and you make this point that in the covid discussion. Theres very little awareness of the tradeoff factor. Can you explain how that works with covid . Well, i think that covid is unfortunately one of the most profound examples of this principle that i do believe somewhat with the gift of hindsight, but i actually was really kind of writing about this a year and a half ago as well that this was a classic case of tradeoffs and they were in this case not merely economic tradeoffs. They were societal social some cases medical and societies have to make decisions about tradeoffs. The other great contemporary example is the environment in a sense that our approach to the subject to Climate Change is one massive case study and tradeoffs and and were trying to deal with different longterm things with shortterm implications and vice versa but in the covid moment, we were worried about the spread of a highly contagious virus and the wellbeing of the Economic Community had to be traded for what we hoped would be the avoidance of spread. It didnt seem to work very well avoiding the spread but we did get an awful lot of the Economic Impact on a macro aggregate sense. Its been less impactful because of the amount of money that the fed in the congress as far as flowed into the system, but on a micro level it did unspeakable devastation, but it was part of a tradeoff around what we were trying to remedy in a health situation. Im glad you touched on the social because when child stays home for two years. Theres some sorrow often not always but often and some damage and that of course is one of the tradeoffs that was unacknowledged in the very pursuit of perfect covid prevention, right . Well, ironically ill say one more comment on that Wharton Business School highly regard is one of the top Business Schools in the country and certainly never accused of having some right wing bias ran an extensive white paper, very academic estimating the hit to gdp. Over the next 30 years that they anticipate isolated to the School Closures of the covid moment, and its significant. And so i think that speaks to a tradeoff then in that case can even be expressed in economic terms. Yes. Well you think of the gi bill which got a lot of people through college after world war ii who might otherwise not have gone to college that increased our productivity. What does the opposite to when you have people less prepared than the baseline expectation, but now i want to move on all daves life. Weve known each other a long time dave and i made a cartoon book together. Its very important to be creative and econ and that that was a wonderful venture cartoon history of the Great Depression, but all the time since ive known you dave youve talked about flourishing. What is flourishing and where does the phrase come from . And what do you mean by it in the context of this book . So the notion of Human Flourishing as the aim of economics as the purpose of economics. First of all invites me to approach economics from a fully holistic standpoint. So just to use a very simple analogy if i could argue that theres an action that could be taken that would in aggregate produce an extra 10 basis points of gdp growth and would damage the soul of the society would decrease the aggregate level of happiness. Peace harmony, i would argue that that was antiHuman Flourishing that what were looking for in our economic aggregates is something that advances the wellbeing of humanity. So the way im defined it for High School Students that im teaching this subject to the semester and i know some of you are laughing right now as you should be but they so far have not thrown me out of the room is the notion of Human Flourishing as the synthesis of material and spiritual wellbeing and so Human Flourishing that leads to a harmony that to a joy of peace now, its the great Arthur Brooks at the American Enterprise institute who all of a sudden helped a popularize this concept a lot of economic minds of faith, and i consider myself an economic mind to sort of but of faith a great deal and weve been talking in this language amity for a long time about flourishing Arthur Brooks came around about 10 years ago and said, this is how people achieve happiness is with earned success that the component of family a friends of some religious connectivity and then of work that it is these are the factors that it when harmonize most bring about a happy human experience. This is theres a long tradition of teaching of this in the church both catholic and protestant traditions, and i believe that human forishing is no more complicated than that which advances the wellbeing of society and i think that economics is a profession losing. To that aim and moving into more you mentioned charts and graphs and econometrics has gotten this incredibly wrong. Well, but im going to push back a little there dave. Does that mean a child credit is more important than a significant reduction in the Capital Gains rate. Well see again that involves a tradeoff and charts and it does require charts, but what were doing when we study the charts and and evaluating an adjudicating the policy issues child tax credits have a prima facing acceptability capital gain tax reductions have a prima face acceptability. How do we look at these things and do pros and cons . I believe that reasonable people can disagree on the policies. I favor more capital gain reduction than i do child tax credits because of my belief of incentives, but i still want the aim in that policy adjudication to be Human