Sean, you've touched on one of the things in terms of subsidies, and it brings me back to Gayl, in terms of a comment you made that would raise.... I'm just wondering about the question it raises.
Farmers will tell us that when you subsidize, actually all you do is marginalize the capitalization of assets. One of the big issues is the price of land. We're overcapitalized sometimes, but I'm not saying in equipment, for example. If we went to a match of one for one, so that a young farmer might actually be able to buy a farm, do you see that as an issue? I think it might be a trade issue; if it became a national one, it would actually become a trade issue, but do you see that as one of those steps? Someone says to himself that he only has...it's $5,000-per-acre land, but it will actually only cost him $2,500 per acre, so he can actually pay $3,000. Do you see that as an issue that drives the price of the asset and the competition for land upward?