 With inflation surging at historical levels and real wages being in a free fall throughout most of 2022, of course, intensifying human capital of the cost of living crisis risks to deepen economic scarring from the pandemic. At the beginning of 2023, now here in Davos, policymakers and business leaders face an array of challenging decisions to try and shield the most vulnerable in the short term to address some of the systemic drivers of worsening living standards and deepening inequality beyond 2023. So I am delighted to have on the panel today Christian Lindner, he's Federal Minister of Finance for Germany, Gita Gopinath, International Monetary Fund, Alan Job, Chief Executive Officer of Unilever, Anwar Tyson, Distinguished Professor of the Graduate School of Berkeley. So thank you all for joining us. This is not an easy topic, but it's one maybe that we need to spend a bit of time just to try and understand the underlying causes of inflation, the cost of living crisis. Can you give us an overview of what you think, first of all, have we seen the worst in terms of inflation and the pressure this is putting and also these underlying causes? Yes, thank you. And it's a real pleasure to join this panel. As you said, it's a tough topic to talk about, but I think it's actually a little more easier to do so now than if we were having this conversation about six months back. Six months back, things were really tough. Inflation was at very high levels, especially headline inflation, which includes the cost of energy and the cost of food. Across the globe, we saw a global rise in inflation in the second half of last year. And these two factors were a big part of why we had this. Now we've seen energy costs come down quite significantly. We've seen food prices come down, but still remain elevated relative to before the pandemic. So actually I would make a distinction between what we're seeing in terms of energy markets versus in terms of food. I think in terms of food, we still have food security problems as a major concern. But we have inflation coming down. And so the cost of living has gone down over time. Now what is tricky, of course, is that wages haven't kept up with the cost of living. So there's been a lot of erosion in real wages. And you see the consequences of that this year. You can see unrest in different countries in the world and social unrest. There's something we need to worry about. Would you like me to go into the factors behind this? Factors, please. Yeah. Okay. So in terms of the drivers for the big spur of inflation last year, I think I would start off by saying that we had a serious imbalance between demand and supply in several sectors. So for one, even before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we had energy prices going up. We had oil prices going up quite sharply because we had a pretty strong recovery from the pandemic as a consequence of substantial stimulus that was provided both in terms of monetary policy and fiscal policy to the world as a whole. So that generated a big sharp increase in demand without the supply coming through very quickly. It was also a period when people were spending a lot on goods as opposed to services because the pandemic was not over and people were still hesitant to go to restaurants. They were buying a lot of goods. And so we saw a global component of goods inflation rising everywhere. And of course, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we had a double knock on energy prices. It was different. It was really bad in parts of the world like Europe, where you had gas prices go up three to four times. So these were several of the factors that drove the inflation. And of course, what's bringing it down now is the slowing global economy, which is coming from tight monetary policies in several parts of the world. But also we've been lucky with the milder weather. We also had 2022 as a year when China's demand for several of these commodities were actually low because they were still living under zero COVID policy. Several of those things can change this year. But let me stop there. Okay. Minister, do you assume, thank you, do you assume that actually inflation will remain a high for a pretty long time? It's coming down, but it still remains high from historic levels? Well, we are witnessing higher levels of inflation this year and the outlook for the next year and for 25 remains on a higher level than we used to see in the past. But there is already a decline. The outlook, the economic outlook for Germany, for example, will be updated. At the moment, we expect 7%. I don't want to spoil, but I expect a decline of the inflation rate. If you allow, I would like to underline one political aspect. We have heard the economic assessment, which I fully share. But we have to tell people and we have to tell low income countries that one of the most important reasons for the higher inflation rates is Russia's unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine. There are some narratives which focus the sanctions we made decisions on. But the key reason for higher inflation rates, for example, in the European Union, is Russia's war. When it comes to Germany, if I may add, we have this very strong dependency especially on Russian energy imports in our domestic market. We were ridiculously dependent on Russia. And now we are making efforts to overcome this situation. And I'm happy to tell you, we built already two LNG terminals within some months. And if you compare, the old German speed had been 20 years for one airport. And now we are able to build LNG terminals in months. And so this very special situation poses an opportunity for Germany to improve our overall competitiveness by supply side measures. Laura, how difficult is it to break down actually the causes of inflation? So how much of it is a war? How much of it is structural issues that have been here for quite some time? So I think that economists continue to debate