Flourishing. Well, lets just allow since were were up here in controversial a Capital Gains rate cut can increase flourishing. It not only can it should be assumed that it will and when i say that i merely quote the great Democrat John f kennedy. Yes, sir movie i want to mention Something Else the best part of this book is not the great dave finds. Its the intro by dave dave bonsen. Please have a look at this intro and what struck me was david no noted that perfection or the concept of perfectibility was dangerous. Can you speak a little bit about that because often when we are about socialism. It sounds way better almost perfect. Um, and thats very concept that that we can get to perfection you as sale on this side of glory. I have no intention of embracing rightwing utopianism anymore than weve hopefully spent the last hundred plus years rejecting leftwing utopianism. So most rightwing criticisms right now of what they call market orthodoxy are rooted in the nirvana myth. That we can achieve utopianism and it is a forgivable mistake from the left in the sense that theyve always been making it since the progressivism of woodrow wilson. I could go further back philosophically, but i dont want to disrupt anyones lunch by talking about hegel, but the fact of the matter is that utopianism is the ultimate fallacy and Economic Policy setting for no other reason than it cannot be achieved. So you try and try and try to do things that cant be achieved how what could go wrong . Well right now many on the right would look to certain things that have not gone perfectly within markets and want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but if they didnt have as their aim the belief that perfectibility could be achieved perhaps they would rethink that and i think we would get to a wiser approach to dealing with the challenges that we do face in the economy today. Well, yes and the Republican Party in particular is grappling with this actually both parties are grappling with these concepts whats feasible and whats just ideal and easy to sell on television. Theres a wonderful statue in edinburgh scotland. Basically black a black material right on the mile when you walk down to the parliament from where all the tours go and that is the statue of adam smith. The great philosopher in your book you say you quote smith. You say how selfish so ever man may be supposed there are other motives in his nature. Can you explain why smith is important and what he meant adam smith had the fortune of being the most famous economist in the world in a day and age before google where adam smith would have been lost in the shuffle for the vanillaness of his name, but in 1776 when wealth of nations was published and his equally significant, but somewhat lesser known book theory of moral sentiments this book, which i found from this quote that you referred which i found from russ roberts refers to something that smith hit upon that i think is profoundly important about human nature. The characterization that adam smith talked about selfinterest in a gordon gecko way that we all operate from selfinterest meaning im going to get whats best for myself. Is entirely ignorant . Adam smith did speak to the rather obvious reality of incentives that when we go to work to provide for our family, which sounds like a noble thing. We are inevitably doing commerce with somebody else and that it is benefiting and that those are good things in its this the construct of the invisible hand. But what smith says here is that mankind is more complex than that and that there are im desires to be lovely desire to be seen as lovely and that there can be we know this from aristotle and augustine and aquinas. There is a moral nature demankind that feeds Economic Activity and i believe that smith as as one of the great enlightenment philosophers. Got this right at a time that the class of Economic School had a chance to take off and so for us to now then take the advantage of what the class of Economic School created for 200 years and characterize adam smith as gordon gecko is totally unfair. So i go straight to smiths own words to basically trying to embody the notion of moral sentiments that are selfinterest when it becomes more enlightened morally leads to a better societal response of Human Flourishing. Thats right. Smith didnt write a book the story of gordon gecko and wall street greed and bad people who short he wrote a book called theory of moral sentiments. Thats right, and and thats important to to look into and to help. Im just going to go through a couple more names. Okay, david found the names. Its this ones a hard one frederick bastia. Its a french name. Okay. Bastia. But hes an important one bus just speaks in your book and in his wonderful treatises about the things one sees and that which one doesnt see what what must be foreseen. Tell us about it. Tell us the story of bastyas broken window fallacy. So i as a very very young person who did not have a very easy time getting dates with girls read henry hasletts economics in one lesson and and became very familiar with the broken window fallacy, but as i became more serious in my studies as all serious students do decided to study original sources and not merely writings about original sources that 100 years later. So hazlet was quoting from Friedrich Bastiat about his notion of broken window about fallacy and i immediately became an throttle basquiat and now its very briefly share why but biographically boston died at the age of 49 and he i think was the most important european 