All right. So I want to jump back into this leadership problem. And I'm sure you've heard this saying, it's oft repeated, hard times, create strong men, strong create good times good times create weak men

weak time weak men create hard times and the cycle repeats so you've heard my

adjustment to this I don't think I have no strong strong smart men create good times and nuclear weapons. Good times, create weak men.

Weak men and nuclear weapons create end times.

Well, that's scary. Well, I'm just trying to say that there's something about this reflexive fourth turning

ideology that I just don't agree with.

That game doesn't go on infinitely.

Agreed.

Agreed. I think your point being here that we can reach a point of technological sophistication that we stop, blow up the cycle or stop the game entirely, which we're at risk of now.

Yep. Since 1952, 53, that game changed.

Yeah. Okay. Fair point. So what I'd like to drill in to here, and this is a good example of that, that I think incentives are the actual the soil from which our individual characters are born, right?

And there's the old saying, no man is better than his incentives. So I take a bit of an issue

when you're saying if we had better leaders or stronger leaders or the leaders from the past

that we could somehow navigate these institutions

today in the right direction. I think the problem is actually the incentives themselves,

the misalignment of incentives. What's that? Let's find the disagreement. I don't disagree with

you yet. So I don't know if you're taking an issue with me or what you imagine my perspective. Well, I might be wrong about your perspective.

So in my mind, what I heard you say earlier was if we had stronger leaders or better leaders,

it could help rectify our current institutional malaise.

That is an issue of incentives.

Agreed.

So what I'm saying is you couldn't, in my mind, you couldn't go and pluck George

...