this. And maybe Gita has the most recent research. There is among economists, the general view, well, how much of this was due to the fact that we really pumped up demand to get quickly out of COVID. And how much of that was the fact that supply came back much more slowly than anticipated. So essentially the problem is its demand supply, if you thought you were pumping up the demand, but you thought the supply would come back kind of normally, then you had all of these supply chain disruptions and you had logistic disruptions and you had shipping disruptions. And so I don't think, from my point of view, that is the most important question anymore. The question now is what do we do going forward? What do we do going forward? We are where we are. I want to start with- But, Laura, if you don't understand where it comes from, it's very difficult to then give a- It's demand and supply. So basically what's happening in the world is we've got the central banks pulling back on demand. We've got the developed economies and the developing economies pulling back on the fiscal stimulus to the extent that they had one pulling the bat. So we're working on the demand side and we actually are also working on the supply side. If I think about the Biden administration, for example, it's done a lot on opening up the ports. It's actually worked hard to get the logistics system back under efficient rapid recovery. It's done a lot in terms of strategic use of the strategic petroleum reserve, actually putting oil in and now actually buying oil to put back into the system now that the price of energy has changed. So I think all I would say is rather than debate how much was demand versus how much is supply, let's say that both factors are there and that actually you have policymakers acting on both sets of factors. You actually do and I think that's important. I just want to point out one positive issue here that hasn't been mentioned so far and that is inflationary expectations because part of the concern of the central bankers and the fiscal authorities, the macro authorities, and this would include the IMF, obviously, was once you let the inflation genie out of the bottle, you would end up with self-reinforcing mechanisms because as people expected structurally higher inflation, they would create structurally higher inflation. And if you look at the medium to long-term measures of inflationary expectations, they suggest that people still expect, maybe not that the inflation rate will go quickly down to in the U.S., the 2 percent target, but it might go reasonably quickly down to around 3 percent, which actually may end up being a place we can be for quite some time in a healthy fashion. Alan, what are you looking at? Unilever is Unilever one of the biggest food companies in the world. You're dealing with inflation day in, day out and you also have to make a decision whether you pass that on to consumers. Yeah, I think there's three enormous threats to our business, which is the climate emergency, the loss and destruction of nature, and rising inequality. And it's the inequality challenge that inflation is really amplifying enormously. I think 75 percent of the world's population live in a country where the genie coefficient over the last five years has got worse, the gap between rich and poor. And that's triggering, yes, a cost of living challenge, but also social unrest and anger. I humbly suggest actually the central banks and intergovernmental bodies were very slow calling inflation. We could see it coming for quite some time before it started to get called out. Maybe I'll just put some numbers against it. So Unilever revenues in 2021 were €52 billion. On that we have a cost of goods sold of €24 billion and last year we suffered €4.5 billion of cost inflation on a base of 24. So it's a very, very material unprecedented number. The last thing we want to do is take prices up. It affects competitiveness, it disturbs volume in the market. So our first reflex is to go to productivity savings, change the mix in our business. But ultimately we did land price last year and the consumer did not react as we had anticipated. There was a far lower volume elasticity than we expected and I think that was because of pent up household savings that buffered the consumer. There was much less down trading than we expected to see. Premium segments in most categories remain quite robust in food and healthcare and personal care. And the world is not flat. We saw more of an effect in Europe, much less of an effect in particularly Southeast Asia, South Asia, Africa, Latin America, places that are used to economic volatility stood up very well. And our best read right now is that there's another €2.5 billion of cost coming through in this calendar year. So I think the panellists are suggesting we may be past peak inflation. I think that's right. We are certainly nowhere close to peak prices. So the consumer is going to see the cost of food, personal care products, everyday commodities is going to continue to rise. And I think the most households particularly in Europe are going to feel the squeeze. Minister, do you agree that we've reached peak inflation and how long are you expecting the German government to continue to subsidize your citizens? Well, I hope so. We presented a protective shield for our private households and small and medium enterprises. We have amount of up to €200 billion for 23 and 24 to pay subsidies in a form of electricity price and gas price break. But now we already have to think about an exit. We cannot allow ourselves to continue to spend these amounts. Even Germany has its budgetary limits. And it's crucial to return to sustainable, to sound public finances on the one hand. We mustn't further fuel inflation. And on the other hand, we have to let the central banks to do their work. They have a high responsibility for fighting inflation. And I really welcome the change in monetary policy which we have seen last