But when you start immunizing people from the consequences of their bad decision-making, whether the people you're immunizing are corporate executives who have gambled badly with the resources of their corporation or, you know, children who make bad decisions and it causes them to be disliked at school, people have to have those consequences come back to haunt them so that they will stop making the same mistakes and get wiser. And any place that you break that with the equivalent of a welfare program, you are guaranteeing that you will end up with an infantilized adult population.

But making people reliant on that social safety net and then having generation after generation reliant on that social safety net, you stifle all growth and development and make people dependent.

My argument would be a system functions really well when people are immunized from real bad luck, right? Things that they – it's not the consequence of their bad decision-making. It's actually, you know, you happen to get a tumor because of a genetic vulnerability or an encounter with some chemical that you had no ability to know was there.