Member Statements The member for Toronto St. Paul's Good morning speaker today. I'm rising on behalf of a wonderful constituent of mine and her name is Sherry First I want to remind folks here that in Canada Approximately three million people are battling eating disorders Sherry is one of the 500,000 or so people in Ontario who are struggling with her own battle. I Want to make it clear in this house That we need additional supports for eating disorders Sherry has been struggling for Roughly 30 years And I'll explain to you the brunt of the struggle We only have 20 publicly funded beds in Ontario For people who are critically ill enough on death's door to be hospitalized Speaker I know the government has made some investments in eating disorders, and I appreciate the effort But for many families too many of which are in St. Paul's and across Ontario We need more We need additionally public funded beds. We need staff To support patients in those beds it is Absolutely heart wrenching to know that there are empty beds That cannot be Accounted for because there are no staff to take care of patients We need additional publicly funded beds. We need more staff We need more psychotherapy more mental health supports for people here in Ontario who are battling with on with with eating disorders And it must be publicly funded Because not every family in this province has 30, 40, 50 or 60 thousand dollars to spend For months of private care Speaker please Join me everyone in this chambers and let's fight for people who are living with eating disorders So they can live another day Thank you The next statement It was a wonderful news to hear Our premier announced a 10.2 billion dollar childcare deal this week alongside our federal government This deal is meant to deliver an average of 10 dollar a day childcare by september 2025 And it could don't come at a better time for the Ontario residents of I have been hearing from many working families in my riding of Mark and Thornhill That they have been struggling to keep up their cost of living childcare cost went up to 300 percent under the previous liberal government The childcare deal alone with other initiative From our government will help the people of ontario make ends meet Mr. Speaker This is just one of the example of a government is reducing financial pressure on families in ontario The deals also include hiring new early silkwood educators and supports Improved compensation for all registered early silkwood educators working in licensed childcare Ontario is creating 86,000 silky spaces with more than 15,000 spaces already in place since 2019 As our premier stated our silkwood educators deserve more money Mr. Speaker, this is a great deal for all ontarian parents Under this program reducing fees for an average of 10 dollar a day in ontario would save an average of 7,300 Unworthy pay unworthy first child which will give parents the opportunity to afford childcare for first time Mr. Speaker Thank you to minister of education for his hard work And you also he also stated that we will be maintaining the ontario silky task credit program and that will continue That is a great news for many hardworking family. Thank you, mr. Speaker Thank you member for mark and cornhouse member statements member from london north center Speaker the current epidemic of homelessness and lack of mental health supports in my community is hurting everyone Residents business owners shoppers visitors and especially those who are struggling without supports are all suffering When this government took power in 2018, they immediately cut promised mental health supports by 335 million Speaker they voted down my bill to provide powerful prescribed supports to those struggling with mental health needs Since I was elected I've called upon the government to provide emergency supports to address our homelessness and mental health crisis People who are struggling are sent to london from all across southeastern ontario And london doesn't have the capacity to handle everyone The government needs to step up Mayor ed holder wrote a letter in early march and city council is still awaiting a response from this government about ssrf supports Shelters like unity project london cares and atlosa need your help now Nick in my riding wrote to me about the human suffering seen on london streets And he underscored how the province is not looking after its responsibility for health care and mental health For too many years governments have not built enough affordable and supportive housing It's unacceptable to leave people this way Speaker it's time for the government to step up build supportive housing and provide meaningful assistance So that those suffering from homelessness and mental health can rebuild their lives and businesses and people can enjoy beautiful downtown london again Thank you For mississauga lakeshore. Thank you speaker work hard when you are young So you don't have to when you are old From the days of when my italian grandparents and parents first immigrated to ontario This was the saying that was passed down through our family's four generations I'm sure many ontarians if not all abide by this philosophy in their regular life However, we all know one special person who does not follow this Sentiment at this is the former mayor of the city of mississauga hazel mccallion Even though it was only a few short months ago when she celebrated her 101th birthday Hazel continues to give back to her community providing to us all that age is simply just a number That is why i'm honored to rise today to recognize another accomplishment in her life And that is that hazel mccallion walk for health The hazel mccallion walk for health is a new fundraising event hosted by the trillion health partner foundation Which takes place in my riding of mississauga lake shore with the support and funding of our government Along with the largest donation ever in canadian history of 105 million dollars by the peter gilgen foundation The community will soon have a chance to fundraise of their own for the new hospital These investments will help increase the number of operating rooms and add over 350 additional new beds Our government continues to promise the health and safety of all ontarian is our number one priority With what will be the largest hospital in canadian history This build will help ensure we keep the promise for just For the not just for the mississauga residents, but all ontarians. Thank you Member statements the member for st. Catherine. Thank you speaker Today I rise to talk about protecting our environment and our green belt The direction we need to be going in is protecting more ontarios parks and expanding green spaces Expanding the green belt on one hand. We need to do this work to combat climate crisis The greatest threat to everyone. However, on the other hand, it is an opportunity to support communities and create jobs One of the reasons our region and st. Catherine sees so many visitors a year Is because our community was built in harmony with our natural environment Once this is paved over by a developer. It will be gone forever I mean every word I say I look at our shoreline Our community and our green spaces throughout st. Catherine's one of the reasons it is so beautiful Is because it it is a priority to protect these spaces We are already paying the price for the climate crisis our children and their children will pay this price in the future We need a province with a bolder clear Fully committed plan for the environment The last four years Too much time has been about making it about politics When it should have been about policy I am proud to stand with a caucus that takes this seriously And I hope all of the members in this chamber does as well The member for glenberry press scott russell Thank you, mr. Speaker It is with admiration and emotion that I commemorate today the life of a remarkable woman from the pr region And I was happy to know her and miss Madam monique wolf yell a peaceful warrior who passed away from a fifth cancer on january 22nd at the age of 77 Monique was an outstanding citizen mother of four children loving and present teacher for 26 years She dedicated her time to so many organizations and groups especially for education and women It's impossible to even summarize in the time eluded her countless qualities Including her generosity her rigor her integrity and her courage have marked hundreds of people throughout her life In her eyes life was a perpetual moment of learning caring Wonder and fulfillment She lived this way until the very end It is because of the determination of women like monique that women today are exercising leadership in a variety of critical areas Without their courage and rigor we would certainly not have all Our achievement russell our home the place where monique significantly improved the quality of life for so many A place she left in better shape than she found it and for that we are forever grateful She left her mark and we will never forget her. Thank you, mr. Speaker The next statement the member for mr. Saga malton Thank you, mr. Speaker We are devastated Family members of five killed in brampton home fire Plead for others to check alarms This is a strong and compelling headline Mr. Speaker last week an early morning fire claimed the lives of a family of five Flames tore through their brampton home around 2 a.m. Monday. We lost the lives that could have been saved The coal community is in shock, but more heartbreaking is How it may have happened potentially It was an active smoke alarm Since march 1 2006 it is a law for all interior homes to have a working home alarm On every story and outside all sleeping areas still we keep losing lives to know or inactive smoke alarms in the house In commemoration of the great chicago fire every year fire prevention week is observed from october 3rd to 9th to raise fire safety awareness And help ensure every home and family is protected Clearly mr. Speaker. This is not enough Commitment from community and everyone is the only way to save these precious lives In 2020 there were 10 fatal fires that left a total of 11 people dead while in january 2021 15 fires left 22 people dead half of these fires were preventable house fires We could have saved those lives most fatal fires occur at night when people are sleeping A working smoke alarm will detect smoke and provide an early signal to the presence of smoke So you and your loved ones can get to safety or prevent the fire from spreading through you, mr. Speaker I want to urge everyone to test home Smoke alarms regularly and replace them every 10 years one life lost is too many Let's all do our part and save lives. Thank you Thank you Thank you, speaker today I want to highlight a significant issue that is impacting my constituents of hamilton mountain the affordable housing crisis This is something that has been going on for