The AI shockwaves are big and being felt. February 27, 2026

[Music] A list-nuff production. [Music] The S&P, the ISEX stocks. This is Motley for Money. Welcome to Motley for Money, the podcast it does bouquets as well as brickbats, at least from time to time. I'm Scott Phillips from the Motley Fool. I'm a head-boke thrower and he is Andrew Page from strawman.com the man who put the brick in brickbatt. He also put the love, the passion, the desire, the drive and the expertise into strawman.com which has turned into unsurprisingly, Australia's premier online investment club, on the way to of course world domination. Mr. Page, good day. Good day. You know you said that and I'm just thinking to myself I actually don't know what a brickbatt is. I mean I get the context, I know the saying but what, describe what a brickbatt is. See this is what you're supposed to be googling rather than asking me to use it. Actually it turns out a brickbatt. I'm allergic to piece of brick uses a missile. According to Google. I can't find the original. I look up origin now working at talk to it. This is value way. Sorry I didn't read it. It's actually value way. Middle English, okay so yeah so a bat is a lump, a piece or a chunk. So a brickbatt is a bit a piece of brick. Okay, okay. Well I mean let's throw some brickbats around. There's a lot of your targets. I'm not. He's how old this is. This is from online it's a Mology Dictionary by Google's AI. It derives from the word brick and bat which is a middle English term for lump or piece. By the 1640s it developed a figurative metaphorical meaning referring to harsh criticism. So it's like one of the things we've actually recently kind of. It's been used metaphorically for 400 and more or more years. There you go. That's kind of cool. There you go. This is why people come to the podcast. You see something that says money you'll be like fine. I think I was going to talk about some stocks and stocks like no. In a Mology. Middle ages. That's a terminology. Welcome. We'll do a little bit. We'll get to brickbatt. I'm just suggesting that given our personalities. I'm probably more likely to be throwing the book as you're probably more likely. He'll be in the brickbats I suppose. Yeah fair. Let's get on with it because we had a big week. There's so much cool stuff to talk about this week. Let's start with inflation because that's kind of the biggest bit of news this week. Inflation CPI 3.8%. That's the third month in the last four. It's been at 3.8%. The other one was a tiny 3.4%. And we've been above 3% now since July. That's notable. The other thing is notable is the trimmed mean. I've shown you this definition before. Mean is the average and trimmed. I had looked at it up a few months ago. They trim off the top and bottom 15% of outline kind of big price change. So it drops dramatically. It rises directly like, okay, well that's not necessarily representative. Let's take that off and work out what the bulk of prices are doing. That went up from 3.3 to 3.4%. So inflation is too high. We have inflation is going the wrong direction. But it's transient right? Well this is the thing right? Well the probably the RBA is still not sure if it isn't. Which is why the star wars meme here. It's transient right? Right. Right? I think we're with space balls actually. The star wars made that sense of where we're up to without central bank and a bunch of policy these days. Oh yeah. Well I'm going to have a little mini rant just for a second. Don't limit yourself. Go for it. Go to the max Iran. Where are the early in the podcast? Housing costs up 6.8%. Electricity up 32.2%. Now. I'm going to pull this back just a little bit because I spend too much time on Twitter. Everyone knows that. And I am just sick of the partisan BS that comes with this sort of stuff. So here's the thing. Electricity prices up 32%. And those on the right say, "See, are we screwing this? The top 32% is terrible. Do you know how electricity prices? Well hang on. I'm just going to put it in place last year. So unless you said at the time, "Oh thanks, I'll go for the subsidy." And then now you can play them taking away. You can't have it both ways. Now on the left, they will say, "Oh no, you got to ignore that. The subsidies have been taken off." It's like, "Sure." But did you tell me to ignore inflation 12 months ago when the subsidies are actually pushing inflation down? Oh no, no, no, I wasn't doing that. And it's just so just want to, I don't care what side of the fence you're on. Apoxion on both your houses. Normally it's their houses. Normally it's the Polly's. In small part. At just the rusted ones, right, who are just, will explain away this stuff as if somehow there's this amazing smoking gun in either direction. You're either excusing it or you're blaming it. When unless you were consistent both times, you're just doing what they're doing, right? And so don't complain about politics. Don't complain about the other politicians, the other party. If you are not going to say, "All right, it's up now, but I honestly have why it's up and it was down there." And that's okay. All fights first are. They knock yourself out. The impact it was four and a half percent. Right, which is not great. Still more than inflation. But that's not all. It feels like a nothing conversation, but it's just that idea of the selective quoting of data. The Polly's do it is bad enough. If you're going to try and add an opinion, if you're going to try and have a view and add to some sort of public discussion, at least do it responsibly, at least do it openly. Don't either swallow their lines or crop with your own lines where the good stuff I can take and the bad stuff I can ignore from my party or on the other side. I'm going to complied about the bad stuff and pretend the good stuff doesn't happen. It's just, they're thinking, by the way, just really quickly. If you're on social media doing that, everybody knows what you're doing. Nobody goes, "Oh, wow, that's a interesting point." You've bagged the Labour Party for the last 84 tweets in a row. Or you bagged a little more party for 84 tweets in a row. "Oh, I'm going to listen to this one because this time you're really making sense. You're changing my mind, dude." With some sort of fair and reasonable approach to policy, you've un-picked that one. You've got me. I just think it's just nonsense and it drives me a little bit nuts. Back to the point of inflation, how's your up 6.8% part of that is like Trissy Bay up 30%, and 29% of that 33% is a removal of those subsidies. Which words we said at the time, mate? Stupid policy. Government doesn't get a free pass on that one. It was done policy at the time. Frankly, if they're getting hoisted on their own, Patar, there's another saying for you, then. I love that, say. To some degree, they kind of deserve it. You put the subsidies in place last year to try and make prices look lower. Now they're higher. Don't come at me saying, "Well, it's just the. No, no, no, no, you didn't say that at the time, dude." Let's be honest about it. You were not for cynical, man. No, no, no. The difference between your mate is, your cynical and don't think it can change. I'm just stupid enough to be cynical and think it can change. That's not me. That's actually not me. I mean, just get too political at seven minutes into the podcast. If you want to rather rise up one nation's about, it's just about people who are going, well, screwed a lot of them. Just stuff it, right? I think the choice is ordinary. I'm happy to go on record. I think one nation's policies are threadbare and the people involved. Generally, not the sort of people I'd have over dinner. That's a very wide. Some I'm sure are wonderful people. But, you know, if you just think about the implications of you go to that. From, in theory, people who should be reasonable people with reasonable policy backgrounds and long traditions as political parties, it's the US all out of the way. Trump is a Republican by name, but effectively torpedoed the Republican party. The Democrats are nowhere. Trump is only not one nation because he decided to go through the party and rather than around it. You can't be surprised to give them what's happening. Yeah. I do. I mean, you've got to be careful because certain groups seem to take ownership or associations with certain terms. But I do like the term "yany party." Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because it is. Like you're talking about all the left and the right. And it's just like, I think, to me, I just like, they're increasingly indistinguishable from one another. And it's just. I mean, that explains the fringe parties gain to prominence. Because it's like, well, you both equally suck in slightly different ways. So I'm just going with. The vote isn't so much for these other parties. It's a vote against. I don't think so. That's not saying it's no wonder. It's like, "Well, what else do you want me to do here?" So it's the Trump vote. So I'm well, I don't know that Trump's particularly great, but the other mob are doing a terrible job. So I guess we'll be from a guy now. I have my issues with that. But at one level, I can't. You can understand it. Yeah. Tone us a cent. Tone us a cent. Yeah. Yeah. Except if you're a political strategist or one of the major parties, you know, with an army of consultants around you, you still can't put your finger on that particular pulse for some reason. Right. Right. Hey, you know what's the definition of insanity? There's masses of the parts of the electorate that are just completely disenfranchised with the way we're doing things. Let's do more of those things. And particularly think about Australia, we saw Brexit. Then we saw Trump. And they're like, "Yeah, no. Let's just ignore that. It'll be fine. It'll be fine." And it's not even. I'm going to be careful here. I'm not saying that our party should be populist. It's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying. Yeah. The major is not responsible for people being populist. They're absolutely responsible for the conditions that allow populists to rise. And that's. You're looking at it going, "Hmm, Brexit. Hmm, Trump. Nigel Farage, Marine Le Pen in France. You know what I should do? Nothing. I only do exactly what I always did, because somehow. Now, I've got to say, we are protected to some degree by compulsory preferential voting. So, frankly, the only reason we probably haven't seen more of it here is this system doesn't necessarily bend that way as a matter of course. But yeah, you're right. I could just. How do you look over this? There's no go. Let's change nothing. Because yeah, we find. And the worst thing is we might suffer. I. I don't know what the election will bring when it comes. Maybe our nation. Yes, a lot of votes. Maybe they don't. Maybe it's all a fad and passes. Maybe they're not putting the balance of power on the Senate. And then you kind of go, "Well, hang on. You know, those of us who aren't going to vote for a nation and who end up having policy decided by their casting votes, again, you can't get what we deserve, right? If you're arrested on, ask your guys to actually do a better job. Don't pretend you either do a good job, make the new a better job. So that I can actually genuinely say, "That's a great policy. That's a good decision." They're worth voting for. You can't say that at the moment. I have nothing to add. Back to what's lying. The RBA is going to have a meeting. You're not getting an interest rate card. Is that what you're telling me, Scott? No, I don't. Let's cut to the bloody chase here. I've got a mortgage-the-size of Christmas. Is this the thing? Am I going to get some relief? You are very, very, very long-lots on getting any sort of