 Well, I think that it's useful to categorize the solutions under three different headings. And the first, and again, probably the most obvious, would be what I call system or programmatic reforms. Developed countries need to reign in the cost of pay-as-you-go old age benefit programs. Many have begun to do so, interestingly, particularly in Europe. There's actually been more progress in some of Europe's aging social welfare states in controlling long-term pension costs than there has been in the United States. Many countries have enacted forms that either partly or wholly index pension payments in the future to changing demographics and so stabilize or at least partially stabilize long-term costs. Germany has done this, Sweden has done this, Italy has done this as well. But you can't just control the costs because the elderly in most countries are highly dependent on public benefit systems. You also have to put in place alternative means of support, which largely translates into greater funded savings in which people fund more of their own retirement income out of savings set aside during the working years, and here there's been much less progress. So I'd hesitate to say that Germany or Italy have solved the problem to the extent that solved the fiscal burden problem. They may have done so by creating a future elderly poverty problem. So this system may be more fiscally sustainable, but less socially and politically sustainable. But the place to start is within system, inside of system reforms. Beyond that, countries need to enact broader reforms that can help increase the size of the workforce and the size of the economy and so make any given burden more sustainable. Retirement ages need to go up, work lives need to be lengthened. We can't continue to take all of this wonderful longevity dividend as increased end of life leisure. Labor markets need to be reformed to encourage more working age adults to become the productive contributors to the economy. Immigration could also be part of the solution, though some countries are better positioned to take advantage of that option than others are. And finally, there are the global synergies. I talked a moment ago about the geopolitical challenge of a rapidly aging and shrinking developed world and a younger and still rapidly growing developing world. But there's not just a challenge there, there's also an opportunity. To the globalization becomes a way, becomes a means through which young people in the developing world can help themselves by helping to support old people across international borders. This can be done through labor markets, which can match workers with jobs, either through immigration or through outsourcing, and it can also be done through capital markets, which can match savers in the developed world with investment opportunities in the developing world. The extent to which these synergies can be leveraged though may depend critically on reforms on both sides. When it pays you go pension system, and it pays you go social insurance system like U.S. Social Security or the systems in most European countries in Japan, you're a slave to your own demography. In a funded system, you can invest in younger and faster growing countries around the world. So the developed countries would need to move more toward savings-based systems. The developing countries would have to ensure transparency and security of capital markets and in investment opportunities. But there is much potential here for sort of a hopeful scenario of global cooperation in an aging world.