Hi hello. Sorry, I just didn't. I kind of log into it. So Yeah, that's the thing. Give me 1s. Sorry, just 1s. My mom is like, I'll see me one thing. Hi, sorry for being late, I just I couldn't unlogetting. So Yeah, but now I think it's fine. 妈妈。Rory. Hello, can you heavy? I can hear, I can hear loud and clear, loud and clear. All sorry, I'm just sorry for being late. I put a lot games into accounso this way. Okay. How's how's everything? Yeah, everything is fine. Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. Yes. How's Econ going in school? Econ ice not not the best teacher, just stuff not the best. So Yeah it's it's it's all right but like obviously he's just playing videos and the lesons and stuff so didn't really learn too much. That's the issue. Okay, okay okay, okay, fine. I mean it's hit and Miss Right with sometimes with teachers so I guess we kind of have to be a bit patient but what are you doing right now? These this past week though we haven't seen each other. What have you done in class? Theme four. We just start theme four for okay, okay, cool. So a bit of macro. Is there anything in particular you want to go anything in particular you want to do with me? Not really. We can just keep doing what we have done last time. I would continue. So micteam M1. Okay, fine. So in micrtheme one, we always started on the basics, right? Which is basically going right from the start, like the basic Econ problem, right? Yeah opportunity cost ppf's, right? So kind of motivating why we have the subject and even kind of thinking about the different systems, right? The different allocation. Think of free market, you can think of a mild economy, right? So those like the first few topics just opening my notes just to so don't forget any topics in the middle. Okay, 1s. So Yeah, we've done I mean I don't think you did gcse Econ, right? You said he didn't do that, right? I didn't to do it okay? Because it is very much the the same these these first few topics, right? But then it gets a bit more interesting. So let me just. So. We kind of started with nature of economics. We haven't done the normative and positive statement that you actually just realized. That's pretty easy ring. Duwise that volume here once there, can you just download this so you know about positive and normative statements? Yeah, Yeah, I know. What is it? Well, what's the difference between normative and positive? Or if you the nomatter, you can prove the positive one. A notive one is just a past, not just a statement. And palproof essentially because it doesn't give you any data. It's only part. It's only like like subjective, you know okay, so positive is basically factual, right? Yeah is I don't know you're 1717 years old maybe I guess that's pretty positive, right? Yeah normative. Rory looks Young. Rory. Yeah this is normal mayoung. I mean, that's very much subjective. It depends on you saying this right? It depends on who the opinion, right? Yes, it depends depends a lot. Okay, so there's a very classic question. If we think of exam, I have to identify a normative or positive statement. Very simple. But just look for words that show opinion, right? Those words tend to kill an ormative statement memory most of the time. So then we went on to the Econ problem, the problem of scarcity, opportunity cost. So what does opportunity cost? Just to recap very quickly, Rory, opportunity class is the fact that you have to give up something, but if you you want to buy something, you have to give up the opportunity of buying buying the other things or produce the other things exactly. Just it's I mean, it does kind of holistically refer to like several things. You don't buy you full go, right? You know, if you want to buy a Ferrari, mate, not be able to buy something else, right? Or several things, but technically it's the value of the next best option for gosentheory. It's like thinking about the next best again. But basically it's what you can't buy, what you can't get. We don't have time for, right? Which because I guess lost can referred to time ring. I mean, you, it's lesson on you doing this lesi mean, I guess you have to give up something else, whether that's studying for another subject for you or for me, I don't know, going out and getting a coffee, right? So there's different things we can do with our time, with our money, with our choices, right? We're Yeah, but it's all about choices that we think about at railrowing. It's wider. People, consumers, firms all make these different choices, right? I mean, you're making choices all the time. A lot of the Econ is why people make choices, understanding why they make choices in trying to gauge what effect choices. And some bits are very easy, right? Look, if people are confident in well theymake it, or you can call maybe positive decisions, decisions that help the economy, right? Sometimes they don't think they're just a bit, they lack confidence that the economy are doing so well, they need to save for rainy day, right? So maybe understanding that the situations is important, right? Okay, good. That's the first thing. Opportunity costs blabuproduction possibility frontiers. What a production Russian possibility frontier. And last time I actually asked you not to sit, not to explain why it's curved. Okay. And we'll just decate to just magistrcan you personally define a ppf. And secondly, can you refer to why, for example, here, it's a bit curved, right? It's concave to the origin. So why is that a case, do