relief anytime soon. And you're probably going to get an increase. If they're all in core of my investment, philosophy and strategy, don't say that. That's the thing. Oh, but can I set you off on a related rant? Please. Did you see the AFR? So we recorded this on Thursday morning, that's 26th of February. Did you see the AFR on affordable housing this morning? No. Housing is not affordable for the average couple in any capital city in the country. Period. Oh, I thought that was already the case. That was only Sydney. Oh, okay. Yeah. Every single capital. I know I said I have a mini rant. This is kind of a different rant. I'm going to claim the mini rant and move on for another rant. But go for it. I don't know. I know. I'm listening to the same thing. By the way, everyone listening to how there's a guy in the thing. That's the thing, right? Thanks, Captain Obvious. I didn't need some official proclamation. Like, yeah, it's unaffordable. Yeah. We've all known it forever. I mean, I don't. We've been accused of being too negative and begging the government to pass, and we've just started doing the same thing. And I really try my best. I really try my best. I've done some radio at TV. And I kind of. I'm supposed to do the whole. Here's the information. Here's the use of what it means. And I'm supposed to do it reasonably dispassionately. Not because anyone tells me to. Just because no one's here. A winter on the radio or TV. Really, really. I'm really struggling with that. Well, we know the finance Roy. You're supposed to get on there and, you know, But you're maybe not the finance Roy. Yeah, so, yes. It's Colin Jack-Yah-Yah-Nokisels out. And I'm really struggling, mate, because I just look at this and go, "How do you talk about this without a sense of despair in your voice?" So, I've like, "We had just screwing with kids." I find it just really, really difficult to have that conversation. It's having a real time. The average. I'll make this up, mate. I haven't got that reported in front of me. But I think it might be Sydney or it could be National. I can't remember which. Over the past, I think it's five years. House prices are up 68%, wage up 22% or something ridiculous. And it's kind of like, again, back to the point of, Why do we expect kids not to say, "Well, stuff and I'll vote for those guys instead?" It's like, "Well, why would I vote for the unipady?" As you say, the party who are doing it to me, and the party who would do it to me if they had the chance. They're your choices, you know, which is the least lesser of the two evils. Neither they're both pretty evil. Suggesting to do, we'll talk about a couple of guys, that's maybe a minute, but I just. Every single capital city is unaffordable for the average couple. Nothing about being single, by the way. That's a whole different. That's a non-starter just anyway. I don't know, mate. I don't know what you expect young people to do, not you. I just bet what people expect young people to do. "Well, hey, I'm still young." What do you expect? What do you mean? I was going to say, "I don't know what you expect." We're stretching middle ages, much as we possibly can, but that's going to be a stretch pre-send. I don't know. What do you do? I'll restrain myself because I'm just going to repeat the usual things. But the short version is, we need to take some really, really difficult and tough decisions. That's the answer. We're not going to do that, right? This is why you can do all kinds of things to deny economic reality. There are economic forces that are a force of nature. It's kind of like, "Hey, where in a bad spot? You can fix it. It's going to be painful." Or you can just kick the can down the road and maybe get away with it for 10-20 years. Markets can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent as the old saying is. But at a point, it will resolve itself one way or the other. If it does it itself, it will likely be far more painful than it would have been. Both painful, both bad options, but there are no good options anymore. What we can do is we can pretend that there are good options. That's what we've been doing. It'll sort itself out. It will. One way or the other, and that's kind of the problem. We may have economic and frankly political pain in the meantime. Here's the problem, right? We're getting what we deserve, but if we don't deal with it in the meantime, what we deserve is going to get worse and it's going to hurt more. It's why I always, the end of these conversations, I just come back to, "Look, you can shout into the void and you can write an angry letter to your representative." You should do. There's value in all of that. But if I think it's also incumbent upon you to just position yourself appropriately. I'm not going to be used to be clear on that. I'm not saying find some exotic instrument to go short on because you'll get taken to the cleaners on this trade. Being too early with something like that is very much the same as being right. It's like we've often said. You don't want to get bogged down in specific predictions, but you do want to make sure that your financial house is in order. Don't predicts prepare. That just means things muddle forward. You're okay and if things take a turn for the worse, you're less worse off than you might otherwise be. Yeah, well, nice about it to describe it. I'm going to take another detail. I'm going to ask you a complete unprepared question. We've probably a little bit about this in the past. You'll have similar answers, I suspect, or at least directly. You know where I'm coming from. We have talked a lot about intergenerational inequality. We've always had a lot of money. Kids have no money. That's the problem. I think that's kind of true. Now, you'll speak coffee out. I would say kind, or it's like, of course it is. Over the fullness of time and for those people and those generations. The boomers went through the 19%, 20%, 70% interest rates back in the 90s. The millennials weren't alive, they didn't really say it. It was a very short blip by the way. It's often phrased as if it was like 10 years or 19%. I guess I'm saying that the boomers at that point were complaining they had it hard. And now the millennials are complaining they got it hard. I'm not saying either I'm wrong. I don't think that's the answer. I suspect the issue is not actually the fullest time going into generational inequality. I suspect it's going to be inherited inequality. It's something we've talked about in the past a little bit. If you're a millennial, you may be able to afford a house now. If you're a mother, dad, living in Chatswood in Sydney or South of the Aron Melbourne or Chich Chus, whatever. You'll inherit your $3-minute house at some point. And what you might do is a tough one a little while, you are going to be completely fine. It's going to be those, so I suspect the inequality that is more concerning over the next 20 years. That is more concerning over the next couple of generations is actually between those who inherit and those who don't. Or the amount of people inherit and the amount of people don't inherit. And how? Even in the short term, that's the silver munk, Bank of Marmadade, which is an account phenomenon. If you've got a Bank of Marmadade, you're probably okay, largely. If you don't have a Bank of Marmadade, you're probably stuffed, largely. The difference is in the way that plays out. I've been accused of being a communist or a socialist on Twitter about this all week by the way. I'm putting on the love of things, thanks everyone who commented. Did you propose it inheritance, thanks? Is that the TLD out here? No, I did. No, you see, that's why I'm going to ask you because I didn't. And of course, everyone jumped to that, which was like, well, I work half my money, I should keep all my money, my kids should get all my money. Okay, but I didn't actually say that was all I said was, this seems like something that could actually happen. And fast forward a couple of generations, right? So I inherit money, you don't. Okay, well then you're probably renting your whole life. And I've probably not going to rent or at least when I get that money, I get a massive portfolio. And that for me, $1 house, maybe I buy a house with it, maybe I do something else with it. And by the way, I die, I pass them on my kids and you don't, your kids get nothing. So their kids get nothing. And so fast forward a few generations and kind of, nothing is determinant or deterministic. But the concern I have, which I would happily be swaged off, or at least we shouldn't let's converse with, is if that does roll forward, nothing. But I also have things like birth rates. So if you got, if you got an inheritance 50, 60 years ago, you share it with three or four other kids. What's your average fertility rate now? 1.4, 1.6, something like that? There's every chance that, you know, two people's wealth goes to one rather, rather going to three or four. I mean, the math gets really different. Again, I'm not doing gluing, I'm definitely not predicting. But if you look at that and kind of go, is this a conversation we should be having? Because one possible outcome here is meaningfully significantly larger inequality because of inheritance and the very unfortunate effort talks about. And I kind of, so I say that and then I didn't, I didn't, maybe I should have done something more than just say, I think it's going to be an issue. And we should talk about it because then it got to, you know, and so my, you're right mate. So, so if it's going to be an issue, firstly, is it an issue? Secondly, if it was going to be common issue, how would you resolve it? And I think from my mind, there's kind of three, what's four? Different ways, well. So there's, firstly people reject the premise, which is fine. And then there is a question of, doesn't it be resolved? And that's fine. So there's, you know, there's a decision-treaty going down here. I think, I don't want equality because that's communism. I mean, I love it, but it's not going to happen because I'm all right. It's also a fiction. Of course, it's never a society ever in the history of the human race where it's been perfectly. Oh, actually, that's not true. Extremely extreme, extreme, extreme. Yeah, right. And a cube is pretty flat, right? In terms of, such as it's going to be. