Q    But has it improved the chances of something like Mideast peace, or has it made it more complicated in your mind?

THE PRESIDENT:  I think it offers an opportunity as well as a challenge.  I think the opportunity is that when you have the kinds of people who were in Tahrir Square, feeling that they have hope and they have opportunity, then they’re less likely to channel all their frustrations² into anti-Israel sentiment or anti-Western sentiment, because they see the prospect³ of building their own country.  That’s a positive.

The challenge is that democracy is messy.  So there -- and if you’re trying to negotiate with a democracy, you don’t just have one person to negotiate with; you have to negotiate with a wider range of views.

But I like the odds⁴ of actually getting a better outcome in the former circumstance than in the latter.

All right.  Mike Emanuel.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  The number one concern for many Americans right now is jobs.  Taking a look at your budget, there are tax hikes proposed for energy, for higher-income people, and also for replenishing（补充） the state unemployment funds.  Do you worry about the impact on jobs, sir?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, actually, if you look at that budget, there’s a whole bunch of stuff in there for job creation.  I think some folks noted⁵, for example, our infrastructure⁶ proposals -- which would create millions of jobs around the country -- our investments in research and development and clean energy have the potential for creating job growth in industries of the future.

My belief that the high-end tax cuts for -- or the Bush tax cuts for the high-end of the population -- folks like me -- my belief is, is that that doesn’t in any way impede⁷ job growth.  And most economists⁸ agree.

We had this debate in December.  Now, we compromised in order to achieve an overall package that reduced taxes for all Americans, and so I believe -- I continue to believe that was a smart compromise.  But when it comes to over the long term, maintaining tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, when that will mean additional deficits¹⁰ of a trillion dollars, if you're serious about deficit⁹ reduction, you don't do that.

And as I said, I think most economists -- even ones that tend to lean to the right or are more conservative -- would agree that that's not -- that's not the best way for us to approach deficit reduction and debt reduction.

So I do think it’s important, as we think about corporate¹¹ tax reform, as we think about individual tax reform, to try to keep taxes as simple as possible and as low as possible.  But we also have to acknowledge that, in the same way that families have to pay for what they buy, government has to pay for what it buys. And if we believe that it’s important for us to have a strong military, that doesn’t come for free.  We’ve got to pay for it.  If we think that we have to take care of our veterans when they come home -- and not just salute¹² on Memorial Day but we actually have to work with folks who have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder¹³ or Traumatic Brain Injury -- well, that requires services that are very labor-intensive and expensive.

If we think it’s important that our senior citizens continue to enjoy health care in their golden years, that costs money.  If we think that after a flood we help out our neighbors and our fellow citizens so that they can recover, we’ve got to pay for it.

So the circumstance that's changed -- earlier Julianna asked why I think I might get a deal.  I think some of the questions here generally have centered about what's going to be different this time.  My hope is that what's different this time is, is we have an adult conversation where everybody says here’s what's important and here’s how we’re going to pay for it.

Now, there are going to be some significant disagreements about what people think is important.  And then that's how democracy should work.  And at the margins¹⁴ I think that I'll end up having to compromise on some things.  Hopefully others will have that same spirit.

Q    As part of that adult conversation, sir, what if they say deeper spending cuts before you consider tax hikes?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I think it just depends on what exactly you’re talking about.  And I think that there should be a full, open debate with the American people:  Are we willing to cut millions of young people off when it comes to student loans that help kids and families on their college education?  Are we only serious about education in the abstract, but when it’s the concrete we’re not willing to put the money into it?  If we’re cutting infant formula to poor kids, is that who we are as a people?

I mean, we’re going to have to have those debates -- particularly if it turns out that making those cuts doesn’t really make a big dent¹（凹痕，削弱） in the long-term debt and deficits, then I think the American people may conclude let’s have a more balanced approach.  But that’s what we’re going to be talking about over the next couple months.  As I said, I know everybody would like to see it get resolved today.  It probably will not be.  (Laughter.)  That’s a fair prediction.