you think? The first one, you justify a ppmore basic terms. Let me say you're take your time. I mean, the first bit, I think it's easy. The second bit to curve bit is when I always have to think about I think about the curve. Let's say this is cars and this is tables ring. So why is it not something like this, just a straight line ring? We maybe just started finding a ppf like in very basic terms. Let's just think of some line that connects the two axes, okay. What is it trying to say? Doesn't matter the gradient or the shape of the lightning. Just what is it trying to say? Like inside? No, just just just let's just take this line, the straight line or the curved line. What is it trying to represent? Forget about the shape of the line. Okay, forget about that's the second question. What is a ppf trying to tell us, right? It's trying to tell us it's like the most productive on line. So like it's always not the most productive one. Okay. So it's showing basically the production possibilities, the production and choices we have, right according to our country, mean does every country have the same ppf for these two goods, cars and tables? Wait, sorry, what was the question again? Because I think what's a ppf? Just to find what is a ppf? Ppf is. It was production possibility frontier and it's the ideal like amount of things that it can it can produce. Like it's like the most realistic one and most efficient ones. So essentially, the resources are being used to efficiently like this point. Fine. So I mean, it doesn't have to be purely efficiently, right? It can be within the ppf. So what is this point that I get what you're saying? It's kind of what is within the realm? What is what are some opportunities? What are some possibilities they have? What if we're here, Rory, what is this representing this x. This act represents like resources not being used efficiently, like not all resources are being used. Okay. And why might that be the case? Why might we be at x? So I get your x correct. Why might we be at x? Like me can give me a situation, a real life situation where we might be at x. And I went. Anything, think. One. I don't know when when it will be at when there's go go to resources will be underutilized inefficiently, right? We might be there correct. That's perfect. That's that's great. I agree. Right? Yeah but what about Rory? What about. How can we get that? What's a real life situation where we're there? The real life situation. Yeah that's what I'm thinking, but can't really think of example. For example, like the governments didn't use the resources efficiently, okay? But let's think it's a free market economy. Let's think it's a free market economy where where the government does not let say, play the parts, okay? Okay. Where the government just doesn't have a big role. It's the free market. Okay. Got a command requirewhy. Might resources not be utilized fully? I mean, it could be some examples. Okay, ory so this might be because there's been an earthquake, for example, or the lack of confidence. Again, you're in a recession if you're Covid resources are not being utilized fully desspare capacity roory. Yeah Oh Yeah like spare capacity Yeah that's the one Yeah just in you have these options in theory could produce a lot. But it's it's not possible because I mean, it is possible, but maybe people are just at home like a worth Covid rate. People are not allowed to go to the factory, into the office and to work, right? It was not as easy, at least most jobs, right? That's what confidentitially happen, right? So sometimes you're within the ppf, right? What if we're here? Here, the other x this 1.2. What is that? Oh, it's something that is not achievable at the moment. Why not? Because it's outside of the poproduction possibility frontier. The White. No, White. It's just the line, right? They got White. What is the line representing? And y is x, like you're saying. I agree, right? That why is it like it's just not possible because. Because it is representing the product. The ppf means like the perfect production, like efficiency. And if it's outside, that means it's like the technology cannot cannot be achieved. That I don't know why, but like that's all I've been taught in this. That's great. That's great. So basically it's just according to the technology, according to the endowment, it's also not just a question of technology. A country think Singapore is extremely developed, right? Probably has good technology, I'm pretty sure, right? Yeah. But China probably has depend on the good, right, but probably has a ppf that's further out simply because it has more resources, more people to work in the factory to produce cars and tables or anything really or most goods you would imagine, right? Maybe in some cases, Korean spare technology regon. Indeed, a country like Korea does excel in technology and the ability to produce certain in complex goods are more like you know electronics, right? But we can say a bigger country tends to have a ppf that's further out just because it it is more it has more natural natural resources, raw materials etc., right? More people to work. Okay, cool. The ppf represents opportunity cost as well. Why does the ppf represent opportunity cost, Rory? Juthe cost is very much inherent to the ppf. Yes. And so sorry, the resources can't be I know. Wait, huh? Actually I don't know why it represents opportunities lost. First of all, the big clue is they're are two good because of the problem