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. North Korea is pretty, you know, equal, except for a tiny, tiny elite. So when you, when you have very, very equal outcomes, it tends to be, we're all equally dirt poor. Right. So, so there's all those things happening. And so, you know, I don't want equality, but, but inequality was too worse than, I think objectively, that's a bad thing. And you, you're welcome to just a go. And these are, I just, well, I just very clapped quickly. The carifier is just like, for me, it's always been, I, I strive, want to strive for equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Great. Because I don't think it's ever, it's ever achievable in any, in any practical kind of sense, which makes, it's very easy to misconstruel of that. I think if you were born in difficult circumstances, there's no wealth to be inherited. There's various family issues with health or God knows what else. I don't want to get into dark. You know, I just, you, you, you just, you arrive on this planet, right? And like, oh, I've only got one parent and they've got, you know, addiction issues and whatever I say. I just, I just want that kid to have the ability to end up being the prime minister or a CEO or whatever. And that they've got, there is nothing in their way to, to, to get there, you know, you can't change their genetics. So obviously, right? You can't change who they are. But if it's just like, if they wanted to and have the ability to, they, they should be able to achieve whatever they want. That's, that's what I aspire to. Trying to make the equality of outcome. Just, I know you're the same, but I just, I think it's what people get growing up. I just, I think that's, it's noble. It's, it's a great intention. Yeah. But it doesn't work. It doesn't work. It's just, at this point, just empirically, it just doesn't work. And so, if you take that, you mentioned your quality of opportunity, the kid is born with a house and without a house. The, the family of renters, the family of, you know, mortgage players, the family of owners, the family of who actually heritage themselves. You know, third generation, fourth generation, silver spoon stuff. There is no quality of opportunity. Now, I'm not saying it's exactly zero, but it kind of, I mean, it's not, you know, there's an equal opportunity. I'm not saying we should necessarily resolve all of that or try and, you know, be, be overly, what's the right word? I don't know, a medal to try and achieve all of that. You can't, that would mean, that would mean, that would mean, that would mean, that would mean, that the kid is born with a silver spoon. You take money off them and say, you can't have those parents, you can't live in that house. I'm against that. That kid's not right. Exactly. And you know, no one's going to. So, again, just be clear, we're not saying, even a quality of opportunity is not really that, is it? Because otherwise, everyone would have to be in the same housing circumstance when they were born. It's just going to happen. Sure. But if you want to go to school, you can, if you want to study something, you can. You can. Leading towards that, how can we help minimise the inequality of opportunity? Yeah. That's the action. So, I don't know, mate. I don't have a view, I never formed view on what we do in terms of inherited inequality. But I think, honestly, I honestly, I reckon, which I'm about the young kids these have, we've got issues with, you know, are they going to go postal come election time? I mean, maybe, right? It's possible that 20, 30, 40, 50 years, if the inequality of opportunity continues to get larger based on inheritance in particular, that turbocharges that. And we've said a million times, even if you don't care about anybody else, you just care about yourself. Yep. Do you want to live in that society where we're kind of French revolution style, you know, the peasants are revolting, it's like, hang on, I've got nothing. I'm getting up to, I've got a chance of doing anything. So, what else do I do? Yeah. Yeah. So, the four areas to me, and this is going to, it's going to really sense the people off. Inheritance, Texas is one. Well, Texas is two. Capital gains, taxation is three. And personally, come tax levels are four. And it comes down to really how much we want people to have at death and how we treat what they pass on to their kids as their inheritance. Because if we start, when this is where the, this is where the conversation is important on a principal level before you get the solutions. That's why I tried to do it on Twitter. And again, as always, wrong time. Wrong time of life. I know, right. I'm glad to have you. Let's come back that sentence. I wanted to have a mature conversation. I've got a Twitter. I'm not going to Twitter. Oh, did you know? Okay. How's the post this podcast? Bless you, I'm talking about this. But that was saying, because it kind of, it's one of those things where you like, not you. They're like, I hate the solutions. Okay. But is the problem real? Yes. So, what do you do about it? Nothing. Okay. And it's one of those really uncomfortable situations where you kind of got to go, if the issue is real, and people say it's not that's fine. If the issue is real, I don't mind if I saw, I didn't pros any of those or all of those. I'm just saying, I don't know how else you do it. If that's the real, if that, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the circumstances are such that unchecked, we make it gets worse. Yep. You have to check the circum, but definitely, like by definition, that's how it works. So, I suspect, mate, if it was me, I suspect, it's going to make people really grumpy. It can be, if the issue is real, we have to make sex in action. And that actually, we bad for people who have money. That's how it works, right? Just, again, mathematically, if there's a problem, and you want to solve the problem, the solving the problem means you have to take some money off people who are going to give the money to their kids. That's how it works. I'm sorry, that's, that's, oh, again, you can say the problem is not real. That's fine. But there is no kind of alternative. I don't reckon. So, it's gone. It comes, you've got to, you've got to go back, you've got to really zoom out and, and you've got to look at first principles. And you've got to ask, why is it unfair if I inherit a bunch of assets? Can I step back? I'm the vote fair, it triggers a whole lot of people. Okay, okay, okay. So, why is that not your advantageous? Right, yes, thank you. Okay. I'm not too, not too, I just, because people say, well, this is not fair for people to go and take my money. So, fair for it, fair just becomes a stupid, I know you're not saying it, but people are hearing it, it's just, go, go. Well, I mean, I know, I know, I'm, I'm trying to do it as quickly as I really am. And, and I just refer people to the hard money episode. I know, I know it's my thing, I know everyone. But it's sort of like, it strikes me as like this really obvious solution that we just, it's just like, we can't even talk about it. It's not even entertained in the realm of possibility. Now, let's just say that just for the sake of, just to illustrate my point here, that it's just the world that we live in, right? And that I have got, I am the richest man in Australia, and I've got, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars, and I give that all to my kids. Now, again, they don't, there's no, there's an advantage in the sense that you are at the starting line with a bunch of capital, that, that definitely helps. It's only, where, where it, the trouble is with, with, I can't, what am I trying to say here? If I want to, I've got all the money in the world, I've decided I don't want to work, and what do I do? I was like, well, I'm going to buy a mansion, so I'm going to pay someone else to give me that mansion, and I'm going to want servants. So I'm going to have to pay for those servants, and I'm going to want a yacht, and I'm going to eat caviar, and I want to do, so, so, so to fund my lifestyle, I'll have to start spending all of my, my money. And eventually that, that redistribute, that will redistribute the money, and in fact, it will distribute the money to the people who are actually doing the work and creating the value. It seems really bloody fair to me. Why isn't that the case at the moment, the case at the moment is, is because I've got assets, now I've got collateral, I've got collateral, now I've got access to new money, If I've got access to new money, I've got the cash analysis effect. And now I'm getting an unfair advantage, because I actually never really need to touch the capital, because then can do what all sensible rich people do. And this is why they're rich, in general, if there's generational wealth going through, is that they run, they lean into the functioning of the plumbing of the system, and how it works. You know, it's like at a point, those kids will spend all the money and they won't be poor, and they won't be rich anymore, and that will distribute to society. But if we're continually pumping new money into the system, and that money is finding a home because it needs to protect its purchasing power, therefore it's buying into more assets, that means that the collateral that I'm using is going up and up and up and up, which means I can continue to read finance and refinance and refinance and continue to borrow. And I never have to touch the capital. And I'm golden for the next 4,000 years, as long as I'm not a complete moron, and I've got a sensible financial advisor here, I can perpetuate that indefinitely without me personally ever having to create new value. That's the problem. That's the problem. It's right there. And it's just like, we can't imagine anything beyond, yeah, but I just need to, I need to. This is that, this is the, I get what you're saying, but there's a very uncomfortable problem with it. No matter how you do it, someone or some group of people have to decide what is too much, and to take it off someone else, and then who are you going to give it to? Now you will say, or other people say, oh, but we'll do it really fairly. It's like, will we though? Again, this is like, hopefully we, we, we will. And that, that would certainly be a, a noble goal. But history would, would inform you, it's just like, yeah, generally it doesn't go that way. Generally, it just doesn't happen. So I don't know how to, to, to, to square that circle. And I just like, I know my vision is never going to happen. Right? I get that. I get that. But it's, but it's like, it is, I am yet to find someone to explain to me why that is unfair, and why it is fair for one of a better word. I guess, you know, but I would actually, I think it's very appropriate to use the fair, why it is fair that we are going to give certain commercial enterprises the ability to create money and give them very strong incentive to distribute it only to people who have assets already. Not because they're evil or they're some kind of cabal because that's just how the finance system works, right? Like, I'm not going to lend money without collateral. But if I'm going to, if I'm going to use my collateral to buy more assets and just, I mean, we're going to perpetuate that cycle. It will, it will only promulgate in equality. And that is exactly why we have seen, well, the wealth to divide grows so much. Like the top, the top 20% of our country and anyone in the world is not because they are, they are the, the top 20% most productive people. Like, right, right? Like that, and it's like, wouldn't it be better to be in a system where it's kind of like, we allow everyone to prosper, we give everyone equal opportunity as best as we can. And we don't have a financial system that privileges the already rich, the already elite. And that if you work and create value for others, you should be rewarded. I just, to me, that is just sort of like, that is brilliant. And as I said in the, in the double episode, we did, it's like, how can you begrudge an Uber billionaire? It's like, we'll be only way to do that was to create insane amounts of value and then not spend all of the wealth that you were crude. Like that is like, cool, you're a legend. Right? And if you want to go off and like send rockets up to Mars and data centers in space and blow it all up and all these given them, okay, that's fine. It's your money. That, but that money will get spent and that will get spent with people who will then have an opportunity. They, they got the money because they were clearly providing values of the person who was spending it. And they have the opportunity to now continue to create value and a crew wealth. I mean, the whole basis of civilization and prosperity starts with saving and investing, right? And it's sort of like, and an in productive capacity and productive assets. Not only about investing in a product brick and mortar or something like, I'm talking about actually those kinds of things. And it's, to me, it's sort of like once, once you see it, it's sort of like, I know it's the man with the hammer kind of thing, but it's so clear and it's so transparent. And