some time, and it has certainly gone from bad to worse Low and moderate income tenants are bearing the brunt of this crisis The average rent for a one bedroom apartment in hamilton is now $1486 a month for families for two or three bedroom units in the city can cost over $2,000 the housing system is failing our families Now almost half of renters in hamilton are living in affordable unaffordable housing This means that one in five renters are spending more than 50 percent of their monthly income on rent Making it difficult to afford food transportation and other necessities Even worse renovictions are destroying the stock of affordable housing by driving up rent and displacing people from their homes Several constituents have come to my office over the past year because of renovictions Each time i've expressed their concerns here in this chamber the premier and the minister have still been silent tenants trying to find new housing face skyrocketing rental Cost and end up paying upwards of 20 percent more every month for housing in hamilton Affordable housing is a crisis. We need to end tenant displacement and renovation and commit to developing policy That puts the health and housing security of our tenants ahead of the profit of landlords and developers Member statements the member for paris on muscova Thank you, mr. Speaker perry salmos coca is most often known for its natural beauty and welcoming people But what you might not know is that also home to world-class athletes I want to offer my congratulations to the olympic and paralympic athletes from perry salmos coca who represented canada in beijing graham richey from perry sound competed in cross-country skiing posting an impressive fifth place in the men's classics pile Team sprint along with his teammate here in canada's best ever finish in that event He also finished 11th in the four by 10 kilometer relay and 34th in the men's sprint I also want to congratulate mark idison born in perry sound and skip of canada's paralympic wheelchair curling team Who brought home a bronze medal mark is now a three-time olympic medalist? Megan oldham from perry sound her remarkable fourth place finished in women's big-air skiing after Winning the qualifying round. She also finished 11th in women's slope style Megan farrell from brace bridge finished 12th in women's snowboarding parallel giant slalom And just two days after coming home from beijing. She won gold at the nationals Finally callin cameron from brace bridge is bringing three bronze medals home to perry salmos coca Call and finish third in men's sitting sprint power cross-country skiing in the four by two and a half kilometer mixed relay And in the men's long distance sitting cross-country event Congratulations to the athletes from perry salmos coca and to all the athletes from team canada for overcoming the hurdles presented by the pandemic And representing our country with determination and sportsmanship job well done Thank you very much


Thank you very much. And I'm really pleased to be here and it's quite an honor to be surrounded by so many entrepreneurs and innovators and of course important public servers. So thank you all very much for having me here. The question is interesting because when you look at it, when I would say 30, you know, first I never imagined that we would even have mobile phones. Just to tell you how this works.  One of the very first time that I came across a mobile phone.  And I carried it around in the car. It was a massive thing, you know. And it was mobile in the sense that I could take it anywhere with you. It was a massive, it was an individual device. And that was it. You wouldn't wear it there. You wouldn't wear it. It was a soft one. This was, you know. So as a complete, what we're seeing today is completely, it's your way beyond what anyone could have imagined. I remember that I, there was a time, you know, I did a lot of research on computer engineering. Professor of Law, as you know. So I was doing a lot of work in the early 1990s. Computer generated evidence. I was saying then that there will be problems with proving stuff that are computer generated because of the way our laws were written. You know, so our laws are written with script in mind. Writing on a letter, paper, letters because of marks, that kind of thing. So clearly there will be a problem with these new devices. You know, somebody sends a text. So if you like of me, if you send a text around and how do I prove it given the state of law and all that. At the time it was considered completely esoteric. Nobody thought this was made any sense. So I think what has happened in the past few years, especially in the last 15 odd years, is in my view and I'm sure there are some people who are much more fast like this than myself, I think it's just incredible that no way anyone can describe it, no way anyone can cope with even of that development. So it's really quite incredible. Thank you very much. Let's clap for you. I guess as a follow-on to that, given the piece of technological change, what things from that era, or what do you think that were the things that you would have liked to have been able to do. They're not regrets, but they're more like wishes. What are the things you would have wished, I wish this was put in place. I wish these opportunities were more widely available. Practically everything, everything I see today, I mean, fantastic if I could do it, if I could do it there. I mean, just to put one point of view of some of my involved research and legal practice, I mean, today things are so much easier. I mean, I spent, there was a time I spent looking for a case, just looking for a particular case, because I was writing on illegitimacy, I was writing a particular case on illegitimacy in Nigeria. I spent six weeks in the high court of Legos where they got their file with all the cases. And now I've got the six weeks I had a terrible cold, I was ill for a while, because I was just looking for a particular case. I've only found the case after six weeks, but now everything is digitalized. I can sit with my laptop, I can research cases from anywhere in the world, I can visit libraries, I can do all those kinds of things. I mean, I certainly would have caught short my entire, the period I spent between graduating and becoming a professor by at least half the time, because a lot of time is spent doing all sorts of stuff. And besides, look at what you guys are getting into now, I mean, payments, systems and all of that, lots of what you guys are doing. I don't think it's seeking to some of you guys who are doing what concrete occurrences and all of that. These are developments that if we have them, I'm sure they'll do better than you guys. I can somewhat believe that, but we'll see. Gognas and how you think about challenges Nigeria faces and what it needs to do to provide a better future for everybody. Research teaching exposes you a great deal to many different views. And one of the things I found with being a teacher is that I'm not bothered about criticism, because I'm criticized, my views are criticized from the very first day that I walked into a classroom. So not only am I at my work, and when I say criticism, it's more people saying I don't agree with this, I don't agree with that and argue with you about stuff. So I'm in a faculty where my work is being examined constantly, where it's being critiqued constantly. So I get to a classroom, I'm teaching students, and somebody who hasn't studied anything at all raises his hand on the fact. But first I go and agree with that. And here the guy who hasn't studied anything. After all the research. So for me, I think that what is done for me is that it helps me to be able to just, you know, I'm not worried at all about people saying I don't agree with you, or people saying I don't like what you're doing, because I face much sharper criticism than this is what I mean. So I think back, what my background has helped me to recognize that you're only one idea, or one set of ideas, and there are so many people with more, possibly more brilliant ideas. The idea is to be able to advocate those ideas for the common good. The idea is to be able to get what everybody is saying, understand what they're saying, understand that perspective and see how we can use that for the good of as many people as possible. That's basically what my background has done. So that's amazing. When you think about Nigeria over the next 30 years, what do you think is the one thing we need to get right? Really show our potential, to convert the potential that we keep saying. For me it's very narrow. It's integrity. That's what it is. It's integrity. It's about, you see the problem we have is look at the share amount of resources that we have, and look at the share creativity. Because people who are in politics, many go into politics because they want to make money from politics. And that's what I'm putting in as delicately as possible. People, many people who are in politics just want to make money from it and they want to steal resources. So it affects everything. It affects judgment. So for example, you want to build rather than pay teachers or rather than invest in education or invest in medical care or whatever it is. Because I mean paying actual individuals, it's easier to build to say I'm not going to build a road. Because it's more like it will make some money. So it affects judgment. It affects everything. I think that if we were to get people, able to hold people to account, that would be, and I keep saying that if you have an honest person, what if they present an honest man 50% of the problems are solved. 50%. Because most of our problems center around corruption. Center around the use of funds by people. Funds directly of people looking for where they're stealing from. That really is a major problem. If we give all our resources, let's just say 70% of our resources went on the things that we want them to go to or out that the private pockets could never be where we are today. Impossible. It's several times ahead of where we are. So I think that for me that's the main problem. And what do you think, before we launch into those questions, that your people need to do to ensure that there is integrity and that we are on that right path. I think the important thing to bear in mind is that integrity pays. It's the only thing that works. I was speaking to people, some members of our cabinet, and I was talking about the very idea that honesty, you know, it's not what you say is the best policy and those kinds of clichés.  