s they were, whether they're mine or anybody else's. Has nothing to do with me. So I care about what's happening today and now. And it might be true that there's some groups that are disadvantaged because of the history of slavery. To which I say, I don't care. Everybody's got some problem. I don't know anybody who doesn't have a problem. Some people have health problems. Some people are ugly. Some people are addicted. Some people have abusers in their life. Some people have been victims of horrible crimes. Some people have low IQ and they're trying to get by. Everybody's got a problem. Everybody. And you can't tell me that I'm part of your problem. I'm not part of anybody's problem. I don't know any of those people. I'm just not connected to this story at all. So no. It might be entirely true that some groups are disadvantaged by something that happened hundreds of years ago. I don't care. Why should that affect me?

Apparently Nvidia and AMD, the chip makers, agreed with Trump to provide the US with 15% of revenue from their chip sales to China in return for the US government removing export controls on those high-end chips. So once again, if this is true, so this is this morning's reporting, but if this is true, Trump has once again monetized a problem that was unsolvable. The unsolvable problem was that we could try to prevent China from getting these chips, but they were going to get them anyway. So they would just get them through cutouts and illegal ways and then maybe they would just try to replace them with their own homegrown chips. So Trump realizing, here I'm just speculating what he was thinking, Trump realizing that you can't really stop China from getting the chips. You know, you could work really hard at it. You could ban them, but they're going to get the chips. So instead he simply says, all right, you can sell them chips, but you have to give 15% to the government. We're basically your partner now. And apparently Nvidia and AMD agreed to that. So once again, Trump finds a problem that he can't solve because it might be just unsolvable by its nature. So he monetizes it. He just finds a way to make a profit for the US government. I don't hate this. You know, even you could look at the individual situations and say, I don't like that one or I don't like that one. But I kind of love what he's doing to reframe the role of the government that if the government is part of your success, well, the government gets a taste and you and I are the gov