it's almost too radical to ever, and it's very hard to see, but it's too radical to ever be an actor. It's time a realist. It's not, it's not going to happen. I don't think any time soon. But if you want the honest answer to your question, that's how you do it, man. And then I'll put it on you as like, how do you decide you're the king of Australia? How do you decide what's too much? Who are you going to give it to? So that would be, no, I'm saying that. You can't do it non-sub, you can't do it objectively. Of course, but the problem is that's every tax. And so I don't think you can then, I think that argument's got to be made at a level of government, rather than a level of individual taxation. So, because I, who are I going to do nobody? It goes to a consolidated revenue like everything else. But the, so here's my, here's my thing about tax, man. And this is, you're guessing off the top of your little bit, but it's really relevant given the question. So I think everything seems perfectly fine. But I don't think you, if your argument is, who can, how can government tell whom, who gets money from tax? Then we say, well, let's give it a tax. At some point, we have to accept the imperfectness of a governing system that allows for the collection and use of a proportionate income for the common good. If we accept that's true, then every tax has that question to be answered. And every tax is either justified or unjustified on that basis. And I want to say every tax, I mean, every possible tax policy suggestion is justified. I just mean you can't say, well, we can't go to a tax, we're going to give it to, but we do income tax because we know who to give it to then. I don't think, I don't think the argument holds unless it's all that. No, it's a good point. It's a good point. No, what I'm really saying is that we obviously need, we need some form of tax to pay for essential services that can't be supplied in any other way. Absolutely. I'm all for that kind of stuff. But as you've said yourself many times is we've, the tax has to be, it has to create proper incentive schemes. And if all you're doing is just saying, and it's very easy to say when you're not at the top 20%, I'm not at the top 20% right? And it's like, it's like, oh, things are hard. That person has more than me. They should have, and they're going to give it to that kid. So no, I want, I want to take that. And then I think that then we can give this to other people. And it should be like, whoa, so what are you trying, what are you trying to disincentive? I say, what are you trying to remedy? And is that, is that an appropriate rational remedy given how we know it's going to work? So you're right. We do have to say, so step back from what I said, and then step back again and then say, well, how? Absolutely. I agree. I agree with you there. So I have that answer. Not as a whole answer, but as an approach, right? So I start with, and you've kind of covered some of it already. I simply start with as a community. And I'll say we have to agree. Now it's, you can't all agree, agree 100% with everything because that's just a monstery, right? So I'll say agree, but assume through whatever democratic process we think is appropriate. We work on what, to your point, what government should do? What should government do for us? Because we can't do what ourselves, or they probably want to provide, or it's defense, or whatever those things are. What things should government do? Okay, tick that box. This much welfare spending, this much disability spending, this much defense spending, this much infrastructure spending, this much, whatever whatever, right? And you're right. So we've got to raise 84 trillion dollars. That's the number to do the things that we think government needs to do for us. Cool, right? Okay. So the second question is simply just who should pay what proportion of the 84 trillion dollars on some appropriate, and I'm going to say appropriate with inverted comments because there is no objective answer, there's no objective. On what appropriate basis do we decide who contributes what? And so for me, the answer for the potential of something for the ultra wealthy and/or some sort of inheritance worsening inequality is maybe there should be a wealth, actually it's right to land tax before, maybe it's an inheritance tax, maybe it's higher capital gains or personal income tax at the top level, whatever. And as a result, others will pay less of the tax burden, or the tax free threshold changes or the marginal rates change or we get rid of a particular tax we don't want or or more of another tax we do want or whatever else it is. It's same as in Chris the GST. So with we Chris the GST, how do we start to get to the money? No, it goes like a solid-aid revenue. And if we don't get extra money, then someone else gets a tax break. And so for me, that's how I would make those maths work. It's not a matter of taking the inheritance money and give it to those who don't have any inheritance at all. It's not that for a second. It is a combination of we know that tax is inherently redistributive whether we like it or not. It's just these what it is because it takes from someone working, give someone who's not working or someone who's in defense, you wouldn't have a job with that government spending or on a road that wouldn't be built otherwise. So it's always redistributive as much as people with ideology hate that I hate the ideology of tax because just the idea of like, yes, it gets to kind of anarchy or communism. It's like, it's either those things people. It's just the uncomfortable gray area in between. We have to work out what we think and how we do it. So for me, Matt, that's my approach is where is tax most appropriately levied based on a whole lot of things, including, as you said, where you're incentivized and disincentivized. But on top of that, on top of ability to pay, that's the whole progressive marginal tax system is, you know, someone on a million dollars can not only afford to pay a higher dollar amount, but also higher percentage of their income that someone on 25,000 dollars because they've covered their, the necessities life multiple times over. And so saying, well, the million dollar, you know, million must say the same tax rate as the person on 25 grams clearly not regional in my view. If you disagree, are you or anyone listening, knock yourselves out, but that's my take. So how much do we need to raise and how is it most appropriately levied based on who has the capacity to pay and the impacts of that to your point of the tax is being levied? I mean, yeah, as a high level thing, the devil's in the detail, right? This is the trouble. As soon as you start, you go, okay, that sounds very reasonable. Okay, so let's start. And all of a sudden, you know, almost immediately, just, oh, because there's, because you know what there is, and this is the lesson of economics, is that every, every step of the way down this trade-offs and every step of the way down, someone's going to be better off and someone's going to be worse. And it's really, really hard. I just, I guess for me, I just, I just push back on inheritance tax, not because I'm sitting on gazillions that I want to send to my kids. In fact, if I did, I've spoken before I wouldn't, because they'd just be entitled little snot. So I'm not going to do that to them. But it just, it doesn't, it doesn't fix anything. It's just too, it's too shallow. I mean, I just googled it while you were chatting then. So let's pick on Gina, right? There you go. Gina, we're taking everything you want. Everything. We get $25 billion as her net worth according to Google. It's like, well, the federal budget deficit is $37 billion. So we don't even, we don't even budget, we absolutely liquidate her, and we don't get anything, right? We don't, we don't, we, we, we barely cover out, we don't even cover out a budget deficit for one year. And so it's sort of like, it's easy to say the billionaires, and it's like, I'm not, I'm not, I'm really not trying to stand up for the billionaires. I'm not, it's just that it just painfully doesn't work as an idea. And it's, it's like when people talk about business and that being the problem, it's like, yeah, we love to focus on these big mega corks and multinationals. But the 70% of, of, of, of people are employed through small medium enterprise, these family-run businesses, they're just Sharon's hair salon, you know, Suzy's mechanical services, like it's just these are, these aren't corporate corporate fat cats, you know, and it's sort of like once you start looking at what is available to take and to redistribute, it just, and then you just get to this stage where it's like, you know what, it's just easier to be a real estate agent than start a business or, you know, I'm just, there, there is no incentive in here for me to do anything because I don't know, it just, it just, I agree, that was absolutely the detail. I just, I think it's, I said, I just see there's two conversations and I think as we've most politics and most policy, I don't like some of the outcomes, so I'm going to pretend the issue isn't real. It's frankly where we're with housing, but that's exactly where we're with housing, which is just like, we really should hope young people get in the housing, yeah, we should, but I don't want my house price to go down, we should hope young people, it's like, let's give them more money, let's make house price go, I might go this affordable, yeah, but we should help them, okay, well, it's my house price. I'm really hungry, right? But I don't want to eat my cake, let's over here. Yes, exactly. And so you're right, you're 100% right, man, I completely agree. It's just also that idea of like, okay, the, agree on the issue is real, is that kind of, it's kind of adulting 101, right? It's just like, la la la fingers in the years, I don't want to, because if I say it's real, maybe I'm going to do something about it, you know, I've got a tricky problem. Okay, well, then you're going to do something about it. No, I don't, oh, you don't have to do anything about it. Keep drinking that, it's, it's, it's honestly, it's just that 101, right? Yeah, by the way, it wasn't me confessing, I don't have a tricky problem, hopefully. But, you know, it's just that idea of just, agree on the thing, you got to sell it, you know, you know, you know, you got to do the problem, Scott, that's the issue, you know, you got to accept it. He says, is he takes a hit for these, he's flasks. That's right. That's why podcast is recorded, mate, but in the podcast, I'm so awesome. On the floor. Everyone's like, hang on, that makes sense. That would explain a lot. Anyway, now I get, I just, I, all I would say is, is that, you know, wrong, but as, as, as up in the clouds is, is my little solution is, so is yours. Like, you know, like, of course, neither, what you just said is I just want to mature a conversation that we could write, okay, and I want to hide money, so like, we can, like, this is when they wheel us out the front of the nursing home and go, sure, that's right. We should have that, you know, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not going to happen. It's just not. Oh, dear. So, yeah, I love your intent. I appreciate it. I'm a bit further down the day that the jaded path to you is like, I thought that I could change the world at one stage. I still know. You're an acceptance, exactly. Something actually much, much, much better. I am. So Erning season underway, we took a lot about it. We'll talk, we'll talk about it next week, kind of a bit of a wrap or something. So, speaking of, probably, that's in Bokeh's earlier. I want to give a couple of Bokehs to a couple of companies. Let's be positive