19th century thinker. Alexander hamilton is my favorite founding father. He died of the age of 47. My father was a incredibly remarkable christian intellectual who died at the age of 47. So i have this soft spot in my heart for people who changed the world and never made it to age 50. Its something just very interesting about it to me bastiat wrote about the broken window fallacy, which just starts with the idea of a whoigin throws a brick through a window and people come by the next morning and look at the shop and they go oh on one hand that windows broken, but this is great because now its going to help the economy because someone have to come out and fix the glass and measure the window and it will and then it will create some sort of Economic Activity out of repairing the window and bossy instead. Of course, thats true for the glass maker and the window repair person. Theres an economic benefit, but what you failed to see is that all youve done is transfer with the owner of that. App was going to do with the money to the glass and repair person and presumably if he had gone about a new suit or something more productive to his business, that would have been a more rational allocation of capital and he used it to point out one of the most important things in all of economics, and i just happened to be talking about this right now to you one week after sharing this and i think changing the lives of a bunch of 16 and 17 year olds of the classroom when they can see how economics needs to be understood and in the visible effects, but also the invisible how it affects one group of people, but also how it affects all groups and how it affects things in the short term, but also how it affects the longer term so the invisible and this is something you can carry with you your whole lives all bad economics all comes down to ignoring the invisible the longer term and all people while you look at the visible the shorter term and some people and that was bastians great. Beers and out of the 19th century hazlet was a austrian economist who wrote for the New York Times in the 20th century and popularized it and now i think its one of our most profound economic insights to this day. And were gonna but lets just say lets take this metaphor a little bit further. Henry ford has a big factory in michigan. All the windows are broken in the factory. Therefore henry ford cannot afford to buy the assembly line. He was thinking of buying. What is the hes repairing windows all the time . What does that mean . It means . Fewer saturdays off right for the worker. So it really does translate. You can follow the chain and thats what i would point out emily because you brought up covid earlier that the henry ford analogy is such an important one and theres so many places we can go rationally and organically with it. But i will tell you it is perhaps my biggest pet peeve and there are long list of them of things in Financial Media that bother me when they see a hurricane or a Global Pandemic and an impulsively think wow. What great Economic Opportunity that we are supposed to somehow be hoping for the broken window of a hurricane to generate economic growth. Its somewhat on disgusting morally if you think about it, the way governor is hope they can declare an emergency right because that means money for the state. Okay, we we would be remiss if we didnt on two other fellows. Sole and hayek, so lets lets go you have thomas sold throughout your book. The soul says the most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best . What did you mean by that . What did tom sol mean by that . And this is going to parlay into our our talk about frederick hayek, but thomas sole is who is still with us. Hes in his 80s his dear friend Walter Williams passed away this year, but these are two profoundly intellectual africanamerican economist who are advocates and champions of liberty. And what souls referring to here is not merely liberty for liberty sake or for licenses sake and some times it is characterized that many advocates of liberty believe in soul is here referring to the logical and philosophical dilemma of one she referred to once you get down to the fact that there are things to be decided the question of liberty becomes who is going to decide them. And so like hayek was a tremendous believer that decision should be made by those with the best knowledge. High accuse the Word Knowledge so we use the word often optics that there was a visibility and in local circumstances and so our Founding Fathers understood this through federalism the Catholic Church understands it through subsidiarity. There is a intuitive logic and morality to localism who should decide those who a are have the most optics, but then where soul would also hit home is those who at most affects skin in the game skin and well that this is something we all know intuitively from our town. Lets say relating to our tax rate and our schools and one of the most beautiful examples a soul of course is an economists who lives on the west coast. Hes long been affiliated with stanford and hoover. Um, and he wrote a beautiful article many decades ago about a problem where local were ignored by national. Sanctimony and that was a high School Called dunbar in washington dc which was a Magnet School for africanamerican you had to work hard to get into dunbar and you had to work hard to to be at dunbar and to continue as at some other schools. Well this idea of a school for africanamerican. That was a modern we had importance Supreme Court cases in the 