it's hard to just get infinity of both to produce infinity goods of cars and tables, right? So we have to make a choice. We have to make choices, right? If you make more, if you want to make more cars, you have to make less tables, right? So it's just that it's it's pretty simple, right? It's just we have to make choices both in consumption and in production as shown in this ppf, right? There was no opportunity. Well, sorry, there was unlimited goods. We wouldn't have to just produce everything, right? We d, there was no basic comproblem. There's no scarces here. Rory, the subject that we both study, right? Be useless. Why do you think itbe useless? Yeah. Why do you think ecwill be useless? As a subjective, we just had unlimited resources, goods and services. Because it's not realistic if there's no unlimited resources essentially Yeah mean, if it's unlimited, it's just what's the point of studying allocation? Econ is all about allocation choices, unlimited possibilities for everything. What are the choices we have to make? None, right. Allocation. None. I mean, if you get a Ferrari, Rory, I can also get Ferrari. You're gonna get 100 feros. I can also get 100 feros. There's doesn't know we're leaving money, we just take things. It's unlimited. Okay. Yeah. Fantastic. So after the ppf maybe I can quickly give you the little explanations to why it's curved but this is maybe more it can be built out understanding this it's somewhat interesting. Okay? But no, I want to make it like a focal point. Okay, so why is it curved? It's curved another a straight line. Let's see between these two pointhree. Because of the following roory, imagine you're hit x. Well, let's say this. Point one. Yeah. Do you see this? Point one? Yeah, producing a lot of tables. At point one, how many cars are you producing roory? Lots of so different, like there are lots of at. Amounts of goods are produced differently. Yeah, Yeah. So at the point one, let me point one is just tables, right? Point this point here, Yeah we're producing tables and you know sea coordinate, right? Zero cards. Yeah Yeah. So that's an extreme choice set, right? It's saying only produce tables, right? If you produce more cars if you want to go up the y axis, right? Youhave to produce less that make sense, you have to trace the line. Let's assume you were on the line, on the curved line. That's another assumption. But let's assume, okay, so you're traveling up the curve, right? Reduce more cost. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay etc.. Okay. So it's not a constant grading. You're not traveling on a straight line. It's a curves line, right? So that what you have to forgo raring, the number of tables need the go changes for every car, for every additional car you want to produce. Does that make sense? There's no explanation yet. I'm just saying when you go to the left on the x axis, less tables, right? The relationship between Yeah I and more cars is not constant, right? It's not a constant grait's, not a straight, it's a curline, right? Okay. So why is this the case? Why is this a case? Okay. Here at zero point x point one, the work we just started here, okay, all resources are used to produce tables. If you want up the first table, you don't have to give up sorry, the first cut, you don't have to give up a lot of tables, okay? Because it's a piece of the gradient is more versible right here. However, let's say we can enjoy it in big. We can see it properly again. Once we're here roaring, we've got five tables. We're still producing five tables. And here we're producing six cars of king. If we want to go to, let's say, here and produce seven cars. Yeah, I'm inventing the numbers, right? But this might be three tables. Okay? So to produce just just one more car, you have to give up two tables. Do you see that? Yeah, I can see that. I mean, it's pretty simple, right? It's just you're tracing from one coordinator to the other, right? However, here Yeah, let's say we're here, you're producing nine tables and zero cars, right? So let's say get to. First car. Yeah. How many tables do you have to give up? I mean none basically, right? Like let's say they're a decimal let's say there we can produce decimal tables okay Yeah it's like 8.7. Oh let I'm just inventing this again so you have to give up 0.3 tables to produce one more one car, the first car. So clearly at this point you don't have to give up a lot of tables, right? You're basically getting cards Yeah for very little. All gone tables. Again, why is this the case? Well, this is the case, Rory, because we've got a lot of resources, a lot of machines, for example, to produce cars and tables. When we're just producing tables, nine table, zero cars, all machines are, let's say, just machines. Again, let's just keep it simple. All machines are used in the production of tables. If you want the first car, you have to reallocate one machine to start producing cars, right? I see it down should I? No, no there's there's no drawing no drink. Don't worry it's just but you want to want to write it down on your own. Yeah, fine. No, no, no, no it's what I'm saying is that all resources at the circled point okay, I'll be to produce tables okay. If you want to produce the first car you have to four code tables and basically reallocate resources to the production of cars. The first machine you allocate to production of cars, it's not that efficient, okay? It's not that efficient. It was the last machine to be put into the