another contributor was sheila bare, and i was at the treasury department and noted the picture of frank paulson that has gone up, with his approval at least, took credit for the things that wound up in the reform bill. so i want to go back to the deficit, the chairman agrees the military but he talks about the entitlements. when you talk about the level of reduction you need, if you do not go elsewhere and just focus on social security, i -- let he ask you from the economic standpoint. given the importance of a longer term policy to reduce deficit, purely economic standpoint, policy preferences that i know you don't want to get into, but the purely economic standpoint, would it be greatly different if that came from reducing the cost of living increase or reducing medicare or a change in tax code, would there be a maco economic difference? >> from a macro economic difference, that means the -- >> did not make that much difference which way you do it? >> it depends on how you spend your money. >> i appreciate that. but i want to go back to the question of the dual mandate. and the notion