1950s. We wanted to be integrated and dunbars specialness and the students there performed very high. Thats why tom paid paid attention to them because the outcomes that the quality of the students their knowledge and how they performed in the economy as adults was very impressive that school became casualty to crosses far away, which is we decided it was wrong to have schools that were not integrated fully dunbar wasnt integrated because it was an africanamerican school. Therefore dunbar must change. Did dunbar get better sold and think so when it was forced to change by far away forces and this story of a lost Magnet School one school is in seouls recent book on Charter Schools and why he thinks theyre so precious which won the hayek prize. It shakes us to frederick. Okay our last and i think i counted 38 times. You mentioned tyek in your book. Thats just with my kids but in the book, that sounds about right. Yeah 38 times. So who is hike why are we mentioning . All these foreigners hayeks hi bastia, um because foreigners lived in places where things were worse than they are here so they had clear insight is the answer they gave voice to things that seemed not so grave here because weve done so well, but so hayek lived in austria, and he watched him fall apart and he watched russia take over east europe and then he lived in london where he hi, like rooted varmesis and many of the austrian economists. Had a great glance at european developments and came to america to help warn us and and got ingrained in very high level pillars. I i constantly remind people that frieda kayak wanted nobel prize in the 1970s Milton Friedman won a nobel prize just this year the supply side guru bob mandel passed away. He want to know about and and all for ideas that just a couple decades later are sort of unfathomable in the in the Economic Community and this is most unfortunate but even its just say economists will not acknowledge these ideas notwithstanding the ideas of hayek. They have won nobel prizes. Yeah. This was very intellectually serious work that we essentially spent a few decades post world war ii. Out and i believe that these guys won the debate and yet here we are now digging in on some of the errors of old hayek is is probably for most economist to who sort of operate from a philosophy of freedom and advocate for this concept of the free Society Hayek has got to be most of their hero most of their hero. He really was an extraordinary philosopher in economics. And so the use of knowledge in society is a 17 page white paper. That i believe from the age of 15 to 25. I read a hundred times. I was that cool. And i believe that this notion of what he calls the Knowledge Problem radically informed thomas sole and and certainly Milton Friedman and and other contemporaries today that existed at a few University Faculty lounges where its still safe, but fortunately for us where you they started getting booted out of faculty lounges they still got hired in some president ial administrations and were able to profoundly change the world from there. But but hyatt believed that knowledge is dispersed throughout society in in such a complex manner that the fatal conceit of the central planner is the notion that they could possibly absorb the knowledge and redistribute the knowledge in policy and planning in a way that was beneficial and that rather those still imperfect imperfect. That rather the best people to deal with what hyatt called time and place reality time and place decisions are the people that had time and place knowledge. And so to your point of the Charter School dynamic the idea intuitively that somebody in sheboygan, wisconsin. We want someone in washington dc making decisions for their School District is silly, but economically we all concede power to central planners every day that they cant possibly have the knowledge to effectively adjudicate in our lives. Thats how you create contribution. Oh that you and its important to remember that hayek was never he was at chicago, but he was never a chairman of the university of chicago econ department. It all along. Its been a struggle for these economists to get the recognition. They warrant the road deserved them is really a covid story an emergency happens in road to served amidst a war, but it could be a Health Emergency and therefore theres a pretext for the government to expand much farther than just handling the proximate problem the enemy or the virus and and were seeing that with covid. I think its time. We open to questions and we are very happy to have them to ask dave. This is a wonderful book. Its a keeper here. Ill turn it this way. Its a keeper. Its very good for grownups. Its very good for teenagers and i do say because its broken up into. Little bites one to two pages three pages. Its fabulous for an econ or spiritual devotional. So you raise the issue of what you have your microphone here . Yep. Thank you, abigail. Okay. Raise the issue what might be called the existential trump. Thats the small team on policy the whether its world war ii pearl harbor or the argument is is that Something Like covid or 9 11 essentially trumps other things to the extent that those tradeoffs are subsumed as being existentially irrelevant for some period of time. So, how do you see that playing off in the making of Economic Policy to be able to move from the existential state in which government power is effectively untraveled in the pursuit of some type of a survival need as opposed to the normal types of tradeoffs in which you have a real