production of tables, okay? So by reallocating this machine to producing cars, you don't have to forego many tables, okay? So maybe it's best actually to. Maybe it's best to 1s. Three cars let. Mean, even look at the other way around. Let's say we're here three cars. I think it's be easier to look at the this way. Imagine we're three cars and let's say eight tables, okay? If you want to get to the nine table, so produce one more table, you have to give up lot a lot of cars, three cars, right? So we're originally here. Yeah. So why is this the case? Because. You'll here, you'll produce it again. I mean, I think I need to write things down. So here. Okay. I think this is quite well described. Okay, so here you're producing three carars and eight tables. Okay? The big point here, to produce that last table, I go from eight to nine tables, right to right the corner. So nine zero, okay, you have to give up three cars, right? Do you see that? Yeah, okay. This is a big sacrifice. I got to give up three cars for just one more table, because the last machines in capital you have to redistribute to the production of tables are the ones that are most specialized in the production of cars and least specialize in the production tables. And hence, you will still go a lot of cars for a very modest gain in car production. Does that make sense? Yeah make sense. So basically the assumption here, Rory, is the cars and tables need to be made or need to you need employ machinery to make cars and tables, right? But not all machcan do both things or can do both things as well. That's the assumption, right, Rory, that machines are somewhat can change into the production of different things, but it's not straightforward and some machines are just better suited to production of one than the other. Looking. Yeah Yeah. So we can think of it as at point when we produce three cars, the best machinery for cars is they're producing cars, right? And when we're producing a tables, the best machinery is producing the tables, right? However, once we want to allocate those machines that make cars to make that last table, these machines are very the best at producing cars. So if you switch them to the production of tables, they won't be terribly efficient Nicki, and we'll produce a little bit more table ables, just one more table looking. Anyway, this is rather important, but I guess it's a bit more minor issue. I don't think we we've already spend a lot of time on a so Yeah basically remember it's the relationship is nonlinear and it's got to do with machinery and capital and the fact the machinery and capital is not 100% interchangeable. Looking fine. Cool. Okay, so that was ppf's. If you grow, the ppf shifts out. If you shrink, if you into recession, there's earthquake that hits the country and destroys resources, machinery, everything, factories, offices, the ppf would what would shift in? Okay. World War Two was for sure a big shift in, right? Yeah, right. So I don't think we've talked about specialization and the division of labor, right? No kind of told about this. So what have you heard about the specialization of labor, Rory? For example, like a produce in a factory, each labour specializes on one pile of the production. It's going to be more efficient. For example, Ford, it's like Ford production chain. It's very efficient. And it was some new invasion at that time. But essentially all the factusing that and the quality can be guaranteed because each part of the goods are specialised by specialized workers, so are produced by the specialized watches. Okay. So you've heard of the Henry Ford, the Ford factory example from the twenties in America, right? Yeah, that's the example what we learned in the school, okay, in history or in Econ? Ecokay, great. Yeah, no, they're fantastic. Fantastic. That's also one. I don't know if you did history of gcsc, but that's one you don't, okay? But Yeah, it's a great example, right? In history, in Econ, and it's basically applied to both. I mean, Henry Ford, it was I not that successful earlier on in the twentieth century, probably because production of cars was hard and there might not be that much demand even back then, right? Whenever something starts like there isn't just demand, right? If you come out with the iphone in the 19 sevens, I mean, I know people would buy it, right? There's just there's no demand, there's no infrastructure. There's no, I guess before it was just to drive a car was not obvious. The horses walking around New York in the early twentieth century, right? So driving c's not that obvious. Anyway, they finally made a car also, there was good, it was demand for it. But they're most well known for the MaaS production lorory rent to the production line. So they were the first ones that would be think about production as more of an industrial process and not so handmade, right? So rar, if you make a car, it might take you ten days, right? The whole car if you more than some of the jobs, right? Imagine you're a good mechanic, right? Really? And I'm a good world of, I work well with metal and just I make the kind of shell and you make the inner parts, okay? And we might get an electrielectrician, a third person, right? And maybe someone else to do other bits like a paint to paint the the outside room. We divide up the job on production line, so it kind of goes through the factory where you'll all add our little bits and pieces, right? This is much quicker, much more efficient, right? And we