year. It's a journey which has just started, I think. And we mustn't further fuel inflation. And if I may, we have to work on the causes for inflation. And domestically, it is the high energy price level. On the European level, I think it's a lack of competitiveness as well. And we'll talk a little bit about electricity prices. But if you look at the milder winter we've had, if you look at the price of gas that's gone down, do you think you won't spend those €200 billion? From my point of view today, we won't need €200 billion. Because it's getting easier. The price levels are lower than we expected. We have less hardship cases. And so my expectation is we won't need the whole protective shield of €200 billion, which is good news because German state is paying more for servicing all debt. Alan, you were nodding. No, I think there's one big unknown that none of us would have predicted that China would be where they are right now and that they would have come out of Covid so extraordinarily quickly. There's two trillion of excess household savings in China right now. And we fully expect we're gearing up for revenge spending by Chinese households who have been locked down for three years. And that's going to show up in travel, in domestic consumption. And I think that could be the disruptor that slows down the ending of inflation. That's a very big variable in the supply and demand construct. So I think that's one to watch carefully. Is there a danger that we are talking at cross purposes because inflation can come down, but for the people that have lost the most during the pandemic, the cost of living is very real and is not going anywhere? So indeed, even if inflation comes down, prices are high because we don't have deflation. We just have lower levels of inflation. So the prices have gone up. You know, how much of a hit that's had on households and on consumption varies across countries. So in the U.S., for instance, there was a lot of generous support provided to households during the pandemic. That meant that the savings of households have grown quite a bit. And in fact, there is still a fair bit of that excess savings left, which is one possible upside to spending an inflation that could happen. I think that in the developing parts of the world is where you really see the stress, which is the cost of living has indented their incomes. And that's been a big problem. So in terms of the point you raised about has inflation peaked, we do believe that in terms of headline inflation for the global economy, we think it peaked in 22. And it's likely to keep coming down. But if you look at the more stickier components of inflation, which is services sector inflation, for instance, I think there's more stubbornness in there. And that's going to be a challenge for central bankers. So Gita, what do you see as a prolonged, I guess, cost, you know, the risks of a prolonged cost of living crisis for the most vulnerable groups, even if inflation comes down? I think there's a real risk here. Like I said at the beginning, I'm actually particularly worried about food security because we know that food prices have come down, but they're still raw food prices have come down, but they're still about 30 percent above 2019 levels. And we know that the pass through from raw food prices to retail prices takes a while. So we haven't seen the effect yet. And we're likely to see retail price inflation of food going up, especially in the emerging and developing world. Laura, how do you see this panning out? So if we have this cost of living crisis that is prolonged, what are the right policy mixes to address it? And what is the ultimate legacy of this? Well, I almost want to say that without calling it a cost of living and crisis, let's call it what existed before and it's going to continue to exist. And that's a living wage crisis for many, many people. That is a living wage crisis in the United States, maybe for the bottom 20 percent of the population. It just has been. And if you look at in the U.S., where the major components of cost of living are food we've talked about, gasoline transportation we've talked about, but housing is the largest single one. And that was a cost of living crisis in the United States before. And it's going to be a cost of living crisis going forward. So I want to make that distinction here. The cost, the inflation of these key areas of importance to cost of living has exacerbated what was a living wage or a poverty problem throughout the world. And as Gita said, what we've seen is we've actually seen instead of a reduction in people living in poverty, we've seen an increase in the level of people living in poverty. We've seen a worsening of the Gini coefficient. So it's exacerbated a problem which existed before and which we have not solved. Minister, you live this day in, day out. I mean, housing in Germany is a concern. It's becoming less affordable, especially for young families. What are some of the things that you have introduced or can introduce to make it easier? Well, to reduce housing costs, we need to build. And this means we need public funding and subsidies, especially for poorer families and vulnerable households on the one hand. And on the other hand, we need more effective, less bureaucratic permitting procedures in Germany. This is the problem of Germany. We have private sector capital, we have know-how, and we have interested companies and investors, but it takes, it took too long time. We are working on it. And may I ask or may I add one aspect? The special situation in Germany is that we are, at the moment, we are losing collective welfare due to the higher prices for energy imports. The German business model for too long time, based on very cheap energy imports. And this is why we could afford a higher level of taxation, for example. And now we have to reinvent our business model. And my expectation is higher competitiveness for the German private sector will lead