It's not. It really makes sense because trustworthiness is how business is done everywhere. If you trust it, if people can trust you with credit, if it can trust you to give you credit, if it can trust you with anything, you will whatever that thing is, you're going to advance and you're going to do a lot of it. And I think the important thing is to teach people. The important thing is to get people to understand that that is not a moral issue. It's an economic issue. It's a business issue. And if you can trust it, if people can trust you, there is no way in the world that you will fail. And I think that many people like I think that many people understand that insurance is one of the most creative people in the world. Many people know that we are some of the best minds but people are worried about integrity issues when they're dealing with us. That's an amazing response. And I guess for us I mean that's something I've also found especially from business because many people think it's just a government issue. But even in business, you know, it's more personal. And it came from Mr. Eputa A.M. And I think the question, which I like a lot was what is the most valuable lesson you have learned in your current role as vice president? And how do you measure it or arrive at that conclusion? I think the most important lesson that I've learned is how difficult it is to actually get things done in our environment. I think that there is a huge gap between a stated objective and getting it done. And the reason for that is because not just in the public sector but also in the private sector we're not big on timelines we're not very big on efficiency, we're not big on productivity in a very positive sense, you know? So we let things slide. So if for example I ask you to do some work and I say you tell me I'll do the next one I'll give you the next one. It's not necessarily to give you the next one. And it's not such a big deal if you don't. So I don't even feel very angry or profited if you don't give me the next one. So if you give me two weeks time I still think well that's enough. So there's something about how we're not very big on on time, on maintaining our timelines on keeping the promises that are made on say I have said this time and I'm going to deliver at that time. I think that's really the difference between us and some other people that are in terms of productivity. And this one is one of the biggest lessons.  And I think that's something that they bring to the table in a lot of cases is maybe more efficiency, I think they're a bit more efficient than other people that we tend to work with. And they are and I think that really the whole idea is to get people to be much more cautious, to be much more faithful to, you know, deadlines on promises and those kind of things that they make. That's as big as the implementation, how to make sure that stuff is implemented when you set up the plan. There's going to be a small change in format which is the question one after the other.  Of course you know I reserve the right one so I'm not going to answer. Ok, thank you very much. So I have an analysis on employability and I agree with you that it's a major challenge. Part of it of course is that I have to do with training. It's the kind of training that people get. And I think that we suffer in some sense double jeopardy because not only is training inadequate, there's also technology that's moving so far ahead. We have robots and all sorts of technology and intelligence that are taking away jobs. This is going to be a much more complex thing for us. So when you start by people not being able to basically read and write, make presentations, critical analysis and all that to the bigger problem of technology taking away people's jobs. So it is a complicated one. But I think that one of the advantages we have is that technology is going to help a great deal in unraveling a lot of the problems. So for example in our N-Power program, the N-Power Graduate Employment Program basically the idea of N-Power is to engage graduates who have new jobs. But also to train them and the training is basically an employability side skill. So everyone has a device so put you onto a platform where we have all sorts of stuff that you can and I think that today, you know, if you look at the most causes, I was talking to John recently and they were telling me that the most subscribed to videos teaching people how to do something. And I think that a great investment that we need to make is to push people to those sorts of, to that sort of thing. Today people are going to, so after you graduate, say you have a BSE agriculture or whatever it is, you know, it doesn't necessarily make you the best farmer or even a smart advisor or a farmer. But then there's so much now, so much material available now that helps you to hone whatever skills you want to. So even all you want to do is to talk about improved seating and how to market improved seating how to even find where they are. You can learn a lot of that today. So I think really what we need to do and what we're trying to do is to push people to improve themselves and a lot of self improvement is what this is going to do. A lot of collaboration is also important. You see, my take is that we are no longer going to be able to teach the way we used to teach. And for me this is particularly important because I'm a teacher. We are no longer going to be able to do that because it just doesn't make sense. You can't teach people the way we used to teach law. No one is going to teach law like that in ten years time. So we started with clinical education where we set the problem. And you say solve the problem.  But we set the problem. So we tell you that Mr. X walked into your room saw two people dead.  So you tell them from legal principles. I don't have to teach you those principles. I just show you where they are. You can apply those principles.  There is no time to say criminal law, the definition of criminal law is, the definition of crime is, you know, there's no time for that anymore. So things have moved along. And I think that we have to teach, we have to change the way we teach. Which is a lot of the work we did at the last educational song that we held at the last educational song. And we've been looking at these issues of critical reasoning, collaboration, pushing people to technology and using technology. So it's a, and I think it's also a big opportunity for the private sector to develop new ways of teaching. Because the next 10 years my view will be will present all of those kinds of challenges. Benjamin wanted to know that people who are in innovation find that they break wall with government. And true, I think that you are absolutely right about that. Because, and the reason is that there is no, we just have created enough platform for people to interact with government. You know, and that's why the Civic Hub is one of those excellent examples of situations where people who are innovation, especially innovation that is socially relevant have some kind of link with government. And one of the reasons why I took a particular interest in the Civic Hub, and maybe one of the very first to come here, to come and visit the hub, is because of what they were talking about. I mean for those of us in government, we want to see how the problems in government are resolved. So it's more interesting. So that interaction is important. But I think that we need to create those platforms. And I think that the various innovation, organizations or private sector people also have to make, take a trouble to break that, to break whatever that, or to open up a club for the other people. I think we just need to be much more aggressive about it. So an interaction like this is important. An interaction like this is important. It's important that we create these opportunities for people in government to come and talk, to hear what is being said, to see what's being done. And that gives also opportunities for a lot of people to interact. And I'll give you a few examples of what we've done. For instance, when we did the Aso Villa at the Mondea, I'm also sure how many people are familiar with that. That was a challenge that we were, an innovation challenge that we actually feel to innovate all over the country. And I was very well subscribed. All across the country, very many young people came together with their innovations and ideas. We finally, I think that we've over 4,000 different innovations. We worked out of labels for that called, I believe, Cardinal Thamamai. But we finally were able to aggregate about 100 or so young people who had different innovations. And we finally got down, I think 30, to come and meet with the President, and Zucca Barber was also there at that particular one. We've done another one that's been, we're also doing the students innovation challenge, which is one that we're collaborating with the City Hall for actually collaborating with the City Hall. This is a challenge, innovation challenge for students across Nigeria. And already in our talk, those who are following know that it's already online and people are applying and all that. Aside from that, we're going to do technology hubs in Nigeria and the University to start the junior life. Over everything about the space for it, they've given us space to do this innovation hub. It's going to be really, really creating hubs in every way. Even beginning from the way it's going to be built. Again, all of this is private sector. All of the young people who are working with us involved in this whole process. There's a mecca where the innovation hub YOLA, which is also government supported by the private sector, that innovation hub is one where the recently had been made up on for those who have creative ideas about solving some of the humanitarian challenges in the Northeast. And that has proved to be an incredibly well-subscribed innovation. So there are many, we're creating many platforms, many opportunities and all of that. But definitely there's a need to do much more. There's a need to do much more. But I think that innovations also have to be aggressive. They have to work, you know, because government belongs to all of us and we've got to see ways of opening up the opportunities in government. I've already talked about values and how your values are challenged all the time and how you cope. And that's a very difficult question because your values are always the challenge. Even today, my values are challenged in government as you can imagine. But you see, let me give you an example. I set out teaching and practice.  The common secretary wants you to stick your feet. So the common secretary says, give me 60%. I take 40%. These days it's going to be worse. So people ask you for kicking back and all of that. And I give you another example. NEPA, for example, look at NEPA, you know, it's going to fix your, what's it called, fix your meter, it's probably way better. Now let me tell you what, you see, I found and none of us can say that we're not under pressure to work with this thing. I found by experience, by experience, that you just face to stick to your values. And in both cases, those three examples that I've given you, I was involved in both examples. And I lost out of the fact. I found that I just could not, first of all, my conscience would take those things. And I just thoroughly hated the idea of having to spit at my feet with anyone. I just hated the idea. And I didn't do the work. You know, you didn't do the work. I mean, who are you? So it was just for me, I would not allow you to cheat.  