 Well, as in most matters, there's some good news and some bad news. The good news is that the United States does have a number of important relative advantages. We are the youngest of the developed countries today, and thanks to a relatively higher fertility rate, we're nearly at the replacement level with a fertility rate of 2.0, and to substantial net immigration will be the youngest country by developed country by an even wider margin in the year 2020, 2030, 2040. When the median age of Europe will be 50 in the year 2035, 2040, the median age of the United States will still be relatively spry, 39. We have more flexible labor markets than most developed countries. We have broad and deep capital markets. We also have a relatively inexpensive social security system, which gives us a leg up. Italy, Germany, and a number of other European countries spend more on public pensions for the elderly today already before the ramp up with the age wave than we'll be spending in the year 2030 after the last of the baby boomers have retired. That said, we don't age as much as the rest of the developed world, but we do age very rapidly. This is because of the baby boom pig in the python, which isn't the cause of the aging of the population, but influences the timing of it. The middle aging of the baby boom has been slowing the aging of the population for the past 25 years. The elder share in the United States has been flat at 12% to 13%. But as boomers start turning 65 in 2010, 2011, that share skyrockets to 21% within just two decades. And at times, it isn't the level that matters as much as the rate of change. The United States is a country which is accustomed to relatively low tax levels to a relatively small public sector. There's going to be a great deal of pressure on public budgets, and it's going to ramp up very quickly. I mentioned that we have a relative advantage on social security, on the pension side, a relative cost advantage. But of course, it leans just the other way on the healthcare side. We have the most lavishly expensive healthcare system in the world. We spend about twice per capita what the next runner up Switzerland does. And most of that, we don't have national healthcare in the United States, but we do have national healthcare for people aged 65 and over. So almost all of that cost shows up in public budgets. We should be preparing for this challenge today with high private and public sector savings rates, but that's not the case. Household savings hovers around zero in the United States today, and we're running widening fiscal deficits rather than surpluses to prepare for the fiscal gauntlet ahead. So there is a chance, if we don't somehow manage to overcome gridlock, that despite these relative advantages, we could end up in little better shape, fiscally or economically, than some of the faster aging and apparently more challenged economies of Europe and Japan. So a cautionary note.