When a government is in charge of spending money, there's, and correct me if I'm wrong, or if you have a different view on this especially, but it looks like there's spending, and then there's investment. Spending, if they are spending money, there's probably not necessarily a multiplier if that going on, in other words, when they spend money, it doesn't necessarily create wealth in the economy. It kind of almost extracts wealth, not almost, I believe it does. When they invest, however, that's kind of where things actually get better. So when we look at these things like the New Zealand Superfund being a higher proportion of government spending in the future, is that a good thing? Is that a bad thing? Whereas when we look at health, education, and even just the cost of running the government itself, which probably types potentially of not really smart government spending, I'm not saying that those things aren't good, but the way that they're going about it is sucking value out of the economy in my view.