 Thank you Richard, and I will not repeat things that have been said because the IMF's WEO, most of us have read it, and it is indeed in the long time, the first time that the IMF has become more optimistic than it was in the past editions. I want to focus on really two points. One is this issue of debt and interest rates and whether that is a major risk. Clearly the amount of total debt, private and public jointly, and of course, in terms of gross debt, I mean there is a netting out process, but gross debt to GDP has increased, is higher today, significantly higher, depending on the measurements, the exact figure, but it's about a third higher than it was at the beginning of the 2008 crisis. This debt is carried and is feasible and doesn't create too much of a problem because of extremely low interest rates. So if there was a chance for interest rates, if there was a probability of interest rates rising, the overall debt situation in the world would be a problem. However I don't foresee these interest rates to rise for various reasons, both supply side and demand side reasons. Urey has mentioned the low inflation and so at least in the next few years, I don't see that that is a real risk despite the fact that debt is so high. If this hypothesis about interest rates is wrong, then we could enter a major crisis situation because debt really is very high. The second point I want to make, and I think that is about the productivity paradox. We just heard that, most of us must have been here for the last session about digital communication, news, and you know we've entered a world, artificial intelligence, a booming technology world and if you look at these technology stories at the micro level, you would think as a macro economist that productivity growth would be rising very rapidly. But in fact the opposite is the case. Both labor productivity and total factor productivity are rising much more slowly than they have in a long time. And that is pretty much a global phenomenon. It's true in the US, it's true in Europe, it's true in the major emerging market. So this is a very strange situation. On the one hand you have this booming technology, innovation, and on the other hand you have measured productivity in terms of GDP statistics that is actually slowing down and it is slower than it has been in the last, you know, for decades. The decadal trend has been much, much faster. Now quickly two points in our time is very limited. Is this a measurement problem? Some people will immediately say this is a measurement problem. There are some measurement issues, but there are important papers that have been written that actually show that measurement only explains a very small part of the problem. And of course we have to remember one thing, productivity measured by GDP does not try to measure consumer surplus, I mean I don't want to get too technical. Consumer surplus is a different concept from GDP and it may well be that consumer surplus is rising, but there's also been research on that and even if you adjust for consumer surplus again you don't find that technology is rising, total factor of productivity or labor productivity is rising rapidly. So this is a paradox, this is a strange situation which is a real puzzle. And we've done some research which is not finished. But the story that comes out is very interesting and has to do with something that we wrote together also some years ago, income distribution. What's happening is that the firms, the best firms on the frontier are actually increasing their productivity quite well. So there is rapid total factor productivity growth and labor productivity growth among frontier firms, among the best firms. But they are a small minority and their weight in the overall economy is small. The other firms, the median firm or the low median firms is showing in most cases negative total factor productivity growth. So it's not that innovation is not happening and is not translating itself into the productive sphere. It is, but only by a minority of high performing firms. And this has of course one that has many implications. One can be hopeful because the diffusion might occur and that would solve the problem although there's data that shows that the diffusion is actually slowing down. But it has one very important consequence also. It is making the income distribution even more unequal. It is one more factor of why the income distribution is becoming more unequal. And I think I've run out of time.