Well, I think part of the {financial market} reaction we've seen, I mean, comes from a number of sources. Part of it comes from improved economic news. And that's part of the reason why rates have gone up in other countries, as well as in the United States. And that -- to the extent that tighter financial conditions reflect a better outlook, that's a good thing. That's not a problem at all.
Part of it reflects views about monetary policy, in that -- that we want to make sure we get straight. And that's why -- to answer the earlier question again -- it's why communication is so important. We need to explain as best we can how we're going to move and on what basis we're going to move. It's much more difficult today than it was 20 years ago, because the tools are more complex, they're less familiar. But that's still very important.
I think the other factor which was at play was an unwinding of excessively risky and leveraged positions in the markets, and insufficiencies of liquidity in some cases meant that those unwindings led to larger reactions in prices and rates than might otherwise have occurred.
Now, the tightening associated with that is to some extent unwelcome, but on the other hand, to the extent that some of the riskier, more levered positions have been eliminated, I think that makes the situation more sustainable and reduces, at least, the risk that there will be an over-strong reaction to further announcements.
So we will do our best to communicate clearly. That is our goal and our objective. The more clearly we communicate, the better the chance that markets will understand our intentions and that we can avoid any -- any sharp movements. But, again, we're dealing with tools that are less familiar, harder to quantify, and harder to communicate about then the traditional funds rate.