that wasn't like jack's magic beanstalks, what happened? >> it wasn't sam zell's argument.t wasn't his argument. we were open discussing the op-ed piece in the "new york times," which is a very basic, going after and collecting these taxes as they accrue. which is weird. but you could very easily look at the capital gains tax as a way of rectifying this. >> look, the issue that capital gains are only paid on realization, is an issue. there's just a lot of practical problems associated with things that are not liquid. >> the more interesting thing in the article, it refers to steve jobs, is upon your death, you can transfer your shares, because they're an asset like a home, to your spouse, effectively tax-free, no estate tax on it, you don't have to sell them. and when you do sell them, you sell them on a stepped-up basis. meaning whatever the value is at death, you're only paying on the incremental value that's created after the death. and that actually, i thought was actually an interesting point. that could be debated on different sides. >> look, i think that's right. i t