The sector can, to attract the consumers dollar, can't take the kinds of risks that the four profit sector can in pursuit of new revenue streams, can't use the same time horizon that the four profit sector can for measuring it, and you don't have a stock market for risk and growth capital, and you just put the third sector, the charitable sector, the non-profit sector, at the most extreme disadvantage to the four profit sector. On every level, and then we call this whole system charity, as if there's something really wonderful about it, you know. Charity could not be undermined with more reverence paid to the notion of something noble. And if we have any doubt about the effects of these two different rule books, this statistic is really sobering. Since 1970, the number of four profits in the U.S. that have crossed the $15 million annual revenue barrier is 144. The number of non-profits, excuse me, the number of non-profits that have crossed is 144. The number of four profits that have crossed is 46,136. You know, in the interest of time, I'm not going to really talk about where these ideas come from, but in any society where there is a notion of original sin, that's sort of where this all has its roots, and we can go into that in a great length later. But this separate rule book is policed by this one very simplistic question, which is, what percentage of my donation goes to the cause versus overhead? And we want the amount going to the cause to be very high, right? We want the amount going to overhead to be very low. Incess, you don't think about it for about 10 seconds. But if you think about it for about 10 seconds, it begins to fall apart very quickly. And there are a lot of things in life that we don't think about for 10 seconds. You know, for some of you are too young, some of you are not, but you know, there was a time when we used to drag our suitcases through the airport. Like it didn't dawn on anybody, but we could put wheels on the suitcase. Not exactly the new technology, the wheel, and matching it with the suitcase. But human beings can go for very long periods of time, being unconscious about the most basic things. How many of you are staying in the hotel? You know how you can navigate the curtains to match, and the sun always comes through that little crack, and you can do all kinds of things. Well, they have a nice little overlay that just runs the curtain over. Like somebody actually thought about this for 10 seconds. So but anyway, when you think about this for 10 seconds, there are three really big problems with this question. The first is, it makes us think that overhead is not part of the cause. But it absolutely is. Unless there's some kind of fraud going on. And if there's fraud going on, no one is going to report it in line-night in detail on there, government forums, their form 990s, then every dollar that a charity spends in good faith, it spends to advance the cause. And the way it believes the cause can best be advanced. So the receptionist that saved the children is labeled overhead as if she should wake up every morning feeling absolutely miserable about what she does with her life and the drain that she is on those poor kids. Which is trying to save the children every bit as much as the field worker in Africa. Nobody's trying to hurt the children. This notion that overhead somehow steals from the cause or is not part of the cause creates the second problem, which is it forces charities to go with other things that they really need to solve problems. So for example, maybe a charity has the opportunity to hire a powerful new leader who has some great idea for solving a social problem. But the person comes at a high price, results aren't going to show up until down the road, short term overheads going to be high. So the board says, you know what, let's not do it. Let's go with somebody much cheaper, half the price, who doesn't have a vision for solving this social problem. Or maybe an organization wants to triple the size of its fundraising staff. And the hope of quadrupling its revenues. Again, results aren't going to show up until down the road, short term overheads going to appear high. So the board says, no, let's not do it. Let's stay the size we are. This is how we institutionalize our inability to reach the scale of these actual, the actual scale of these problems. Or maybe to simple matter of staff training. Again, it's going to spike overheads. So we're systematically forcing charities to go without the things that really need and the interest of keeping overhead low. Well, if what we tell charities it is, your very survival is dependent on you keeping overhead low. And what we're going to get is low overhead or the appearance of it. And if we don't say anything about it, I want you to solve this social problem and I want you to solve it quickly, then that becomes completely secondary.