From the outset, it became clear that economic analysis was yielding very important insights into the law. It's clearly a methodology of, a method of analysis. When you turn to, not economic regulation, when you turn to risk regulation, it's a totally different story. Risk regulation is rarely eliminated. You can't just prohibit risks. You can't eliminate highway traffic safety problems. You could if you made every car proceed perhaps at 10 miles an hour, but as a practical matter, there's no way to eliminate traffic safety problems and traffic deaths. But you can try to, to reduce them, not minimize them, but reduce them to the point where the benefits are equal to the cost of that reduction, the benefits of saved lives versus the cost of saving them. The question becomes how best to regulate it. Suppose it's a pollutant that has adverse health consequences for air breathers like ourselves and animals. And this is actually what our environmental agencies do. Try to figure out first what is the safe level of exposure to the substance. If their exposure is in a workplace, it may be very intense. And they may need to be protected from the substance with protective gear or with a lower threshold of exposure in the, in the environment where they're working. If they're exposed through the ambient air, it might be much less toxic for them and it could set a greater threshold of acceptability. This is a difficult set of questions. But when it's set, you then get the, the economic question. How do we get to where we want to go? What is the economical way to achieve that result that we think is the appropriate level of emission and exposure? Is it by pricing emissions? Might be. Is it by reducing emissions to an acceptable level through regulation? Is it by prohibiting the use of certain substances in, in manufacturing processes? We do all of those things, depending upon the circumstance. And it would be irrational to just say, well, we're not going to do anything about it,because it's costing society and lives lost and in property damage and a variety of other things. When you're talking about risks like occupational safety and health, mine safety and health, environmental pollution, highway traffic safety, the answer is not often going to be just deregulate it. Because there is a problem there and it needs to be addressed. It needs to be addressed because the public wants it addressed and because it actually is a drag on society. It's bad for people's health but it's also costly in a way that makes it worthwhile to regulate it.