to the ability to pay higher wages to reduce the burden for the private households by paying better loans and wages. There has also been suggested for that real estate company, BIMA, should take out loans and build state housing. Is it something that you rule out? I won't allow this. BIMA is the state-driven public sector company. It builds the buildings for ministries and military areas. It's not for families and people. That's clear. Laura, what, Alan, you had something to add. Well, I just wanted to pick up on what Laura was saying about this idea of a living wage. The reason why I frame my opening remarks in the context of rising inequality is that this is a long-term trend. It's not a short-term cost of living crisis. It's a long-term inequality crisis. And there's a concept of a fair living wage, which is paying people enough to feed, house, clothe and educate themselves, in some cases transport as well. And you know, even over four years ago, we said, well, of course we'll run company. We must pay all of our people a fair living wage. So we started, well, what is a fair living wage? And there's multiple standards. So we picked a standard and we looked herself in the mirror. It turned out there were pockets of the world where we were not paying a fair living wage. We got busy with that. We've now rectified that. Everyone who works for Unilever makes a fair living wage. We've now said everyone who provides products and services to Unilever will pay their employees a fair living wage by 2030. And we've got 93 of our suppliers have signed up right away to pay there. And so that amplifies us from an impact of hundreds of thousands of people to millions of people. And this is not charity. People who are paid properly are less likely. You get lower attrition. You get higher productivity. You get better motivation. It is a strong financial incentive to pay people properly. And so I would ask all the business leaders in the room and the regulators in the room to consider a fair living wage as an opportunity for your business, because we shouldn't be running our economies and running our businesses on slave wages, poverty wages. So I think there's a call to action here to pay people properly. Alan, the last 12 months, have you increased wages to match inflation? So eight, 10% increases? It's very different in different parts of the world. So our global wage bill will be just slightly lower than inflation for 2022, same in 2023. But enormous differences in different countries around the world. Minister? I completely understand and share your concern when it comes to inequality. And we have to support the most vulnerable in our societies. But well, I would like to focus on our middle classes and people who were able to afford a standard of living and who were able to afford their own properties. And for them, the situation is changing. They now can't afford the cost of living and they can't reach their own properties. And so in the German and probably European perspective, we are doing a lot for the most vulnerable, paying welfare subsidies. But we have to ask, what can we do to stabilize the qualified people who are working hard, playing by the rules, and now are witnessing that they can't afford their lifestyle, the way of living they have learned from their parents, for example. And this leads to, well, a renaissance of competitiveness so that our companies are able to pay fair wages and lead to a new financial surrounding so that those people can afford loans and mortgages for their properties. So Laura, given what the minister on Allen and Gita have just said, what's the right policy mix to deal with this? Policy mix. Well, I indicated that I thought at the beginning, these are not traditional macro demand and monetary policies. So you have to go into the, from a federal point of view or a state, I do a lot of work for the state of California, which is a big economy. At that, you look at the composition of the budget in terms of what you're spending money on and you look at composition of the revenue stream in terms of what you are taxing, what you can bring in to support the spending on the budget side, because we're not talking about major deficit deficit enhancing spending. So in this case, I would say, if you think about what the federal government of the United States has done, we've said long term, how can we get at more affordable cost of living, more affordable cost of living. One is to work on improving logistics infrastructure. I mentioned ports. Part of the problem here, certainly through COVID and the supply chain and the slow recovery on the supply side, was logistics issues. And so the bipartisan infrastructure bill has a lot in that area. Another area, of course, obviously is climate and trying to deal with the reality that over time, we're going to have to do energy transition away from carbon based fuels to other kinds of fuels. And if we can give tax incentives, and there are many, many tax incentives in our IRA bill, to basically reduce the cost to a consumer of buying an electric car or of using all kinds of, if we think about the goal here for climate of electrifying everything, we've put tax credits in for everything to electrify, to try to get people cheaper access to the electrification faster. So those are a couple of examples where it's working on the supply side where you think policy can actually encourage more supply. You know, on climate, just let me mention, and I know this is true around the world, there is a lot of interesting stuff going on in the private sector with improving agricultural techniques, whether it's how you seed, how you irrigate, how you harvest, to improve the efficiency of that, and over time to reduce the cost of food through improving the technologies. So there's a lot that I think is in the area of enhancing technological development to deal with sectors. I want to say that housing is the most complicated, and it's the most complicated because