And just an example I gave about NEPA as well. So these people come and give you some of our treasured bills.  But in both cases, as I said, I got my finger story and I made up my mind. Again, I suppose fake health because I became a born again Christian.  And I also learned that it gave me the opportunity because you see the strength that you get from being able to say that I'm not going to do this. I don't know how to describe it, but you are in a very, very powerful position. I found that my love, as soon as we made up our minds that we're not going to take, we're not going to do anything for individuals. We lost practically all of the corporate jobs that we had. Practically nobody was going to touch them. And for almost three years, we were not able to get those kinds of jobs. So we were just going to pay. Just to tell you how pervasive this corruption is. And this is private sector. But after that, we then began to get other types of jobs. We were getting intellectual property jobs, we were getting application of jobs. But then also some very good opportunities that gave us far more, far more money, far more resources. And you know the good thing? These are the guys who have not given jobs. They will say, if you want a firm that you can control, go ahead. They'll tell you that, take it away. They'll tell you that they want to take it away. So over time, it's a painful thing and there's no one can tell you that. It's not because you must take the pain away. And look at government. Government is to say everybody who comes to you, everybody comes to you. They expect you to do a deal. This is the way the country is. So we have to ask ourselves whether you want to do this or you don't want to do this. And you've got to keep people, look at that. You become a minister. That's really private sector. You have to become anything. The people who celebrate this thing, people from church, people from your faith community, people from anywhere who celebrate this thing expect that you're going to be transformed immediately. So the only show that I've got is all I watch from you is one billionaires. And then I respond by saying my salary is 1.75 billionaires in a month. That's my salary. Now, that is not my expense. Of course government pays for everything. Transport pays for everything. But that's my salary. I have more than that at least in this country. And this fellow says to me, oh God, please now. Almost as if, almost as if, forget it. That's just rough. I'm not going to wear this. That's the way people see it. People just think you must be putting your hands somewhere. You must be stealing something somewhere. And if you are not stealing you are seen as some kind of, you're almost crazy. But the truth is that no community on the grid are theft of everybody. This is not possible. It should be the exception. It can't be the rule. So we're going to set ourselves apart. I think that individuals are the same. I'm not going to do it. Oh, and it's a short term thing in my view. A short term. Once you establish a reputation for not taking pride or not giving pride, people will know it may be harder first, but after a while that reputation is good for you. And if you look at a lot of companies who work in Nigeria, especially the foreign companies, those companies that have to report to their countries and all of that, many of them have made up their minds that they're not going to do any of those things. We also know that they're not going to do any of those things. So what to deal with some of the more shady, dodgy characters from different parts of the world when they don't report stuff and all that. But people might not have their minds, but I'm not going to do it. And that's it. And if you want to do this, you can still go to that. So I think it's a tough thing, but women's form as a community of like-minded people. And I've always established that wherever people who think like me, I engage only people who think like me. I only bring up more people who think like me. I don't have people who I think might be dodgy. I can hire people who I think will raise the awareness, think the way so that we have a community of people whose ideas and ideas reinforce each other. I agree entirely. I don't have any problem with people running for office at any age. I've benefited from being very young and being able to achieve stuff while extremely young. So I mean I'm fully in support of it. I'm fully in support of that and I very strongly believe that this is the view of government. I don't think there's anyone that I've heard in government who feels that people shouldn't run for any office at whatever age they want them to run for. Frankly, I think that it's more a matter of let people play the field. But my view is that we should focus on developing ourselves. We really should focus on developing ourselves. Unfortunately sometimes because of the majority that we see in government everyone assumes that I can govern. So if that shows up today and says I've done one or two things that I can run the whole country. Sure. I mean people and it's because of the majority we see in government. That's why anybody assumes that at the age of 22 I can't be president of Nigeria. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because surely I wouldn't do this and it's true. So you say surely I wouldn't even behave like this. I wouldn't do that. So I think it's important for us to really look at how to develop ourselves, develop strong values, develop our skills, whatever way you know. I have, as I said, I work with very high number of young people in my office, very, very high number. My entire power team, I have a team of people who advise on power, I have a team of people who advise on infrastructure and I have a team of people who advise on the economy. Most of them are under 35, certainly under 40, most of them. So what do you see? What do I see? Because I also worked in a government, I started working in a government at the age of 31. I was advisor to the then federal attorney general. So I worked with him for a period of, you know, a leave of absence from an investment or a foreign. So I worked in a government. So in some sense I was trained, I became a certain general of the government because there are some time left about almost 10 years after that. But I was trained, if you see what I mean, I was trained to be an attorney general and very few people have that kind of training because I worked with one. I had seen all that there was to do, I had advised that and all of that. So he gave me a platform on which I had to really do substantial stuff. Not just, I was learning as well as the job. So I think that the experience that young people have working in government is a very important experience. Working in political parties, you know, planning elections, planning campaigns and those kinds of things. You know, honing themselves in manifestos, looking at the product challenges and problems. I think that that's a very important thing to do because really, if you are going to benefit this country as a leader, you definitely need substantial knowledge, substantial exposure and all of that. It's not just about age, you know. It's not just about age. So I think of that as a fantastic idea. Fantastic kind of a commitment to social causes, a commitment to governance in some way or the other. Because not everyone, because if you are going to work in government by and large, you are not particularly well paid, if you see what I mean. It's not like working in some of the places where some of you might work and you know, some very serious cash. It's a surprise how much of it is equity. Well, you must yield to our full equity too. But the point is that in some sense, this is sacrifice. There's also almost like a call. Social entrepreneurs, people who are doing those kind of things. There are almost invariable people who want to do this sort of thing who are motivated by these sorts of things, who like to do it. And I think government is like that too. I have a few people who are working with me who are extremely well trained, have very good degrees or not, the best universities anywhere in the world. And they have opportunities elsewhere, but they want to do this. So I think the first thing is to want to do it. Because if you want to do it, that's helpful. You know, start at least looking for the opportunities. The other thing is that we can do a lot more from the universities and this is why it's important. Do internships, you know, have young people from universities who are interested in the government. Come and work with us for a few weeks and all that. For instance, the person who works with me today, my special assistant at the university was an intern who came to me when I was a third general, which was in second year, then university. And interned with me every year up until law school and all of that. That's my senior special assistant at the university. So the internship process is important. It helps people just like in the industry. I think we can do a lot more internships with the government as well. That will create opportunities for people to work with. Next for you, I think the first was a lot of people wanting to know the challenges in transitioning from one profession to the other and all of that. I think I'm not entirely certain that I experienced a transition. And it might be strange to say so, but that's the honest truth. So I was a teacher and I was in practice as well. Because my first exposure to public service was in the area of law, and I was an advisor to third general, and then became a third general. And thereafter, you know, went back into practice and politics. And I see with politics and I've always been involved from secondary school to different. I've been involved in one course or the other. So human rights, activism, anti-corruption, child abuse. I'm a cause for this.  So in some senses I am not certain that there has been a transition. Maybe just for me it's just been a continuum as opposed to a transition. One of the things I found, for instance, I also, as you know, I passed a judge for very many years, until 2014, 2015 I was a field product. One thing I found is that all of what you learn as you go along are useful in whatever you let them become. I found, for example, that campaigning you know, for white women were campaigning in 2015, I was able to go to markets, to go in for the boss, talk to people, because I don't know that as a product.  