 You require some downward inflexibility in the wage rate at some level, right? Is that, what is the strategic importance of a? No, it's just the wage on the marginal input on human capital. So that's why it's an efficiency wage. Okay, so it would be the market wage. We normalize it to one, so it doesn't really matter. Okay, okay. Or you could have a minimum wage. No, there's no minimum wage in the model. Okay. There's no minimum wage in the model. So there are competitive factor markets and all of that. Yeah, so but there's no physical capital in the model, right? So it's just outputs being produced by human capital. Okay. Yeah. We have a second question. Is there any particular reason why you have focused at the period 1985 to 2005? And the second question is recently there have been some surveys which really look at the proportion of children who are enrolled in private schools in states. And maybe you could, could you look at that as an outcome variable as well? Yeah, we haven't, so let me answer the second part. We haven't used that as an outcome variable, but we've used the enrollment rates to get the private education investment shares. So we have the public education investment shares. From Tullian Dixon's paper, we have a sense of the private enrollment rates. In India, that's a little murky because, so for those of you who may or may not know this, there's a kind of fairly large, low cost private education sector in India. A lot of it is kind of unrecognized. Some of it is aided, some of it's unaided, and a lot of it is unrecognized. So we have some data on the private enrollment rates which allows us to get the private education investment shares. So the focus here not is, yeah, so that could be another focus, but here what we're trying to see is what happens to this, this law of motion of human capital over time. So once we have the private enrollment rates and therefore the private education investment shares, we can, we can calibrate out the human capital accumulation. And therefore growth and talk about inequality as well. And you had a first question, sorry. Why, why exactly this piece is that simple? Yeah, well, we started this.