Dean Ball

They kind of just think that that's gone, and we don't do that anymore, and now we live in the jungle, the dog-eat-dog jungle, and if the government wants your stuff, well, maybe you can fight them, maybe you can't, but yeah, I mean, that's kind of the terrifying aspect of all this to me.

And so I don't think the government is saying here, I don't think they're truly doing a Maoist seizure of all the private property in this moment,

But what it suggests, and as an American, I think you do have to think about principles and procedures, what it suggests is not positive for the trajectory of private property rights in this country.

Well, so I don't think it's crazy for... I don't think the principle that the Pentagon is standing on here in broad strokes is crazy.

I think it's...

It is a little bit... One of the jokes I make about NewTek, right, is they're kind of new to thinking about any matter of civics, like thinking about this at all.

Because it's like, well, first of all, defense contracts have plenty of usage restrictions in them.

I guarantee you that the defense contract of the...

The contract between the Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin for the F-35 or something does not say, you can do whatever you want with this, sir.

Thank you so much.

I'm so scared of you.

You're so strong.

Uh, right.

Like that's not what it says.

I think what it probably says is like, there's probably like, it's probably extensive and has like an extensive list of like intellectual property restrictions and usage restrictions.

Things like, you know, Hey, if you fly this thing above X, Y, Z altitude, um,

it's going to break, and we can't be responsible for fixing it, right?

We make no representations that it can exceed these speeds or exceed these g-forces or whatever else, right?

And I'm sure that is extensively lawyered and detailed in the contract.

But at the same time, like, I think it's not unfair for the administration to say, yeah, that's fine.