also become specialized with good at something, right? I become better at what I do. I'm also ready better inherently because I've worked in this bit car production for a long time, right? So specialization of labor is everyone does a small specific job. And it's kind of also, I'm not saying it's synonymous, but it's very related to MaaS production, right? In production line, okay? He was the first person to come up with this idea. And I guess it seems obvious right now, but was less obvious potentially before. And also businesses and you know, burwere mostly just very small and everything was very and made because there wasn't a lot of before the industrial revolution. I mean, it was hard to do things on scale, right? What to be expected? Okay. So who was the first person, do you know, a very famous economist? Adam Smith, great. Okay. Well, what do you know about his example? About what he said, or he talked about his famous example, or he gave a famous example? Sorry, actually, I don't know. Well, what do he do? Because he gave quite a lot of examples. Okay, maybe it's more than one shot. I mean, I think one of the biggest ones is the pin factory example. Basically, like cars, he looked all about pins. And pins are like like little things that you kind of, I don't know if you had her corwhat's a like a cork board, a home, or you still have one. I had one when I was a kid growing up. And basically why you pin your literally pinning your photos onto it, right? You, so, I mean, I had one growing up, still my parents house. And basically the pin is just that, a little piece, piece of metal, really. And he would just say, look at one person. It only produces pins, a whole pin, everything. He can produce 10000a day or whatever it is, right? However, he divides up the job between himself and nine other people. If it's ten people, they don't just produce 10000, they produce 100 million or a billion. So okay, maybe this is exaggerated, but what I'm saying is typically, if you, if it's ten people, you would expect the total production, Rory, to be 10000 times ten, right? So the production just multiplies by ten rate. So it's 100000. He found, however, that it wasn't 100000. As a team, each specialzing in one part, they would produce 500k five times more. Let's say again, then, just production of one times ten from ten people. So production is just much more efficient, much better, much quicker, more volume and rate. You specialize. That's it. Very simple, right? This seems quite obvious, but maybe not so much before. So what are the benefits of specialization, Rory? So what do you think are the benefits for businesses, for consumers, for society? Specialization? Yeah what are the benefits advantages? More efficient and more productive and high quality. High quality. I mean, Yeah I mean I it can be both, right? But I think people would say high quality because rif you do the welding only in a car, you must become quite good at it, right? You might have Yeah you're doing a all day. So I think higher quality, more accurate, less few of fald. So like faulty goods have to be returned more efficient. Why is it big, more efficient? Good, it seems obvious. But why? Who benefits from that? Because obviously that each part is produced by different people and surely it's more efficient. Yeah it is more officibut Mosay lo. Why does that matter? So the fish something I guess we think about Econ as a subject. Back to the basic Econ problem. If you're more efficient, you're allocating the resources better, right? You're not wasting so much metal, for example. If you're inefficient, you might be wasting material, right? So Yeah, you're not using the exact amount that must be used, also utilizing even if it's the same number of resources because much quicker can also produce more. If more production is sent out, it's sold. The business will hopefully do better if it's able to sell these goods can emplomore people more people with more disposable income, the multiplier effect, blah, blah, blah, right? It's benefit society, more lesay prosperity, high living standards. Okay, great. And also, I don't think this is impossible, that you do learn it at some point. In a level, wages are typically equal to efficiency. Roaring. Okay. So my wages represents what kind of value I add right to you or whoever, right? I mean, it's some percentage of that at least, right? If I can of producing one car, I contribute to producing many cars. And my marginal product, my marginal contribution rule ory is higher. I should get a higher wage rate. So it also increases wages, increases production, more people get employed, high est viincome, it benefits everyone, right? Okay, fantastic. What are the disadvantages of specialization? Or are there any. No, I think we've talked about everything but disadvantages. So bad things, cons, Oh, disadvantages, maybe less. Not a stuquality like in comparison, because I know it's contradictor, but maybe it's because it's fast produced. So that means that they don't really emphasize on quality anymore, but efficiency first, give me an example maybe of good or complaints that people have about, let's say, modern day production. That's fast. Do you have any examples of this? I agree. I agree with your pointing. Eri hundred agree. Do you mean examples? Maybe because it's like when Charles developing the factories were all specialised factory and that makes the Chinese make qualities not not the best quality. I mean Yeah it's kind