for a second. Now, these happen both. See where this goes. All right. These happen to both the companies I own, which I feel very kind of self-conscious about, but, and I probably, I probably know, just, you know, I didn't actually, there are also two companies we recommended at one of the some multiple services or other ones. I hold ones of advice. I'm not, this is not a recommendation, but I own both. And I was covering them just because I was covering the current members. I was just doing the right ups of the earnings announcements. And there's been plenty of rubbish out there. I don't remember if I bagged day and said a couple of weeks ago or last week. They kind of said, "Oh, look, our profit's up 70 percent." And they said, "Um, yeah, but I actually underlines about 17 percent." And actually that 17 percent is up on the average of the last two quarters period, full stop. And you read down the table in the announcement. It's like, "Year on year, our profit's up 6 percent." So because you didn't mention that any of the wording, you didn't mention any of the tables at the top. You had to read down to the data and actually look at that and go, "Huh, that doesn't seem anywhere near as good as what you guys said." So I bagged day and said, "Last week, I've been doing the podcasted on socials." And I opened up ARBs. ARBs, the car parts, the kind of full-wheel drive accessories manufacturer. Really cool business owners shares, as I say, of owner parages. And they had an awful result in number terms. Not overly unexpected, but not great. The sales were down, profit was down for reasons. We can talk about those or not. That's not really matter. And the underlying numbers down less than the overall number. So the statutory profit was down further. And they said, "The underlying, which when they strip some stuff out, we can always argue about what that is, was down less." So what did they highlight? They highlighted their statutory number. And they just said, "Hey, here's what happened." And they gave it to us straight. And they again speak of things that we kind of, you know, you know, I ran to about this all the time, drove out all the time about what company should do and treat their shelves like reasonable people and all that kind of thing down. Most companies don't. And so I read this and honestly my first thought was, "Huh, I'm actually getting the numbers properly." And I'm getting it at explanation. And there's no garbage. And I said, "Oh, this said, "Hey, sales were this, they were down 1%. Reported profit after tax. This and this, down 18.8 and 17.2% respectively over the previous corresponding period. Before tax and after tax for, including while for adjustments was down by less, it was 16 and 14 rather than 18 and 7. That was the third paragraph. No bullet points, no B headline saying, "ARB says, "Groced margins will improve next year or some other misleading comment that has said, "Here's what happened." No, no, no, no, no drama. The sales revenue on the table down 1%, so I'll revenue at 1.2, profit or tax and 18.8. And yes, they went profit after tax, excluding adjustments. They put that back in. It was just really, really, really honest. It's straightforward. There was no spin. There was no pull-out. There was no dramas. And it was what I haven't done in ages. I just emailed the company, because hey guys, just thanks. Thanks for just being candid and being on start front and not spinning. Because they could have. They could have. But it was just a really, really nice update. I've never been a great company for ever. No surprise for the business, right? Right. And just played with the straight, but it's just it's an exceptional business. It shouldn't be noteworthy that they just did what they did. I know that's the thing. That's exactly why I was known. It was like ANZ over here. This start, this start, look at this, look at this over here, look over here, look over here. Maybe years ago, do you remember the business called Healthy Life when it was traded on the ASX? Healthy. I think it's all this story before. It was a health food chain. By the way, the brand's been reborn now in about worth a different same brand. Kind of they were actually bits of the same business, but not I just want to be very good with people. It's not the same thing now. So different ownership, different. It was just on the ASX. I was going to black wars at the time. So we're kind of paying attention. This must be goodness. 167 and 80 years ago. And they went broke subsequently, right? And no surprise because they tromped it. They headlight on the early news was Healthy Life and how does it grow smarter than increase? It's like, gross margin it. Like that was the best you guys could find. Sales were not. The margins dropped but sales absolutely collapsed. Yeah, the problem was down. And that maybe a bad loss, I think, from memory. It was just one of those, it was like, you've literally scrapped the one of the other. I'll find which one metric guys can we actually talk about profit? No, that's down. Oh, maybe we're making a loss. Sales are down. Uh, costs are a gross margin. Let's go with gross margins. Like just it was just funny. It was one of those things where it was a total margin. I was just product, product sales versus, this is price versus cost. It was just one of those funny. Anyway, massive props for ARB. Again, as you say, I shouldn't have to say it. Should we be like, well, cost they would. Why would you not? This is just reasonable treatment of your shareholders because you work for them and you think it's reasonable. As Buffett would say, to treat them as you would want to be treated if you're in a different position. Yep. Why is that notable? It's notable because it's so bloody rare. So just thought it was a, you know, a really nice update. I said, I own the shares. It shares were down on the day. They're back up again since and I don't know whether they are worth the time you listen to this has been a pretty volatile week. But yeah, just just what I just mentioned was worth calling out. No, it is. It is. I'm glad you did. I mean, their shares have been crushed in the last little while. And I'm not saying that to poke fun in any way, shape or form, but it just to reiterate the, well, I know. I mean, I'm genuine. Honestly, for someone who for the longest time has been desperate to own some shares. It's like, this is not a, I'm sorry to share holders. You mean, you're not a bad thing. Actually, even for shareholders, unless you're looking to sell immediately, it was sort of, I make this point every week. I'm just going to do it again quickly. I had to go at someone who DM me the other day on straw make it like because they said, they said, Oh, Andrew, this is like going back a year. It's like, I really, I've got some cash. I need the market to four. I'm going to back up the truck. I'm ready. And then message me again the other day going, what's going on the market? This is ridiculous. Like, dude, exactly what you said wanted to happen has happened. It's happened. Yep. And but now you're upset. It's like, so I don't know. It's sort of like you've got to be careful what you wish for. I mean, ARB is actually such a great example of this because if you'd been a long-term shareholder in this, I mean, this is just, it's been around on the market for forever. But even at the, you know, gosh, what do we go? Let's go back 20 years for just just for fun. $2.51. It's 10x. And that doesn't include all the dividends they've paid out along the way. Right. Right. But we do it every week. But just if you're new to the pod, this is a lesson that you can, it's like shaving. It's like shaving. You can, you know, that how well you do it. You've got to do it again the next day, right? It changes every Sunday. Nothing changes. You just go back for the same story. And it's it's it's it's quite unquote crashed is, you know, more times than you've had hot dinner along its path to 10x. Right. So it's sort of like this is normal. This is what this is what we should want. And I hope if we're ever trying to outperform the market and get in on good prices. Yeah. So yeah, I just I'll make that point. Also, the other thing is that the just below the surface, as you said off air and we said last week, take out the banks in the miners. Just like yeah, it's it's rough out there, man. And this isn't like all the specky biotechs and whatever's of, you know, all the small caps have taken a crumble. It's ARB. It's it's Promenicus. It's CSL. It's Wystech. Like it's technology one. It's zero. It's sort of like and it's and not not 10%, not 20%, which is it is a really remarkable to me. And honestly, I'm I think that this is something that we should relish. I want for those people out there who are a bit scared at the moment is not to just say don't be scared because that's it's easy to say and if it's very human to be scared. Yes. But and this isn't also to say, oh, I see you're saying that now's a good time to buy. I was like, no, I could go down to 30% from home. I had no clue. But I can objectively say that there are a lot of good businesses that are just objectively cheaper than they were. And you know, I like discounts. So I assume that you do too. And I'm not saying there even there'll be plenty of companies that have fallen a lot and are still too expensive. So there is work to be done. But this is the point where all the best investors I know are sharpening their pencils right now and they're rubbing their hands together. Whereas your classic quite unquiet retail investor is like, oh, this is ridiculous. I knew the share market was, you know, my mates were right. I'm an idiot that doing it. I need to go back to do it. You know, it's just sort of like, and then and then when we're at an all-time record high, excuse in the future, and then he's like, oh, it's not fair. We need to tax. We need to tax. We need to tax. Equally capital gains more. It's always, you know, I don't know. I just I think that and just to sort of connect it loosely to your point is it's like when you when you have a company that is being ridiculously transparent here, not ridiculous isn't the right word. I'm using it as young kids use it insanely transparent. Low keys that you want my daughter like say is low key transparent. Okay. Yeah. Okay. She can't quite explain the definition, but she likes to use it. So it is low key transparent. So I was like, you can do you can do you know little work here and you can you can do it. We won't do it now because it's not the point of the public. It's like, okay, profit was down a bit. Why? Was that that is not good, but is it because the business is in serious trouble or is it because there's a division that has a high degree of cyclicality and it absolutely doesn't change. You know, it's literally talking about a 12 month period and or six month period in this case, you know, like that. Anyway, there are there are far more opportunities right now for the for the sensible long-sided, fast-sided investor and I would I would train use this opportunity to encourage you to to see it for what it is, which is potentially at least almost definitely for for for certain companies a good opportunity. Yeah. It's a line about you know, people being happy when the petrol price goes up because you've got a full tank of petrol. Yeah. You're going to refill it at some point. You're going to be a net buyer over time, right? Being happy. Oh, thank God I bought the peanuts. Double the price. Well, I've got a full tank. Yeah. And last year week now what are you going to do? You know, see, yes, being being happy on price of falling is a good thing. I should say there are some people who have firm, it's not right. If you're not actively accumulating, if you