there are resistance to the use of land for this purpose. So you talked, Minister, about the difficulty of getting zoning. You know, California, we have a huge housing crisis. It has been recognized by the federal level for years. Most of those zoning laws are made at the local level, and most localities do not want to build additional housing. They don't want the drain on the education system, on the healthcare system, on the transportation system, on the park system, on nothing. And therefore, this is going to be, to some extent, one of the hardest nuts to crack. Policy makers are having a really hard time with this, getting people behind them. Just make a couple of points. Firstly, since there's been a focus on the more secular features of the cost of living, I think we should agree that if we can bring inflation down from 10% to 2%, we would be much happier. I think we live with 2% inflation in many parts of the world for a very long time. If we can bring inflation durably down to that level, I think that would be success. And macro policies, or I agree with you, the supply side measures play an important role, but macro policies are going to be critical to that. So I think it's very important for inflation aggregate demand relative to supply depends upon monetary policy stance and fiscal policy stance. And therefore, it's very important to stay the course, bring inflation down durably. The second thing, and I think Alan's point was, we saw inflation coming sooner, if you looked at food, if you looked at those sectoral products, especially food, relative to, say, central bankers did. And I think this is a lesson to be learned from these last couple of years, which is the central bank thinking, monetary policy thinking was that you kind of could ignore sectoral price movements. If you see big movements of sectoral prices, you could see through that because those things tend to be very volatile. Monetary policy works with lags. So you don't want to rush in and raise interest rates because you saw food prices go up by 20%. I think what we've learned in the last two years is that when you are in a world where you have demand coming back strongly and you have sectoral supply shocks hitting at several margins, in that case, you really can't see through sectoral supply shock. So I think that's the lesson we've learned. And it's something we have to keep in mind because we're not out of the woods when it comes to supply shocks. We still have a climate transition that has to happen. We have to make sure we have secure energy. We still have China that's coming back. And I agree with you. One of the risks to inflation going up is how strong the rebound will be in China. Right now there's a bit of a disconnect between the markets and what central banks have been communicating with. The markets expect that we're heading towards the 2% target really quickly in the US and the Fed will be there to cut interest rates very soon. Again, you have to keep in mind that there are all these uncertainties around the world, including what will happen to energy prices as the Chinese economy comes up. So we have to stay the course. The second thing I would make in terms of the more structural side of inflation is it is important for countries to diversify the sources of where they buy goods from. Heavier reliance on only one country we know, Germany has that experience, can create a lot of trouble. And so diversification is very important. But the answer is certainly not to bring all your production home, which is a risk that we see. And it is a significant risk to the global economy. The reason we had three decades of being able to keep inflation down was because we were we had trade with many countries in the world that put cost pressures down for households and for firms. But I see the tendency now in response to the pandemic and the war to go maybe the other extreme and to say the only solution is for us to do everything in-house. And that is the perfect recipe for us to live with high inflation per se for a long time. Gita on the monetary policy point, is there a danger that so we go from inflation 8% to 4%, 5% and actually central banks will have to put a lot of economies in a recession, we'll see job losses. And so the cost of living crisis will get worse to get to that 2% target. You know, we haven't seen the softening in the job market that we typically see going around with the big increase in interest rates. So when we say that 2023 is going to be a tough year and tough of several economies compared to last year, it is because the labor market is where we are likely to see unemployment rates go up. We're at record low unemployment rates in the U.S. and in the Euro area. Record lows, right? Everything we know about how monetary policy works when you've tightened interest rates so much is for the unemployment rate to go up. That's how you bring down inflation durably. The question is how much will it take? But at this point, there's really only one way for it to go. Minister, what are you going to do for that middle class that you say is being squeezed so much? I mean, do we need to reform the electricity markets? Yes, we have to reform the electricity market. We have to reduce the burdens, for example, in the taxation. We have to improve the framework conditions for our SMEs in Germany and all these supply-side measures. And this is crucial. I remind us of Joe Biden here in Davos, 2017, when he delivered a speech concerning the American middle class. And he warned that if we forget them, they would forget us, the elites, and they were probably looking for other representatives. And afterwards, we saw what happened in the US. If I may, there's one very interesting aspect you mentioned, the serious risk of fragmentation of the global economy. We see protectionism. I have my concerns with the Inflation Reduction Act. And we need to have the right consequences in this situation of supply chain, bottlenecks, inflation. There