We don't want to come to your tracks. We don't believe what you have been doing. So I think all of that, you know, works, you know, and I think that one must just embrace the opportunity, whatever those opportunities are, so that you are able to be a lot better for it. So I'm also sure that the transition I think is also, if you like, a whole complement of experiences that have shaped what I have become and what I am becoming, and I think that there is still a long way to go. Okay, so that's a lot like it. And Sarah wanted to know, Sarah, your concerns about health care and about government or government. Absolutely, I agree with you that we haven't met the targets at all. There's a 1% in the health act and all that. So unfortunately, one of the problems we have with this 1% thing is that practically every sector is 1%, 2% pool. The other day we were totaling the 1%, 2%, you know, a 1% and that's without providing for anything else. So it's probably not the wisest approach to it because everyone struggles for their, you know, and that would have people write legislation and they would have presented it. Now, it's important for us to invest in health care and education. Absolutely, and no one denies that. But we can't invest, you know, my view from a project alone. What has happened in the past is that we've always insisted that we're on a project for health care. What we're pushing is national health insurance. There has to be a different way of funding health care. Today everybody is out of health care, people are paying out of health care for everything. Whereas we should have a national health insurance scheme. We have one, but it's not been made compulsory and everyone has to contribute to it. But that's the only way to fund health care of a country of almost 200 million people. There's no way we can budget it. The other thing is that people tend to look at national budget as the federal budget, as the budget funding health care. By the way, as you know, the states are primarily responsible for health care, not the federal government. As with education, the states are primarily responsible. So primary schools and secondary schools are run by states. Federal government has only 100 schools, you know. But people tend to focus on what federal government is spending whereas we ought to focus on what the states are spending. Because the states that are responsible for these things are constitutionally. So there's no way the federal government can provide funding for the states by education. No way. So the federal government supports the states. So far, we've supported the states under this administration, between 1.91 trillion in error. That's support for the states. The problem is that the states also need to generate their own income. They need to be idea. Most states are not generating. They just don't have to be generating enough. So focusing on health care and all of that is a function of how much you have and then trying to devote some resources to it. And I think that we're getting a lot of that. You know, for instance we're looking at malnutrition. And this is one of the issues that came up when our discussion of bigger gates are called. We're looking at malnutrition. So children between the ages of 0 and 5 need to be fed. We have a school feeding program where we're feeding about 7 million children today. It's not the health care, it's what I mean. It's an important bridge to what we're talking about. So we know that this feeding addresses the question of malnutrition. And we tend to continue to do it because it's an important part of the whole health care process and all that. So there are different programs also that may not be factored into spending for health care spending but also part of health care spending. But overall, I agree with you entirely. There's far that we have a long, long way to go in terms of I think we just have to be much smarter about it now. We have to look at national health insurance as a major way of funding. I did, I wanted to know what tech giants, how government is supporting the tech community. I can't tell you that there's a very moderate focus on government supporting the record. I've talked about the various challenges and all of those things that we're putting out there. We're encouraging. But there's a, I know that there's an innovation fund that BOI has. And the CBN has also been talking about creating a fund for innovation for technology and innovation. The same way I can have a fund for hospitality, hotels, etc. And I think that that's an important thing if we're able to get back down especially the CBNs, they have much more money. But aside from those expected plans, there is no real focus, if is what I mean, on trying to fund technology startups or technology generally. Frankly, I believe that technology by itself, you know, I think it's such an incredible growth area. And people are always, there's so much money that's going to come. Of course it will be helpful if government supports by low interest, low amount of that. But I think the innovation by itself has such a wide range of opportunities. And people are making tons of money for what I see you know, plus the way I call Angela, all the people all the people, all the different businesses, they're doing all sorts of things, you know. In fact, I think we should really be thinking very seriously about, you know, looking at our taxes more. So we're taxed. Yeah, we're taxed. I can guarantee. Okay, for me, mental, no role models, what can we do? The truth is that if we're getting a set of values around which we all agree it's an important thing. And I think that I've talked in the past about building a new tribe you know, a new tribe in the life of Nigerians who agree on certain critical things. I think that a lot of it has to do with what you know, I mean, look at the basic integrity, the basic trustworthiness. Not respecting ethnicity, not necessarily respecting ethnicity. So for example, we should bother ourselves about where people are from, whether they're Igbo, Yoruba or Hausa or whatever it is. We should look at questions around resistance. So where do you live as opposed to where you're an indigene or whatever it is? We should be emphasizing those things. Because those things only exacerbate the problems that we have about the people and don't help us in any way. In any event, I know for a fact that it doesn't matter what people are from. You have excellent people from everywhere. Some of the worst people you know are probably people from your own ethnic groups. So it's not, sorry, an irrelevant in my view which is an irrelevant consideration in terms of building societies and building communities. So I think it is common to agree on certain values, agreeing on those values and trying to live up to those values. The question of role model I think all over the world, people are finding it very difficult to find role models. That's really the truth. So maybe what we need is some kind of blockchain technology. That's where we're all just going to get the magic of it. We're not looking up like that. We're looking more like that. Because really, this is something that I agonize about all the time. That we need to be able to come as a community, as a group of people, as opposed to necessarily looking for people who represent. People at one point over time anyway. So I think even if we are able to get agreed on values and we start building a community of people who agree on those values. Thank you. Thank you very much. What do you think, you know, there's a group of very influential young people in this room. They're all going to go out and do amazing things. As we think about the Nigeria that we need to have over the next 30 years, what are the things we need to keep in mind now? And going into the future, where should we be building knowledge and investing? What should we be dedicating our hours of service to ensure that this country can be just like the progress you've seen over the last 30 years. We can also come back and tell the same stories about how Nigeria was part of the progress that the world sees over the next 30 years. Personally, I think a lot of time is spent on education. That is educating people, educating young people wherever they are. And I think technology offers that opportunity in very many unique ways. So for me, I think the greatest conclusion that we can make, that young people can make, is trying to create platforms to educate other people. When you look at what's going on all over the country and many parts of the country, there is a problem with education. As a problem with education, lots of people out of school, we need to get to them, we need to reach these people, somehow or the other. I think government has an important role to play, by government, state government, local government, but also private people, especially people of access to technology who can use the technology to educate, to bring people on board. And I think also the whole concept, that whole concept of social entrepreneurship, where entrepreneurship is not just for a profit, where there is something that you are contributing to society. So you are not just building a business that's just looking in one direction. You are building a business that also is helping your community, helping people. And we can look at that and say, not only, so this is our profit, so our profit this year was 100 million, but our profit also was 100,000 young people that we trained and all of that kind of thing. Not just a business. And it's not just a CFR thing, so it's built into the business world. We call that a mission-driven entrepreneurship. Fantastic. That's very good work. Yeah, so it's not just about, it's not social entrepreneurship, it's about building a business that has a purpose, that enriches the life of the community. Because as I like to say, you have to have a society to make money. If you don't have a society, you are Afghanistan. I don't think you can build your nest in Afghanistan, you are seeing them on the cover of Forbes. And if they are, they probably can't show their face. But it's about building those two together. So this has been a real honour. Thank you so much for taking the time. I think this has been an amazing honour. Thank you. This is our Kufa Law. Our Kufa Law is a graphic artist. No, he's not here. He's one of our company members. He works from Lagos. He works with a very busy guy. He started the graphic movement in Nigeria. And he's been featured on various programmes, on different platforms like CNN or BBC. He's been doing us really proud. He was also commissioned by Lagos State Government during the Lagos Act 50 event. So I don't know if anybody, most of us here are familiar with Lagos. If you are familiar with the Law School bus stop, there's this graffiti art. He was the one that did it. So that's just to show how amazing you are. So I really do appreciate you. Thank you. Have everyone seated and we'll have the...