now have retirement, draw down fees, you know, I don't have to, if you're selling regularly, you're not happy with that, that's completely okay and reasonable. So it's not going to be good for everybody, but if you are acquiring, if you're looking for the opportunities, you say if you're waiting for the next crash or the next fall, it'll happen when you're not ready for it and when you don't want it and it feels awful and ugly, that's exactly the time you've got a good your lines in code. This is where we are. Well, even if you are in retirement, if you've got a limited retirement nest egg and you put it all into a highly, highly volatile asset class, which is shares, and I mean, you can be annoyed. I'm not saying you can't be annoyed, but you can't be surprised. I'm just saying it's not an opportunity as long as I'm saying you can't go there. I'm glad shares are lower, I get a chest of butts. If you're not buying, I get what people, that circus said, "Well, hang on, no, I don't want that." I will be like that to at some point, I suspect. Well, I hope not too many people have learned the hard way, but it's just sort of like that is why you actively trade down to assets that you know are going to give you a lower return. Yeah, but for these, the problem cash to me. For the way it's more than anything. Absolutely. I have enough cash if you live in the idea for me, mate, it's actually living on dividends. If I get to that point of like, I don't eat cash, because I'm getting an income stream, that's what you're, because that doesn't matter what it's supposed to cost at all. You don't need to be in cash. You can be in high growth assets over time, and you can write it out, because the dividends will do the job for you, provide you the income stream while you're right there. Or as you say, a portion of it in dividends or a portion of it in cash if you want to be a high growth. And cash, that's an okay solution as well. Sure, sure. Yep. Mate, let's go to one of the biggest, I kind of feel bad about this, but also we should really talk about this, which is the wires tech news. They're laying off a massive number of staff. Now, we're just big. We've got AI of I think every week for the past three or four. So I kind of feel like we're going back to the well. You mean every single person on planet Earth at this point in time? I mean, it kind of can't not, because you have to, right? It's a real thing. So if you haven't caught up with the news, wires tech, they're a software company. They specialize in freight, software, a logistic software. Let me spit that out if you like. And it's a really cool, it's a really cool opportunity, not only for wires tech itself to make a lot of money out of it, but for the industry. A lot of logistics is still done, but we're not on paper. And so, kind of being able to consolidate that, so you can see if you're, you're all to get placed in Australia. There's a, you know, a factory in China makes the product. They send a distribution center in China. That goes to a dock in China. It gets on a boat in China. It doesn't have to do, or go, before that, it goes to the cargo company. Then gets put in a boat and comes off the boat here. Tracking that through the whole chain is really, really important. Now I'm talking about one product, but this is used by companies. Do you get a lot of this stuff? And it's larger used by the freight forwarding companies themselves who often hand off at different points to, you know, Andrews company in China, hands off to my company in Australia when it arrives. It's really complex. It's a really cool area to be innovating in. It makes the world economy more profitable. It's cool to decide to do it and build a whole lot of stuff together, made a heap of acquisitions to try and kind of consolidate all this stuff. And maybe they get there, maybe they don't. It got plenty of competitors as well. So that's what they do, just so everyone knows. Kind of a very, kind of a little pedantic here. It doesn't make the whole world more profitable. It makes the whole world more efficient. Yes. And a lot of those efficient. You said profitable. Oh my God, I meant productive. My positive. I get to smallest in the world. Yeah, thank you. But it's just like what what people often miss with, oh, again, buddy, big corporates, yeah, look at they didn't scooping up all this profit. There's a lot of malfeasance in the corporate space. That's be real here. But I just, in that kind of instance here, what actually happens is that we can now ship around the world so much cheaper and faster, which means it's cheaper and faster. Correct. Which means. And this competition process will come down. If they don't pass on those savings then, you know, but the reason I can jump onto my phone and order something from. Right. You know, Germany and get it three days later is because of this kind of. I have a training update while it happens and what's going to arrive. So yeah, I will product more profitable. Thank you for pulling up on that one. So that's what they do. And it's kind of. It's just cool because it's cool because it's cool. I don't know, cheers. But it's cool. This week, they announced they were going to lay off 2,000 staff over the next two years. Their current staff needs only 7,000. They're laying off the best part of one fluid, about 28, 29% of their staff. Well, they're planning to write the next two years. And it's all down to, yes, you know, AI, artificial intelligence. And this is kind of. Look, come up back, try that with their core center staff. I had to rehire them. Why six announced a plan to do over two years? I mean, man, two years in the AI world. That's like a million lifetimes. What's about dog years? Dog decades, at some level. So I don't know what they will lay this people off. We don't know what will happen when they own the meantime. It's all just a big headline announcement. Maybe it was even done to try and make the shape market excited about it and bid the shares up because the cost base we're going to go down. I'm not going to. I'm going to be very careful not to draw exact outcomes from this or assume it's necessarily going to happen the way they expect. What I think is really notable, mate. I'm sure this is already on with this because not a big revelation. There's no great reveal. That is huge. Three out of every ten workers at Wystech. The people sitting there, they're sitting there, cubic, looking around, 16 to 10 others. Three of us are not going to be here in 24 months time. And it's simply because Wystech have a view, I think it's a particularly controversial view, that programming and particular software development in particular, but not only, is going to be entirely massively disrupted by you surveying AI to do some of the tasks. Now, those would be taking a whole lot of people to do it. Right, right now. Well, we haven't laid them off yet. So there's some role that somewhere. But yeah, I mean, that's. The years are. The years plus the wheel weight. Maybe that's actually the point, right? Because you're right, it is happening now. And Wystech is saying, well, it's happening now. We still do this after now. We don't lay them off today. But we see a clear path through in two years time, having only seven out of ten people still at the company we're here today. Now, that's a big deal for Wystech. It's massive for their employees and of course we feel for them. But cast that forward. And yes, software development is probably the White Hot Center of the target for AI because it is something that can be really easily. But with AI can be done because the program is. It's a language, right? So if you understand the language, it's not hard. Now, prompting that is appropriate, testing it is important. All that sort of stuff matters a lot. But it's just a really, really clear example of a company saying, not, oh, we think it might happen, or he's telling people he laid off today because of AI. They are casting forward and saying, this will be enormously disruptive and we are getting ahead of it. I just think it's. It's really not. You mentioned the productivity bit, or I mentioned profitability, you corrected me. But that efficiency, that's what they're saying. They're saying it will be cheaper and easier to update freight records using AI. And so things will be more productive and more efficient. That's exactly what they're saying. They're also saying if we don't do it someone else, we also need to actually keep pace with the rest of the market. That's where this is going. It's inevitable. It's not even a moral judgment to be made. I mean, think about this now. You know, a very small number of human beings can produce food for a very large number of human beings because we've got air-conditioned tractors and all the great things that we see and the advancements we've seen in farming. Can you imagine sort of saying, oh, these people are losing their jobs to this industrial revolutionary thingy? It's just what a tragedy is. It's like, yeah, yeah. It is for the people individually involved and for a short. Transitions are always sort of hard. So I don't want to be flippant about it. But it's kind of like, again, what do you want? What do we want? We want cheaper, faster, better. I want to be richer. Not because of, you know, hedonistic urges. I just, I want to work less. I want to have more. I want to be more comfortable. And I want everyone as much as possible to share in that. That's how we do this. Can I help you? Can you put it on richer because you dropped on me on profitability? Yes. We want to have a higher set end of living. Thank you. And Richard is part of that. Some degree? Yeah. But I say, we're not trying to say we already want to have more zeros in the banking house. I mean, sure. That's a difference. Right. Why bother? But yeah, you know, I know you met that, but just again, just for the sake of clarity. Yeah, we want everyone to have a better set of living because things get better. That's the story. The industrial revolution to today has had a tricolated drawbacks, right? Pollution is disgraceful. And we had to do laws about sending kids in our salt mines. There are things you kind of go, we'd probably ever reach in that direction. That being said, if you look at the extraordinary growth of our living standards over the last 225 odd years, it is almost entirely, I mean, actually, it is entirely by definition, down to productivity improvements. Things being done better, easier, faster with mechanisation or computerisation or automation and eventually the AI. That is the story of human progress over the last 250 years. There is no, you're right, there's no more. I mean, we could choose how we do it, you know, putting limits on things, exploitation, we should limit, you know, so we should say all AI is necessarily good and should never be fetted or considered the implications of social media is a great example, right? But to your point, it will happen. So our job is to say-- Gene, the gene is out of the bottle. Right, exactly. I'm just sort of saying you can have a view on it, but you can't put the geney back in. Right. And it just, look, I would, I said to you off air, I think this is a company that has grown very rapidly via a lot of acquisitions. And generally, when that happens, you just get a little bit of duplication and bloat, you know, it's just like, we combine, you know, in this case, dozens and dozens and dozens of businesses, there's like, how many front end designers do we need? Right, here, we just don't need that many. So it might, it might be a good little bit of cover to sort of say, well, A, it's making our jobs easier, but B, gosh, we've got a lot of people that we just don't have a job for. Again, it's not an evil thing, it's just like we don't have anything for you to do. So I see it as inevitable. I think that's where, for me, when I see companies doing stuff like that, I think that's where I get a lot more signal than listening to Sam Altman on Twitter. Now, nothing against Sam, but, you know, he's, he's going to talk his own book. They all are, right? I am self-interested in making sure that everyone thinks this is the greatest thing in the world and that we can raise the trillions of dollars that we need to sort of make this happen. So I'm going to give you a vision of AGI by 2028 and it's going to be the most exciting thing in the world. And, you know, me, man, like more than anyone, I get carried away with a sum, such a sucker, such a sucker for, you know, visionary tech sort of, you know, vision, you know, and, and, but when you see a business making real world decisions, that mean, because for them, there's there's viability on the line here. It's like, you can't just speak for vibes, say that we're going all AIs, like, and then you're no one, you can't, you can't deliver the service. That's what you might need, right? That's what we're going to do. That calls in on that. That's actually work. We'll have the people back. Thank you. Yeah. And that, and that, when that happened, it was sort of like, that was a, that was good signal for me as an investor that I go, I need to temper my views. Yeah, right? Yeah. And this is another bit of sample. Go, well, but there's a bit of truth to it, right? And, and this is, this is always technological disruption. It's a sort of like little bit of truth in all of it, a little bit of inflated expectations at the beginning. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All of that kind of stuff, but I think it's real. I won't go into it, but I said to you off, I've been playing with OpenClaw, the agentic stuff, and I just, in this YouTube video, watch it. But it is like, it is, as I said to you, it's, we all had that experience in 2022, 2023 when when, when, uh, chat, GPT first sort of gained prominence. And we all went, oh, wow, this is cool. And then we all went, uh, uh, it's a little bit buggy. You know, it's not great. Flash, fast forward to where we are now. It's like, oh, it's good so much better. I'm not saying it's perfect. There's a lot of dumb stuff still, but it's like, oh my gosh, it's great. And what you got in those early days was a taste of what is possible and where things are going. And I think with this agentic stuff, you're, you're also getting a taste of, okay, it's pretty conky. It does dump things. Don't install this on your own machine, by the way, because it'll, it'll, it'll have access to all your files and some analogous horror stories that that are out there. But it's worth playing around with because you're going to, you, you, you, there, there is nothing like trying to understand a new technology than, than doing it. I promise you I'm not going down this rabbit hole, but you, you mentioned previously that you set up a Bitcoin node and a Bitcoin line. You're, you're 100% right. You can read all the blog posts in the world. Yeah. Oh, okay. Now I get this. Yes. And so for me, I'm trying to force myself to use AI as much as I can. One, because it makes my life easier, but two, as an investor, it's sort of like, can, what can it do? And I've just had a few experiences over the weekend, which is holy crap. You know, I, I have a job as from Iron Man, right? Like, you know, not a very good one at this point, but, but they're there. And, and, and I see stuff like Wise Tech, and it's like, there will always be Hume, well, not always who knows, but they're, I think for the foreseeable future, there's, there's humans in the loop. But when I can spawn an agent that can, spawn sub agents that has persistency of memory and active tooling sets and his network to other people's agents and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and it can actually change and iterate on its own code base. And you know, I think it's just, the world has no idea what is coming. And the thing that fascinates me too is, is that there are a lot of technologies where you need that zero to one moment. It's like, you kind of hit this natural ceiling. Like, we have pushed the technology of the imper, internal combustion engine really far. Like, modern, modern ice engines are so much better than the Model T. But each year they get very timely and incrementally better. Whereas in the early days, it was like, each leap was just, just sort of massive, right? What we're, with AI is that we, we know what we can do to make it better that doesn't rely on a genius to come along and find an entirely new paradigm shift that that changes everything. So, so it might, it might cap out with what we know. And maybe it just caps out full stop because there's certain laws of the universe we don't yet understand or of computing and computer science. But, but even if that's true, the investment and the focus is in train to such a degree that it's like, it's going to get better. It's going to get better. And, and I think what you need to do, just to make this practical, what you need to do is an investor is you need to, this is true, or this is always true. You need to sort of distinguish between hype and reality and realize that the truth is probably somewhere between those and that, even where there is legitimacy, you're going to have a whole bunch of people trying to get a little bit of a halo effect by just like standing adjacent to something that's really cool and trying to have some of its glow wash onto you. The classic mining company that adds.com in 1999 because that'll help their share price pump. That's happening right now, you know, with AI and, and you've got to sort of go just because the company CEO got up there and go presentation about how they're using AI. I don't, don't want your pants to get super excited about that. At the same time, don't just miss it. It's all fluff, which is just, I've just had it gone in a long rant. It's going to go, yeah, it might be something might be not you figure it out. And, and I'm sorry, yeah, that's, but that's where we are at at, at, at the moment. And I am, I just, where I guess I'm going is, I am trying to temper my enthusiasm, but there is something inside me that goes, this is the world is changing. This is a big deal. I think, I think that's it. I think this is where directionally it's important to get it right because tropically, we talk about preparation and prediction right time. Who knows, right? We said many times that I'm still waiting for my flying car from the Jetsons. And yet we have the world in our pockets with a, you know, a largely smashed proof screen that allows me to do everything in everywhere, no matter why. The, the, the, the transition in the speed is unknown, but directionally we see it in front of us getting better. I remember using a chat to you, we came back when it was only on trading data. And the train data was like 18 months old, or nine months old, whatever it was. Like, I was like, I can only answer questions up to the 25th September 2011 or whatever, or 21 whatever it was. And it's like, oh, that's kind of sucks, but it's kind of cool. I mean, imagine if we could do other stuff. And now it is literally like, just, I'm just going to go search the net. Right. And I'm just going to go do that now. My agent was doing, I didn't even ask it. It was like, hey, you know what you want me to do this? Like, yeah, well, I hit all these, but I figured it out. What? Oh, I mean, I hit another, but I feel like, well, you read through the chat log is like, so you did it? Yeah, I did it. But rather than bothering you with all the nuance and detail and I just, I just, I just worked, I just, I just troubleshoot it and I worked around it like, thanks. Yeah. Yeah. By the way, I had to hack the NSA and it's right. That's right. That's all of this to make it happen. That's the topic. That's the last one. I'm a good. Yeah. Yeah. I did, I did say that you said the viral video about the chat, chit chat, or different chat bots being asked about going to the car wash. Yes. Yeah. Sure. I was like, just walk. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But again, well, you know, I so twid about this during the week, man, right? There's a lot of snarky synthesis. Oh, I slot, blah. I don't think it's this before. Sure. I have. Oh, yeah, I slot, blah. That's terrible. And it's like, if you're only focusing on the whole man, not necessarily brilliant, but there's one person that's really sucks. And that's not a focus on you on missing the big picture by such. Again, your point of immaturity is that many people are like, I hope it doesn't work because it might take jobs. I hope it doesn't work because it might change the way we engage with each other. Those things can be real. They're very real concerns, right? But yeah. But don't confuse that with what actually can or may happen. I'm not saying I know what will happen here. By the way, I'm just saying don't let your views on what I wish was true. Speak of polyano as we took to tap before. You know, there is, if I run the world, what would I do? And there is how was the world acting now? And if I spend my life only interacting with the world as I wish it was, I'm going to get left behind by a very, very long way. Oh, God yeah. And that's, so yes, by all means, worry about AI's implications, by all means advocate for better roles and rules and guard roles. Do all those things for sure. And yes, even by knowing the fact that it will change stuff. Just don't seek your head in the sand and say, and therefore I just hope it won't happen. So I'm going to believe it won't happen. Yeah, I mean, that was the that was the latter. It's right? We've been here before. You know, if I don't stop using time machines will be fine. It turns out, using time machines kind of useful and wasn't perfect. No, but we got to a better place. And see it for the opportunity that it is in two ways. Opportunity as an investor. I mean, the biggest companies in the world in 20 years time are I don't know who knows. The world is moving by, but I would be not surprised if it was AI at the core of it. In some, it was some sort of new new sporting that, but also for yourself, for yourself. I mean, I was chatting to a friend the other day about, you know, starting the business about 10 years ago now. And it's just like, I needed I needed a wireframe design. I had to find this person. They were terrible. Yes. We'd have these meetings. They go away for three weeks. They come back. You do it. You know, you'd spend $10,000 if you were lucky, you know, and get something that wasn't quite perfect. I do I can do the same thing. 