[Speaker 1]

Okay, so we heard Professor Kleiman talk about how we should give back to the great majority what belongs to them. And I think he mentioned the 1500s or the 15th century or something like that in England. I jokingly said that, well, they're dead, but I suppose that we would follow inheritance or something like that to figure out who actually owned, would have the just claims to that property, which is a little strange to me because anyone along that line or that lineage would be able to contract with others and they would have been able to give up property if they wanted to.

So I don't see how that would be any more just. But even worse, the great majority. Who is the great majority? And we talked about the mass of people. We talked about the expropriated. Well, the thing is, I think we all end up in both the category, the expropriated and the expropriators. And the reason is the state. We do accept a little bit of the extorted money from other taxpayers.

We use state services, yet we are at the same time extorted and pay our taxes or go to jail. Well, I guess free room and board is a good thing. So we always end up on both sides, which means it's not very easy to figure out who is what? Or do we just take, well, you're 51% expropriated, I'm 51% expropriator, so I'll give you all of what I have, or 1%, or what do I give you?

It's not that easy to figure that out. And I think that... The biggest problem really for the Climanian argument is where the means of production come from. Because in every argument we've heard, well, they should give back to them their individual property. We should redistribute the means of production that we have today.

Well, the means of production, except for labor and land, are all created. If we would not have allowed a market from the beginning, we wouldn't have all that much means of production. It would be a pretty poor society. Maybe we would be equally poor, but we would be a poor society. If we instead allow people to voluntarily exchange and follow their dreams and do what they imagine they can do, in that case we create a lot more.

And this is the open-ended enterprise that we see as libertarians in society. This is a society that grows, that expands, that gets bigger and better and more prosperous. More prosperous for everyone, if it's just, if there is no state. It is not a zero-sum game, it is a positive-sum game. And it's actually more than just a little bit positive. It increases a lot.