of we can even go to back so saying we have MaaS production some goods. Rory you would agree that you see a lot of just say handmade, right? Yeah these sometimes are that those words or words or two words is typically synonymous with high quality and typically it's sold quite expensive, right? Yeah, basically low quality can be associated with MaaS production. I think to make an iphone by hand, I think nobody would want that because I think machines are needed because we're not just just not accurately as human beings, but for some good MaaS production is probably against the quality of the perceived quantity, right? Handbags that are MaaS produced, I mean, might be quite good, but I mean, I guess it's also synonymous with other things. I think you can make a really good high quality leather with amazing leather that just MaaS produce it. And it might be really good. You can sell it super expensive. But so sometimes there are things like the quality of the leather that it's typically worse if it's MaaS produced, right? But it can be great leather. So there are things that are not got to do with the MaaS production element that when you MaaS produce, you also maybe the way you stitch, you might be in a certain way that is quicker, that is less strong than if someone does it and reviews, views every single stitch and thinks, okay, this stitch is not done properly. It's not gonna to hold right? So bad quality, a lack of quality, especially for certain things are cool. What else can you get bored under specialization as a worker? Oh Yeah, the workers might get bored because they're just repeating the same thing over and over again. Okay. So there's an AI revolution like maybe today, right? Yeah be a worker that has specialized a lot, let's say a routine task or job or someone that has a maybe a better general understanding of the production of that good. General amongof that group good. Okay, why why? Because you don't need to repeat the same thing over and over again, obviously. Like if you just because I, you're the worker, you you have to like repeating the same thing and work late every day, which is not that I do, which is not I deal. Yeah, I'm thinking more about like, can AI replace you brthat's not what I'm trying to say. Like if you have one thing you're good at one task, that's by routine, you can get replaced by easily by AI. If you have a bit of with ten tasks, maybe AI it will kill us soul, right? But it's harder for you to be replaced by anyone, by a person or by AI, right? Because you do a lot of things even in you know AI advances and can do everything at one point. You can probably supervise the AI and you know add value that way because you have a good understanding of everything. Maybe even AI for a long time won't be able to think about deeply a big thing, right? That's as a human, what we can add value with. You're only good at literally screwing on, screw in one part of the car and then doing it again and again 10000 times a day. You, I guess you can become quite replaceable. So this is another problem. Overspecialization rucan cause structural unemployment. Okay. Have you heard of structure in environment? Yeah structure employment means like you can't find this kind of job anymore because it's basically the technology has advanced and you cut. There's no these kind of jobs provided. So it's that structure unemployment. Yes. The coal mines in the uk, those coal mines until the eighs, right? 19 eighs in the uk, Yeah very inefficient even back then, right? I mean, the uk had no business mining coal in the eighties. I mean, coal was even then an old polluting source, fossil fuel, right? That was no longer really demanded. And also the uk, England, I mean, people, England was a very developed country now and then, right? This doesn't make sense. Making high wages because they live in England. Taking call off the ground when there wasn't a lot of call, to be honest with you, the easy call to take out already been taken out during the industrial revolution, the one that's closest to the surface. There was no bit there. There was no point. There was not a profitable industry, especially not in the long term. Again, so these people once call and Margaret Thatcher basically close us down the minds and stop subsidies, and they all close down these people. What could they do? They couldn't do much, right? They were structurally unemployed until they retired, right? It was hard to find a new job because they were so specialized in coal mining. And suddenly there's no coal mining. They have to find new jobs, right? Not just in a new company, new seso, a lot of these workers, but face structure unemployment, right? AI, AI can do the same thing for everyone, right? Maybe if it replaces me, I mean, it might do, right? I would become strucunemployed. If I don't have any other skills, I might become long term structurally unemployed. Maybe I don't know. Yeah, me, it's potentially right. If I can only teach Yeah I mean, structured unemployed. The computer probably made a lot of secretaries Adamand people strucunemployed right? Secretaries before words do a lot of manual work in putting numbers into it documents into writing things down, managing like of mental maths, right? They don't have to do that. An excel table can do it much quicker or a calculator. So my, I did investment banking before, right? And I worked using a lot of excel, especially in my the second bank. I was advoating before. If you look at like