We get to the point where we hate each other so much, based on political affiliation. Without even inquiring about the specifics of our point of view. I mean, on many, many, many issues, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is trivial, almost non-existent. Indeed, the difference between Democrats and Republicans and me is the real difference. That's huge. The difference between them? Yeah, not so different. They all look the same. Very similar from where I'm standing. They all want to control my life in one way or the other. They want to regulate me one way or the other. So, what is the mixed economy? The mixed economy is where we've left certain aspects of human life. We've left it for individuals to make decisions for themselves. We've left certain parts of the world free. And we control others. And which ones do we control? Which ones do we live free? It depends. It depends if it's Democrats or Republicans. It depends on who gets the vote. We've given the government the ability to redistribute wealth, to choose winners or losers in business, to decide who to bail out and who not to bail out. And this is true of Democrats and Republicans. Democrats bail out some industries. Republicans bail out other industries. Democrats bail out certain individuals. Republicans bail out other individuals. But the point is, they're all bailing people out, regulating, controlling, redistributing. And what happens in a world where I know that those other guys can take my stuff and those other guys can tell me what I can and cannot do and those other guys can bail me out? So, well, whether I get money or money taken from me, whether I get my life controlled or not, is to some extent at least dependent on which group I belong to. So groups immediately are elevated. It's not about me personally. It's whether I belong to a union or whether I'm in need or whether I'm a businessman. But then it depends if I'm a businessman doing business with China or businessmen doing business with Texas or businessmen doing business with Mexico, what industry I'm in. Am I in big tech or am I in coal or am I in oil or gas? All of these things, the particular group in which I belong, is going to determine how the government is going to treat me. And if I rally around with other people who are similar to mine, my group, then we can put pressure on the government to try to make us better and those other guys worse. And what a mixed economy slowly, slowly inches more and more and more towards is gang warfare. And the gang warfare is not manifest in the beginning in violence. It's manifested in what I in rant called pull peddling in trying to establish pull with the government, in trying to manipulate politicians, in trying to manipulate those who have the power to redistribute and control. And for decades, for decades in this country, we've been slowly, slowly establishing little gangs, gangs that vote, gangs that lobby, gangs that do what they want in Washington D.C. to try to shift the resources around so that they get more and other guys get less, benefit themselves at other people's expense. And it's not just business. It's nonprofits and it's the poor and it's unions and it's a whole variety of different entities, different groups, lobbying and manipulating and distorting and trying to get a bigger, bigger piece. So we've got this going on, you know, Donald Trump, who is a genius when it comes to marketing, who is a genius is coming up, comes up with labels for things.  And it is, it's a swamp in a sense that it's ugly. It's dark, muddy, filthy. The animals, the people working to rearrange your freedoms are doing it submerged. They're unseen. I mean, you don't know what goes into any of these pieces of legislation. Hey, Congress doesn't know what goes into these legislation. Do you remember Pelosi's famous words? Well, find out what's in Obamacare after we pass it. But even then it will take years because regulatory agencies write it. They change it. They talk to lobbyists. They, you know, rearrange it. So there really is a swamp. There's a speech in Atlas Shrug by Francisco de Ancona. It talks about the aristocracy of Paul. Well, but this is, I mean, aristocracy is too nice of a word. These are swamp animals of Paul, right? They do it in hiding behind closed doors. They never see the sunlight. They, what they actually, the result never sees the sunlight. All kind of groups, all kind of interests, interests, all kind of pressure groups, all kind of gangs, all kinds of swamp animals inhabit the swamp. And they determine how much taxes I pay, what I can deduct, what businesses I can open, how regulated the business will be, who I can employ, how much I pay them, what my health insurance is going to cost. Am I going to have health insurance? All of these are things that are not dictated by the bonket. All of these things are determined by these creatures in Washington DC, pulling levers and pulling strings. And we vote for them. We vote for them over and over and over again. And the one, I'd say excuse, one reason for voting for Trump was he seemed like an outsider who would not tolerate this kind of behavior. And he talked about the swamp animals and clearing the swamp. Now I never bought it because I believe Trump is an entrenched swamp animal. And it was just a matter of changing the animals in the swamp for his animals instead of the other side's animals. But I can understand why people bought into this because this has been going on for decades, a century, really. It's gotten worse and worse and worse. We saw it under George W. Bush, and we saw it even worse under Obama. And Obamacare kind of caused this thing to bubble up onto the surface when Pelosi said, we'll only know what's in the bill after it.  And it was a rallying call. And then the Tea Party suddenly was paying attention. And this other group was taking stuff away from me. This other group was taking my insurance away. They were taking my healthcare away.  We saw it with the bailout of the banks, Occupy Wall Street. I mean, again, the better motivation of Occupy Wall Street was, wait a minute, why are these creatures bailing out the banks? The banks, all the intellectuals, everybody is telling me the banks did this. The banks caused this and were bailing them out. So in the late 2000s, early 20s, you had all this stuff, the extent of which our lives are being controlled by these pressure groups just came to the surface in ways that maybe it was hidden before. And maybe the fact that the economy basically was stagnant. People felt like they were struggling. I think they felt like they were struggling more than they were. And then on top of that, people were told that the world is as it was some game, that anything the billionaires make is at your expense, that the working class is no better today than it was 30 years ago. All lies, by the way, all lies, where they're told by Pelosi, Biden, Trump, you know, any of these guys, or Piketty or Kugman or any of these. It's all a zero sum. They gain as your loss. You've been stagnating. They've been getting richer. Or take somebody who did get richer, like Elon Musk, who on some days I admire greatly. And yet he made his next tranche of billions off of Tesla and off of solar energy, which both benefited massively from government subsidies. And he got rich. And the story is that the rest of us got poor because the government was divvying stuff up. How are they divvying it up stuff up? By use of coercion and force. Remember, the mixed economy is about coercion and force. Because how do we regulate by force? How do we redistribute by force? How do we decide who is okay and who is not? Force, authority, dictates from above. The ruling principle of a mixed economy is coercion, coercion on some, not at all. It wouldn't be a mixed economy if it was at all. But who gets to be coerced and who gets not to be coerced? So force is the guiding principle of a mixed economy. Might makes right is all over the mixed economy. I mean, just replace might with a majority. Majority makes right. That's the evil of pure democracy. But it's not even the majority. It's not the majority that makes right. It's the powerful that makes right. It's the influential that makes right. It's the poor peddlers who make right. It's the people who pull the strings who make right, not the conspiracy strings, which is the easy explanation for what's going on. Oh, they're just five guys in the back. They're pulling all the strings and that explains them all. And they happen to be Jewish bankers and that. Oh, whoa, that's obvious. Now, it's all these groups fighting one another and they make right. No, but that can't be right. Is the determined by Paul peddlers by the aristocracy of Paul? Well, it turns out it is again for decades and decades and decades of the American history right or what has actually been government policy is determined by people using their influence to guide the power of government, which is might when it's not used to defend rights. So the mighty make it right in government. And I would say that both the movement to the far left and the movement to the far right are responses to this. Oh, wait a minute. We don't want the mighty to be deciding the Paul peddlers, the lobbyists, the influencers, the insiders, the creatures in the swamp. We don't want them to be deciding.  