interplay of various types of policy preferences, so it does become an inherently a bit of a political question because the tension exists in the political sphere and i happen to be a very opinionated person politically and yet what i to do with the book is write it with what i believe are a Political Economic precepts that then if they were brought to the Public Policy sphere would give a certain foundation that would enlighten and enable better policy making so i think most people and in fact most on the right, but but most certainly most on the left do the opposite they drive their economics from their politics where i want to drive the politics here from the economics. So what are the economics were referring to in these tradeoffs the existential trump. It is first to all the acknowledgment that there is a tradeoff. That that beginning a concession that theres no free lunch. Well go a long way. We were not ever discussing the covid moment as if there was this other alternative whether there were two things to be weighing and and i believe that out of wars out of natural disasters out of health issues. Im well aware that politicians are called upon to make difficult decisions. George washington was a historically called upon to do severe policy response out of health pandemic. It happened to be one that was killing everybody not one one or two percent but the point of the fat matter was that tradeoffs are real and then where you go from there in the adjudication has to involve what good economists understand is the limiting principle. And so this is what i think we have lost in this existential trump. Engine is that we act as if theres no limiting principle in the way in which we have to have certain interventions that may be distorted to markets that may misallocate capital to some degree, but nevertheless are deemed to be necessary for a larger tradeoff war pestilence and so forth. There must be a limiting principle. So i think about the example of how we deal with were disabled people in new regulations and economy and that we can make good arguments for how its healthy to have some accommodations for disabled and modern living and not only is this true for the cause of Human Flourishing. Its good economics as well serve greater customers have better brand of caring about all in your community, especially those the deal with the disadvantage. But if i took that and then said every single building that doesnt have accommodations must be torn down okay, or every building must have an elevator with an attendant and have Beverage Service for the disabled. Right . We all say oh, come on youre being ridiculous and i go exactly whats the limiting principle and that to me is the challenge of the day is the pursuit of wisdom the deals of the existential trump, but does so with the acknowledgment of tradeoffs and does so with the limiting principle in mind. Well take one more question. His fellow i will go here first and then to barbara go ahead. Hes got it. Shes got a mic for you. Youre just following up on that last thought in the case like covid or you mentioned the Environmental Issues where the kind of public posturing in the media is this is the worst thing to happen or theres great doom on the horizon. What concretely can someone do . Either on a policy level or people outside the political sphere to keep the focus on the fact, theres a cost to whats being done and bring that cost home in a way that its actually actionable so it impacts the Decision Making and avoid simply looking at one side of the equation now, its a great question and i will start with indictment of some of my friends on the right. The greatest thing we can do to keep our eye on the ball of cost tradeoffs when there are things such as Environmental Concerns is to not be guilty of abandoning tradeoffs on other issues. So if we want to be taken seriously and reminding people of the cost of things regarding Climate Change, it seems to me and coming upon us to not ignore the cost when we talk about automation or challenges of Big Technology or or the issues around Truck Drivers and sometimes this rightwing utopianism i refer to is arguing from the same illogical and inaccurate place that i would argue left is utopians can argue from what i want is consistency here the depoliticizes the issues and brings economic wisdom to the reality of tradeoffs. But the reason that we cant go and say first of all the idea that the planet will be wiped out in 10 years cannot be the basis of policy making when it is non falsifiable. Thats not an principle this philosophy 101 anything non falsifiable is no basis for making societal decisions. So then we have a more grownup conversation. We give them credit we forgive them for past false prophecy. I think the planets already is supposed to be extinct from what i understand, but then we say, do you agree that what you propose here would cause 25 unemployment and work backwards to get into a place and and and i can go on and on i dont want to get in the policy weeds though on the environment. My point is its an issue. I take very seriously and so i suggest to those who do were a tradeoffs here where we can have greater use of uranium greater use of nuclear greater use of natural gas. How do we advance the ball of lowering Carbon Emissions where the tradeoff can be lessened so that we dont have a tradeoff or saving the planet. That means people literally freeze to death and starve to death because we act as if fossil fuels are no longer necessary in our in our society that idea to