are some criticisms about globalization. And I think, at the moment, we have a period of opportunity, a window of opportunity. Russia's war against Ukraine brought us as value partners together. And we were able, on the G7 level, under the German presidency last year, to found a climate club. I think this is an impressive example of policy-making power. And so, why stopping there? We should continue these efforts. Instead of having, well, kind of a trade controversy between the US and the European Union, we should consider whether there is an opportunity for French-shoring, as my US colleague Janet Yellen suggested. So, we should have a different level of ambition. Why not starting to negotiate a global trade agreement of the liberal democracies? But, Minister, it could also, and I know a number of European leaders have voiced concerns about this Inflation Reduction Act. Could Europe not do its own IRA? No, we mustn't. A competition who is able to pay more subsidies would be a threat to sustainable public finances in Europe. And, frankly, our next-generation EU fund is about 800 billion euros in comparison to the IRA. I think we are doing a lot. So, it's not trade war. It's trade diplomacy we need. Laura, and actually, the same question to all of you. Are you optimistic that the cost of living crisis will get better? Or will it get worse before then it eases off a bit? Well, I think the question is similar to the inflation rate. Have we seen a peak inflation rate? And I think we have. I think we're going to, I think traditional monetary policy and fiscal policy is going to continue to battle to bring it down. I think it is true and unfortunate that the only way that monetary policy and fiscal policy does that is to create slack in the labor market. That's what it does. What one hopes is that the unemployment rate doesn't go up too much, that that relationship between the ability of monetary policy to bring the inflation rate down and how much you have to rely on that unemployment rate going up, that that relationship is different now. And that's, I know, what Jerome Powell and the Fed is hoping. But I think that we are on a course to bring the inflation rate down. And I just want to say, because I don't want this to be a debate about between the U.S. and Europe, but what I really think we need is exactly cooperate. Much of the IRA is about climate. And what we need to do is we need to work together to basically use subsidies and tax policy to accelerate the speed, to accelerate and scale all of the technology requirements to address climate change. That's what we need to do. We have to mitigate the negative side effects on partners, I would suggest. No, no, no, no. I'm saying if we think about that as a general goal, we should be able to structure the policy so as to mitigate those effects. But you know you're a political, you are appointed by politics. It is very hard to do this. You're spending national resources, your country's resources. And the politics of the Congress led very much, in particular a couple senators, led very much to the writing of that piece of legislation. I'm not particularly optimistic because the cost of living crisis disproportionately impacts those at the bottom of the pyramid. There is so much talk about tightening rates and about stimulus spending. I think the only way to break the long-term trend of rising inequality is productivity. No one is talking about productivity as the sustainable way out of the inflation environment that we're in right now. I think the private sector has got quite a lot to offer on how you tackle productivity, but I just think it's going to take time. And the people who are suffering the most will continue to suffer for quite a long time. And this fragmentation of global supply chains and near-shoring, on-shoring, French-shoring, whatever you call it, is frankly another inflationary pressure in the world economy. So if our projections are right, we do have inflation coming down globally this year and next. Of course, we've been surprised many times. And I think last year at this time nobody expected Russia's invasion of Ukraine. So that happens. So things can go terribly wrong. But the baseline is for inflation to come down and come down across the globe. I think that will help with cost of living. I think the perennial problems of inequality and those at the bottom and the issues in housing will remain. I think there's a harder nut to crack and that will take some more time. But I think we should feel good about the fact that inflation comes back down to the more reasonable levels. On fragmentation, I'm going to put my global hat on and say, we really want all countries to be able to work together to come up with solutions and maybe putting my completely pragmatic hat on. I would say at least at the minimum when it comes to things like food exports, exports of fertilizers, basic essentials for the world that we have multilateral solutions and not friend solutions or inshoring or any of those combinations of that. Thank you, Minister. Did we get worse or easier the cost of living crisis from here? The German media reports that there's a lot of pessimism here in Davos. I think we should change the perspective from doubts and concerns to opportunities and challenges. We are not objects of our fate. We are not passengers of the flight. We are pilots. So let's work on policy solutions for the challenges we have to cope with. You see the willingness of government leaders and politicians to come together and find a common solution? Within the European Union, among the member states, there is the willingness to do. We are making efforts, for example, to deepening our single market and to make progress on capital markets union. So there's a reason for optimism. Okay. Well, thank you all for a very interesting panel. Christian Lindner, Alan Job, Gita Gopinath and Laura Tyson. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.