Is this the system that we want? What’s the purpose of the system? What's the objective of the system? Because for a long time, we believe that the metric to judge, whether society is successful, is economic growth. And the metric within economic growth is sort of net gains in GDP per person or some other thing like that, but this relative inequality is what causes political tension. And throughout history, the story of mankind is elites rising up, overreaching, and then being brought back down. They've been brought back down in revolutions. They've been brought back down in innovation. In Ancient Greece, the tyrants rose up, so on. And Pliesthenes came along and they created what is the forebearer of democracy as a way of balancing out this power. It happened in China. It happened in the United States in the 19th century when the robber barons got too much and the trust-busters came in and they pulled back. What's the problem? Those all happened under the umbrella of sovereignty of the nation state or a city state or a principality. There is no global umbrella of sovereignty. There are no mechanisms to countervail. I'm not saying you want to change it all and I'm not saying that one wants to expropriate it all. But I am saying that we're inviting backlash and we're seeing signs of backlash everywhere. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, Vladimir Putin in Russia. In the United States, we're seeing signs of backlash. The backlash takes many forms because many people associated these inequities and these imbalances with globalization itself. And so you've got the absurdity of us trying to build a 700-mile wall and a 3,000-mile border, which to me is the great metaphor for our time and exercise in futility, where not only are you trying to keep people out against the border but you're not willing to build the fence along the whole border. But you're really trying to keep out isn't people, it's the future. We're trying to legislate aga...