use the analogy this notion that there will be some jobs lost as there is greater digitization and didier advancement of automated technologies. How do we talk about the other jobs that we can be created . How do we stimulate more labor . Dynamism more mobility retraining vocational efforts, but see we cant do that politically when we dont have the economic sense to understand that these tradeoffs exist regardless of what peoples pet political issues may be and were gonna go go to barbara and barbara. Yes. Thats the mic. Im wanting to. David i love what you say about greed in the book. I think its not clear to a lot of people that not only the that the wealthy are not the only quote greedy people in the world. How do you explain that the High School Students do young people buy the idea that that the quote poor greedy to you know, i think that it is challenging to talk about greed and then start off immediately say look how many jobs jeff bezos are you on must create . I believe its true and most people and intuitively understand but of course they immediately go to the opulence or were they would somebody call the excess of a billionaire lifestyle and emotionally you can lose the audience even if you dont say anything on truthful, but what i want to do is start the way arthur books did and just simply say when you see a poor person they dont have a meal and they may not have any loved one in their life. Do you believe if you give them a meal and leave that you have advanced their Human Flourishing that you have set them on the path to peace harmony material material spiritual prosperity in their life because if you do that is the marxist view of materialism. That all you have to do is give somebody something and they will be happy. So i am a person of affluence on the right who actually believes in caring about people enough that i dont want to only meet their materialistic needs. So what i refuse to do is accept the accusation that those of us who want lower tax rates and are more prosperous economy are the materialists. The materialist amongst us are the ones who want to help the poor by giving them things. Whereas father sariko says in the book. What i want to do is teach them that Wealth Creation equals production minus consumption. So, how can they produce more than they consume and build wealth . And i care about their souls as people created by god with dignity to believe that they actually can be productive members of society. Not merely live off of my production or or others. Thats the way in which i think as brooks did and others you at least open up the conversation by by doing what has to be done first stopping the fallacy that the lefts are the leftist economically they want merely to redistribute wealth are the ones that are most concerned with the souls of folks and they address that with materialistic means i think that were trying to rephrase the conversation in a way that is more fair and ultimately will animate young people to our cause for a free and virtuous society. Where we want to close . But i want to Say Something the the easiest thing to do is write off ads and run for office. Whats much harder and i think barbara and and some of our other questioners of is to get to people early it through education, but its boring nobody. Thinks its exciting compared to running for office and being in the papers and being on tv to teach a class. But it is the necessary and fulfilling work because the idea of tradeoffs the dave has shown us is so important is one kid should encounter in secondary school with an emphasis that is not present in current econ textbooks and certainly not in current history or religion textbooks or any other texts. Your kids might encounter, so i want to commend dave for going to not only adults not only young adults but children and not only by writing but also by actually teaching and creating schools when you go to an event nowadays you find many people want to create or strengthen schools dave and his wife jolene have done that. That is the work that will make people understand later when the crisis comes why tradeoffs or the economy must be considered. So congratulations. They were also laboring in the vineyard in addition to being a Star Financial analyst and author. Thank you very much amity. I appreciate the kind words. I appreciate you taking your time to come do this today. I do hope you all are familiar with amitys work. I mentioned her her material as economic historian, but her study the Great Depression her study of captain the presidency and life and work of Calvin Coolidge our seminal works in both fields. And then now she serves as the president of the coolidge foundation, which im blessed to support and be familiar with and i can tell you that were all in this cause together fighting for the same things sometimes with different ways. I appreciate you all being willing to be here. Ill stick around and talk to you with any more questions that may exist. But i think weve weve covered a lot of people today of all sorts of difficult pronunciations. So thank you forwelcome, and thh for joining us for this very special program with mary trump. Im michelle meow host and producer of the Michelle Miao show and also a member of the board of governors for the Commonwealth Club of california if youre joining us for the very first time the Commonwealth Club is a 118 year old nonprofit Nonpartisan Organization dedicated to the civic discussion of todays most important topics and issues. Any views expressed here are those of the speakers