We want to do it. And on the left, you get a big rise in what they call democratic socialism, this, this glorious idea that somehow we can get the Paul peddlers out and majorities can rule. And we can just vote on everything and it'll be utopia like Denmark, even though Denmark's nothing like that. But you get a rise in this idea that there's another way of doing it that gets rid of the swamp animals in this sense. They agree with Trump completely. And the way to get rid of the swamp animals is to give more power to the people. It's to distribute things. It's to make everything more transparent and more open to the democratic process. Now, on the way the regional backlash towards what's going on in Washington was the Tea Party, which said, Oh, the solution to this is to return to founding principles. It's a return to the Constitution. It's a return to limited government. But that didn't work out too well for them. First of all, they lost. They lost to Obama. And their representatives that they elected, the Tea Party senators and the Tea Party House members didn't seem that different than the other creatures in Washington. And then a man came around and said, I can solve your problems. It's not through democratic socialism. We solve these problems. It's not through more voting. It's by giving more power to a businessman who knows, who knows implicitly what you need. And we'll get rid of all the pulp peddlers and all the creatures in the swamp and do the right thing for you. They exploited a man who embraced the zero sum world and told his followers, don't worry, the real evil is not among you. It's the swamp animals. It's the Chinese. It's the Mexicans. It's whatever. We've done this before. I've gone over this before. Of course, none of that actually happened. He didn't actually clear the swamp. But why didn't he clear the swamp? Well, we know because of the deep state, because the Democrats wouldn't let him, because the forces arrayed against him, the forces of evil, of darkness were too great for him to overcome in four years. They went after him from day one, so he couldn't get it done. So it's us versus them. But now it's not anymore just a million different groups fighting for pieces of the pie, for the redistribution, for anything they can get. No, now over the last eight years, it's coalesced into basically two groups. There's the left and the right. Again, policy doesn't matter, because there's not that big of a difference in policy. But it's us versus them. It's generally the groups who believe that we can attain a solution to this mixed economy by shifting it towards socialism. And a group that claims that we can solve the problems of this mixed economy by shifting it towards nationalism. But both blame the other side for where we are. Both want to clean slate. They want to wipe all the swamp animals out. They want to get rid of them. Both are frustrated. Both are being told that no change is really possible. And both sides are demanding change. And they look and they see how does Washington function? How does the mixed economy actually function? Well, it functions by might as right, by force. It's just that the force is hidden. It's hidden behind government authority. It's hidden behind votes. It's hidden behind the guise of democracy. But it's force. And both sides are basically saying, well, if it's force, if that's how things are done in the city, if that's how things are done in this world, then let's stop hiding. Let's put it out into the open. Let's just do it. And everybody left and right is saying the talk show hosts, the intellectuals are saying the only solution is revolution. Whether revolution of the left towards socialism or revolution of the right towards, you know, whatever BS they claim they're advocating for. And you saw this. You saw this throughout the summer, the tension rise. You saw it leading up to the election, the demonization, solidification of the idea, they, whether it's left or right, they are the devil. They are evil. They are nasty. And if you add to that and if you add to that, an important addition, because the right doesn't have anymore a vision of what they want. They don't have a vision of how to solve these problems. The left does. It's an evil wrong vision, but the right has none. It can't say, what's it going to say? We want capitalism? No, they don't want capitalism. They've just had four years of Trump that prove they don't want capitalism. What do they want? They want the founding fathers? Do they want the constitution? No. They've dejected the constitution. Constitution is boring. It's too difficult. So they embraced a man. Not a constitution. They embraced a man, not a set of ideas. They embraced Trump as the symbol of all that's potentially good. Why? Because he wants to drain the swamp. Why? Because he talks down to the people they view as evil. He talks down to the people who are violent, who used force. He fights against those that the right has labeled as evil and nasty and wrong and bad. And they embrace Trump, not a cause, not an agenda, not an idea, but Trump. And everything is now manifest in Trump. So when the election happened and the Messiah lost, which he did, that was completely unacceptable to them. And it's one thing if it was unacceptable to them and that was it. But again, the intellectuals on the right, the talk show radio talk show hosts on the right, the television hosts on the right and the president of the United States and the people surrounding him kept feeding them a fallacy, kept feeding them a lie, kept feeding them fake news. They kept feeding them, oh no, he didn't lose.  How can a Messiah lose? But I don't blame, for the most part, I don't blame the people who rushed in to the Capitol. I don't blame the people who feel alienated, the people who feel lost, the people who feel betrayed, the people who feel like they have no say in this country, the people who feel like their lives are being crushed by swamp animals, by a bureaucracy, by a political system that doesn't care about them. I don't blame them, I blame the people who feed them, who encourage them, who sustain them, who provide them with the intellectual ammunition, the fake news, the fake ideas, the fake perspectives, they're the ones to blame. Whether it's Hannity and Tucker Carlson and Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, who this year, who last year, two years ago, whatever it was, who said, yes, we were faking it when we said that deficits were bad. We know deficits are fine because it's our guy running the deficits and it's fine. It's not a guy, then we lie, putting to shame the idea that only the left does fake news. Rush Limbaugh does fake news and he admits it.  And you better do something about it and you know what, given that the election is over and Trump lost, what are you going to do about it? Well, the only thing to do about it, the only way to fight it, particularly on that January 6th morning when Trump was standing in front of them and Congress was basically doing a procedural count to certify that Biden had been elected, it was meaningless, it was just a requirement in a process. But when you continue to say it's stolen and you better do something about it, what were they supposed to do? They saw in the summer that violence was okay, they lived their entire life in a system that legitimizes violence. They've been inspired for months that it is time for revolution, that there's no other way that things are being stolen from them, taken away from them, by force, by coercion, by authorities, that the only way to stand up is to fight. The only way to stand up is to use force, just like the left did. But we'll one-up them because we've got the President of the United States on our side. So we'll go to the heart of it, we'll go to the Capitol, we'll go right to the center of power, we'll do a real revolution. Now, you know, I don't know how many of them thought they were going to actually have an impact, I don't know how many of them thought they were engaged with revolution, how many of them thought, anyway, it was a pretty weak revolution, pretty badly planned revolution. But that's basically, we're going to stop the democratic process from working, the voting from working, because that's all that's left to us. And force has been legitimized, being legitimized. And don't start arguing with me about this case or that case of election fraud. Give me a break. We're not going to talk about it anymore. It's a myth. It's a way to manipulate people. It was that from day one. It's why no court took it seriously, because there's nothing there. There's no there there. You can do wonders with videos. You can do wonders with arbitrary claims about voting machines. You can do wonders with arbitrary claims about anything. The arbitrary is amazing. I can claim anything I want and go prove I'm wrong. There's a gremlin right out of my desk here feeding me all this valuable information. The propaganda, the mythology.  Not, I'm not talking about going to other right wing places that vindicate what you think already, but actually doing fact checking.  Now again, the people really to blame are the intellectuals. The people really to blame are Donald Trump because Donald Trump knows he lost and certainly Giuliani knows Trump lost and suddenly Mike Levin knows that Trump lost and Rush Limbaugh knows that Trump's lost. But facts don't matter to them. They're out to get the other side. They're about power and I hear it all the time on the chat. I saw it on YouTube constantly when I was arguing with people about Twitter and they said, look, the left is winning. What are you going to do about it? And I said, you know, I'm still going to advocate for rights protecting and what do they call me? A wimp. Idealistic wimps continue to advocate for the Constitution for rights protecting. What we need now is to lie, cheat, steal, use muscle and force in order to get our way because that's what the left has done to us for decades. So we need to do the same to them now. This is what people are saying. So why would I believe a word they say about a stolen election if that's the case? If they've given up on reason, if they've given up on argument, if they've given up on convincing people, on arguing, on debating, because they think that's a wimpy strategy. If they've given up on individual rights, if they've given up on the Constitution, why should anybody believe anything they say? Just like I don't believe the left.  The right is now adopting exactly the same methodology. They don't care about the truth. The people I argue with don't, I see it all the time and they'll admit it if they're honest. They don't care about the truth. What do they care about? Beating the left. And I'll tell you, all they care about is beating the left. And the fact is, what does the left care about? Beating the right. And this all is an outcome, a consequence, a political consequence, the other philosophical consequence. It's all a political consequence of the ultimate political cause, which is the mixed economy, which is allowing the use of force against some members of society who don't deserve it. That is the use of the initiation of force. It's a consequence of redistributing wealth. It's a consequence of regulation. It's a consequence of bailouts. I always said this would devolve into group warfare. And all of it now is culminated in this group warfare. We got two groups, big groups, the radical, you know, the far left and the far right who are viewed the other as evil, the enemy, the epitome of the devil, to a large extent to both right, because they're both of that, and are willing to do anything to destroy the other and the difference. And what I think made Capitol Hill worse than the summer is that the group on the right is being encouraged by the president of the United States of America. Yes, the group on the left is being encouraged by many politicians and was being encouraged by many intellectuals. But the politicians in power did not encourage it. Now, Biden is very weak on this, but he's not an encourager of it. Kamala Harris is borderline and encourager of it. But Trump is a cheerleader, is an insider, is a rallier. And that's what makes it worse. It's reached the highest level of government. And it's reached almost every intellectual.  