videos, old videos, Adam and people would do mental maths you know an excel table, right? Yeah like Microsoft Excel right before Yeah I think before there was like a strange excel version. There was like a table, like a paper with certain grids and that would help people to be a bit quicker with their maths, as in it was like an excel on a piece of paper, as in you had to write down the numbers. But I'm not sure, but it did help you a little bit. But people would do that job. Loads of people, everyone would do that. And also analysis we did in investment banking, like it wasn't rocket science. Rory, right. But we were able to add, make a table, populate a table with formulas and numbers that might be, I don't know, a thousand cells, a thousand numbers, right? All adding, subtracting and then ending up with the result of the end, right? Or many tabs within the document, 10000 cells. That's pretty easy, right? In an excel. Yeah Yeah. You couldn't do that back then. It would just take days. I mean, it's impossible to do that. So the nsus was much smaller, was much short. It was very much like on a napkin rpretty quick. So Yeah means that technology improves everyone really over time, but there are short term loses again. And that's why with AI, the government should step in at some point and should has the role to protect people that will lose out and people will lose out. People lose out from every type of innovation, right? We can call this creative destruction. I don't know if you've heard of this tell it's not paa level sythe bus rii mean maybe they mention creative destruction. But what I'm saying is creative destruction is a certain trend that helps, that can also cause a short term pain for certain people that need to need help. If you're a coal miner and you're 50 and you lose your job in the eighties into England, you probably needed unemployment benefits for a long time. You needed the government to help you until you retired. Re basically, right. Okay. Of course, the specialization has its pros and cons. As we've said, specialization is kind of within the division of labor, our part of the scene. Okay, fine. So I suggest you take a look at the graph of ppf. I mean, I'm not saying this is brilliant. I mean, it is important. But for the multiple choice, okay, understanding how ppf works and they can give you different situations, right? No matter how different points of diagram. But I'm not sure I'm not sure how you are with the graphwe'll see in the next lessons, but maybe take a look over the next few days and weeks just reviewing that graph and maybe other so Yeah, we've done specialization, division of labor. If we've spent five lots time on this, we can take a look at the function of money next time, take a look at free market versus command mixed economies that actually exists to the end of the first quarter or for first fifth of theme one again. So I can take a look at start with a function of money next time then move on to the next part of team one. Okay. So maybe for Sunday, lose the next lesson. It might be Sunday, right? Is that Yeah take a look. Maybe I have to ask my mom because she arranged it. Okay, I believe so. I believe so. I was checking. Yeah, I haven't hit on Sunday 9:00a.m., your time, you catso maybe take a look at money. So why we're make money good or usable in? Why is bitcoin not money? Right? Do you have any crypto? Okay. Do have do you have any bitcoin? No, no, really, no. But have do you like crypto? Have you read about crypto in the past or no? But I might get into it when I do business, you know? Okay. What are your thoughts on crypto? By the way, I don't really understand what is this what is crpto. Neither do I, to be honest. I just think it's a bit of a scam really, I guess Yeah to understand the point isn't this isn't then understanding the functions of money that's actually in the course that we'll do next time on Sunday is thinking that it's valuable because people use it and people look, if you pay me, no matter the currency, I probably probably take it. Rory right? Because especially if you take give me us pounds, euros, Swiss francs, because I can go out and buy stuff again. I can go to Switzerland and buy stuff with my Swiss francs, right? I can, if you give me euros, I can go to my shop next door and buy stuff, right? It is used. People believe in it, right? People trust it. Yeah and it doesn't doesn't move that much. Ches in one day, one year buys me a coffee, the next day can still buy me a coffee, right? It doesn't fluctuate. So that makes money the hero of money, or the pound or the renumi as well, right? However, bitcoin, in my opinion, what lot people say is that it might be seen as money, but is it truly money if it changes price so much, if you can't buy anything with it? Is it just speculation? Is it just like a scam where it is traded for money? It has some value, you can switch it into dollars, but nobody uses bitcoin for anything other than speculation ring. Anyway, this is a discussion to have when we think about the functions of money on Sunday. Okay, so it might have gone a bit slow today, but maybe just viewing the graph. Okay, if possible. Yeah ppf's. And then we can go a bit quicker next time. Again, you have any questions? Worperfect, we'll see you on Sunday. See you Sunday. Bye thank you. Let me know then on Sunday if you have any particular topics you want to go for others than the want okay, okay, okay. Yeah Yeah I I'll do. Thank you. Bye bye bye.