so they assumed roughly ross ralts -- loss rates could rise to 9%. we're in the 2% to 3% range. losses are running well below that level, and earnings are running substantially above the assumptions. >> let me stop there because you're the one who put out what the appropriate details were in the stress test -- >> actually the fed designed it, as you'd expect. >> that's right, the fed designed, but you advanced it and said we could rely on it. and one of the featured elements was unemployment, and we all know that unemployment relates very closely to the level of foreclosures which in turn relates very closely to the value of the toxic assets. >> but the framing constraint in the stress test was the loss estimates that were applied and the earning estimates that were constrained, and those did not relate to the unemployment forecast. so, again, what matters -- >> is not what you advertised mattered? >> again, the great virtue in this assessment was that we put in the public domain for everyone to see and assess for themselves what the loss rates were, so people can judge on their