And if you look at the flip side, if you look at CNN, it's just CNN is just horrible. The bias, the BS, the nonsense, the willingness to defend the most outrageous things done in the name of the left or done in the name of social justice. It's outrageous on both sides. And it has to lead to violence. There's no other place it can lead to. The only thing holding back the violence right now, and who knows what will happen next week. The only thing holding back the violence is the cowardice of the participants. With the National Guard out, with armed law enforcement. I mean, this is the thing about the riots in the summer. If law enforcement had stood up, had used their guns, had actually far back, enforced law and order. If some of those Capitol Police had pulled out their guns, not inside to defend the Senate Chamber or whatever, but outside before these people ever got in. They shot in the air and then pointed. And the rioters had been convinced that they would pull. None of this would happen. And the same with BLM riots. The same with the left. It is the failure. The failure of law enforcement, which has made it even more convincing now that force can work. But I think when the police out in force, when the National Guard is out, people are too cowardly to actually go out and fight. And if, you know, some people have compared numbers and said, you know, BLM in the summer killed a lot more people than the Capitol. That's true. But if you add up all kind of far right violence and far left violence, it's not as, not as clear cut. If you look at people like the guy who shot up the Pittsburgh synagogue, or you look at people, the guy who shot up the Walmart in El Paso, motivated by a far right, clearly a far right agenda. It's not clear who's more violent and who's killed more people and so on. But that's not the point. The point is that both sides now have decided to make the violence explicit, out into streets, out hiding, without playing games. And they feel that that is the only solution. The only way out of this. And by the way, one of the things, one of the essays, one of the intellectuals that are most responsible for this attitude, for this mentality on the right, is an essay written in 2016 that I did a whole show on. I did a whole show on this in 2016. You can find it on YouTube. And that is the Flight 93 essay. And the Flight 93 essay by Anton, I forget his first name, something Anton, who is now, he published it anonymously, because he was afraid of the consequence. But now he's a senior guy at the Claimant Institute, at the Claimant Review of Books. Anyway, Anton wrote this essay. And basically what he said was, the United States is finished. Michael Anton, Michael Anton. The United States is finished probably no matter who gets elected, he said it in 2016. But there's absolutely no question that if Hillary Clinton gets elected, this country is toast. We're all dead. We're all finished. I mean, exactly the same rhetoric you're hearing now about what will happen when Biden gets elected. And, you know, Biden didn't get elected, did get elected, so you're going to see that the United States will not end. But that's the rhetoric. Now, he said in the essay, it's probably true that the United States is finished even if Donald Trump gets elected. But he said Donald Trump gives us a chance of winning, gives us a chance of stopping these hordes of evil leftists from taking over government. And therefore you have to vote for Donald Trump. It's like, why is it called Flight 93? Why did he call the essay Flight 93? Flight 93 was a flight on September 11th, where the passenger said, we're going to die if this pilot, pilots are playing. We know we're going to crash into the Pentagon or whatever into the White House. We're probably going to die as well if we rush the cockpit. But at least rushing the cockpit gives us a chance. In other words, it's desperate. It's life or death. It's the end of civilization. And Trump is the only person who can save us. Let's roll was the calling call of Flight 93. And let's roll is the calling call in a sense of the attack on the Capitol. But of course, it's a travesty to use those two in comparison. Let's roll in Flight 93 was an act of incredible bravery, of heroism, of a commitment to freedom and to the lives of the people on the ground and to America. And what America represents, the attack on the Capitol was a negation of all of that. And indeed, the essay Flight 93 is a negation of what America means. So what's the solution? Well, the solution, the ultimate solution is a rejection of everything both the left and the right stand for primarily rejection of mysticism, rejection of superstition, a rejection of conspiracy theories, a rejection of emotionalism, a rejection of everything but reason. It's a return and embrace of reason. And that's the solution. Reason rejects force. Reason is the anti force. Reason is the idea that arguments get resolved by facts, evidence, argument, disputation, not by raising a fist. It's a matter of rejection all of the emotionalism that both the left and the right embody. But rejecting it with the alternative, the alternative being reason, place reason in a place. I shouldn't try to quote Thomas Jefferson because I'll butcher it. But remember what it says in the Jefferson Memorial about reason. And then in political politically, it's about the rejection of collectivism, a rejection of all forms of collectivism left and right, a rejection of the group as the unit and an embrace of individualism. And what that means politically is an agation of the mixed economy. What we need is to limit government to estrange its power, to do away with its ability to cross and to force and to redistribute and to regulate and to control. As long as government determines who gets what, pressure, force, violence, coercion are the end result. There's just no way around it. We need to embrace capitalism. We need to embrace the separation of state from economic state from our lives other than protecting us. All right. So capitalism is the solution. Reason is the solution. Individualism is the solution. And a pox on both their houses on the right and on the left, because they are the collectivists, the emotionalists, the mystics, and the statists. Everything that we should be against, everything that every American, real American should be against. We don't need to decentralize. We don't need to secede because the people decentralizing the seating are just as bad as the people who run things today. Small is not beautiful. It's ideas. It's what you think. It's your governing principles. It's not how big the group is that you're going to oppress. There's no more freedom at the state level than there is at the federal level. There's no more freedom at the county level than there is at the state level than there is at the federal level. And there is no more freedom at the little town level than there is at the county, state, and federal level. As long as the ideas, ideas of control, the ideas, ideas of oppression, the ideas, the ideas of coercion, it doesn't matter how big the group is, how big the political unit is, what matters is what they do. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins, or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism, and impotence, and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist roads. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now, 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I think at least 100 of you actually like the show.  There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this, and you know the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego, it's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, and if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share, and you can support the show at your on bookshow.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show you support for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this.  You'll know what shows are on, when they're on, you'll get notified. So, yes, like, share, subscribe, support. Like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one or all of those please.


reversal designs. ABABA, ABABA, ABABA, ABABA, CBABA, CBABA, ABABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA, CBABA. Thank you Ron and Nancy Martella for clarifying that you can do a lot of different types of reversal designs.  It is. It really is. Anyway, they're just that awesome. Anyway, so reversal design is an experimental technique where you put something in place, a condition in place, or start with a baseline. And then you put some sort of intervention phase in place. And then you remove that intervention phase and go back to baseline. Then you put it back in place. That's an ABAB design. So the idea is you're trying to establish this sort of on-off effect on behavior. It's a light switch.  When or at the moment that we switch conditions or almost at the moment, there's always some changes or there's always some transition periods. So reversal or withdrawal designs. So again, thank you, Ron and Nancy, for clarifying that they're not, they're not completely interchangeable terms, but they're often talked about that way. So wow, the camera's shaking. Haven't seen the camera shaking a long time. So that's creeping me out. It must be in a reversal design. See ya, bye.


The last three days, we've done everything from dry blank live for platoon sticks. There's a lot of new things that I got to try, and there's a lot of new things that I was able to put out to my leadership that they really liked. So it was nice being able to talk about it and imply it. Working with my team every day, making sure I can give them everything that they need to perform. Being able to work with my other team leader. Let's build on the squad integrity or the cohesion. Being able to work with the other squads, building that cohesion, we're depending on everybody every day when we're over there. So being able to trust those guys to do their jobs is nice to be able to not have to worry about, especially when we go into squad. You learn what everybody is capable of doing and what needs fixed. You get it fixed. When you move into platoon, it's all these moving pieces, and when you see a bigger picture of all these moving pieces, it's good to see. Seeing that support by fire light up those TRP-1s and TRP-2s while I'm moving down in the creek bed, it's nice knowing that I've got a good cover fire while I'm assaulting through. So it's tough getting to that point, but once I see those tracers flying, it puts a smile on my face that I've got a good cohesion and good soldiers that I could depend on.