10 times better in half an hour. That's okay. I mean, it's a trade-off. And afternoon. And afternoon. And it'll, it'll, it'll just be, you know, $15 in tokens. And so what does that mean? It means that you can now, you can now as a creator, realize your vision in a way that was just not possible before. Hey, I want to, and I'm not talking about everyone assumes tech. It's like, I'd love to, I've fantasized about this. This is the weirdest fantasy in the world that I'm going to know. I'll just sit down. Everyone from it. This could be, this could be interesting. There's a piece of shop not far from me that closed down just sitting there vacant. And I just say, there are a lot of good options around here. I'm like, I don't, you know, I reckon I could make a go of that. And just for fun, right? I was just like, hey, AI super intelligence. Here's this property here. What are he like? Yeah, it's for sale. This is what it was listed for. It's been on the market for this long. This is the former owner. By the way, if you need to do this, these are the regulations you have from council. Here are the forms that you can fill out. I can fill those forms out for you if you like. Buh, buh, buh, buh, buh. Okay. And for a piece of recipe, you do need this, oh, current employment laws require that you need to do this, this, and this. But we can put some ads on the, and any, my point is, is that for something in meat space, outside of the digital realm, I can now, I can go from, geez, it'd be called open up a pizza shop to having so much of the grunt, paperwork, you know, foundation or stuff done on a weekend. Now, before I would have had to go see a solicitor and get the conveyance you're involved, have a meeting with this person there and figure it all out. It's just like, if you're someone particular, if you're young, out there and you're listening, even if you're not young. But if you've ever had something, an itch to scratch, you have never, never been more empowered to do it. And so, yeah, it is a tragedy for a lot of people who are, let's focus back on WISEC. A lot of developers are going to lose their jobs. Like, highly technically trained people that are now armed with this that can, you know, and I'm not, I'm not, everyone's going to be able to open up the pizza shop. But it just, my point is that the barriers to entry are so much lower now. And so the, yes, we'll talk about the opportunity on this podcast in terms of what it means for investing. But you personally, this is a game changer. It really is. And yes, it's not perfect. And yes, it will make mistakes. And yes, it's not yet at a stage where I'm just going to get it to do my taxes and just submit it to the ATO without, without eyeballing it and checking it. But like I say, if this rate of progress is sort of lumpy, but if it continues directionally, we'll get there. And even right now at the start of 2026, I mean, it was almost impossible to imagine, for anything a lot of us, you know, even even three years ago, what the state of the art would be at this point in time. So I, it's scary. It's scary. But you can, you can be scared and you can be moaned stuff and the government should do something or you can, or you can see it for what it is, which is a real opportunity. I guess that's that's what I would, I would try and encourage. No, I love it. I think it's exactly right. And that's that's, again, because it's going to happen anyway. And this is, this is, I'm, I'm lucky over your point, which is just don't, you can't hold back the tie. But don't try and hold back the tie. Do you get to get swaps? You know, I like it, but learn to surf the wave, right? Yeah. Let me talk to the metaphor. You've got to find a way through it. It is going to happen in ways. We can't have it imagine right now. And this is the other thing. I mean, you talk about the beginning of, of 2026. I mean, three months, five months, 12 months, 80 months ago. What do we know, think, believe and see about AI? And it's, it's tempting to kind of take it. I mean, the iPhone is obviously only 15 years old. I don't know what camera I was. It's a baby. Right. And it's gone, but it's also gone from, maybe you could never have switched apps on the, was it even an apps when the iPhone came out? There wasn't an app store. Right. Right. Right. And so, and fast one, and so everything, I mean, I had an old one of those, um, XDA, remember the palm pilot things. They're kicking the internet at, at a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny speed. My internet went down yesterday at home, actually, that we had a blackout. And only the, the closest 5G tower just stays up because it's just fine. Obviously, whatever happened, hit the 5G tower or maybe just a lot of people using it, but it was, the speeds were at a crawl. I could send them receive messages and make phone calls, but I couldn't load a web page. I said, I don't know why I did this. Turn on my sign. I went, I mean, it's like it was when I first used the computer. You look at it, it was an idiot. Like, what do you mean, dad? How was that sort of thing possible? It was just a really funny moment. It takes, it puts it in perspective, how quickly, how incredibly quickly things have changed and how much we've come picked up by that period of time. It's, that's the AI world. And again, I will probably be faster than it has come before it. I do worry about the social implications, mate. I do, I do worry about massive dislocation of employment. We've worked through it all in the past. The speed of AI may well, it could be spinning. You're right to be concerned. So the, the chance of a medium term and maybe even prolonged bump up on unemployment is not zero. No, yeah, for sure. Yeah, yeah. The risk of that is is quite, it's about, I mean, in Wistek, right? There's 2000 people, another, there's 2000 jobs to walk into when they get SAC, no. Okay, imagine other companies do it to the same sort of scale. CB A, during the week, actually, this is didn't get as much coverage because the Wistek news was huge. SAC 300 people, they didn't say it was AI related, whether it wasn't up, we can only speculate. But at the same time, and maybe, maybe because of that point, they, Matt Comenci, who came out to be a homebody, 50,000 employees in AI. We expect them to be using AI in a year's time to be productive now. Now he talks a nice game. He said something like, people will, I can't really, higher value jobs, I think you might have said, sort of employing higher wages, but actually saying promising higher wages. Now, I can't have it if AI is going to actually make things more efficient, it's going to replace people. It's just will, right? So there's that. We're going to have to create more jobs somewhere else. He reckons somehow that CB A can do it or it's just saying that can do it without without having to SAC people overall. But that's, I mean, that, this is a, yeah, you're going, everybody in the company is going to use AI and everyone's going to use it for good things and we're going to train everybody to make sure they can maximize the value they're getting from it. Good on CB A. I mean, if it's just a, yeah, a growing washing, then so bit. But if they genuinely say, hey, we are going to embrace this and see where it takes us and be on the front foot, that's a very good thing for their business because if you're not doing that, someone, you know, see online, AI is not taking your job but someone using AI as second-year job. That's the risk. So be there first. You know, not only embrace it conceptually, embrace it for home and work. I've said it to our guys at work, Matt. They're meant how much you're using it for work. Use it at home. Do yourself just use it for whatever, just get from any with it because using it itself, open-joice to the possibility to make you more comfortable with it and that's more likely to put you in good state. Oh, it's a skill, I think it's going to sound funny, but there was a time in the early internet where there was a bit of a skill with how you searched. Like, yeah, the right, I mean, Google's just got insanely good at the moment. In fact, it's now using AI for search. But, you know, it was sort of like two people could try and find the same information and one person could find it much quicker than the other because there was a skill to it. And actually, a year ago, Fred and I was very sort of, you almost say, my special skill is I'm really good at searching for stuff on the internet, which I always thought was hilarious. But there was a nugget of truth to it. And I think there is, I have definitely gotten better at using AI. AI has gotten better, but even using the same models. Like, I'm much better at it. Yeah. Because I know, well, you don't know, I'm getting better at knowing how to interact with it and prompt it. Break it down into small tasks, be super specific, put in, um, vet it for check. Yeah, there's a whole range of, I'm not saying anything others haven't said and figured out. But it's like, if you just came onto the scene today and said, oh, here's a, here's a text prompt, go for it. You're very, and this is where I see the negativity come from. I friends will go, uh, yeah, I went on to it. They went on to the free model because they weren't prepared to pay. So they went to the really low end model and they said, "Code up for me, uh, Sonic the Hedgehog." And then like, there's way, there's one sentence on a very low end model. Oh, it didn't work. And it was like, it's so overhyped. You know, like, dude, you know, if that's what you're expecting, you're always going to be disappointed, right? But as I said, just on the open claw thing, the point I'll make, not talked about that is I can tell everyone listening here, I am not a technical guy. I've never learned how to code. I know a little bit of basic HTML. I'm not a developer. I'm not a computer signers. I'm not a coder. On the weekend, I set up a virtual private server on Linux dialing in remotely via a terminal. I'm using words. I didn't even know what mean. I didn't know what they mean. Like what? A Ubuntu, Ubuntu? What are you talking about here? SSH? What's SSH? I have no clue. You know, these, and then, and yet I stood this thing up, open source software. I found a provider. You know, it's just like, I, I did that. I did the thing. I did a thing. And it's just sort of like, and that to me was the holy poo moment that it's just like, it doesn't mean that I did anything necessarily productive or value-accretive to why the society for it. But it's just like the very active going through that process shows you the power and just to make the point here, this is why you should play around with this stuff is because I'm not an investing podcast, you know, notionally. If you want to, if you want to, don't be that finance bro when there are a million of them out there go, you know, the same dudes that were experts on viruses during the pandemic. You know, the same dudes that, you know, whatever the latest thing is, you can guarantee there's a finance pro out there that's going to get a natural security, geophonic leg experts. You know, I guess what they're all AI experts. And it's just like, how, how can you possibly be it without using it and without playing with it? You can read all the blogs you want and the high level takes and the YouTube view, get your hands dirty, roll your sleeves up, bang your head against the screen and be super frustrated. I was swearing a blue streak on the, ah, it's not working, but, but, but, but that's how you, tell you progress. And it's also how when you do start deploying money in this space and there's money to be made, it's like you can work out the CEO who's just talking BS and saying a bunch of buzzwords versus someone who is actually, you can go, oh, that is actually absolutely within the wheelhouse of an AI and that makes 100% sense and they are doing it in a stage and measured way. And they're probably going to be able to do the same thing that they're doing now with file S costs. You know, you, you, you can make an informed judgment on that. So this is all just a big long rant to sort of say the world is changing adapt or die. Go with it. Go roll with it. Yes. They're not to say they won't be challenges and false starts and backward steps and inevitably they're, well, the final point I should make here is I listen to a you'd be surprised to know, listen to a Michael Seller interview, the day I went for a walk, never heard of him. He's, he's, he's, he's anyway. He's always been a technologist, but he just, he was making this really interesting point that the internet was, was speculative and uncertain in 1993. Yeah. In 2003, you didn't have to be - He is a cognizant. (laughs) - It's not only happening, it's not only real, it's going a long way to run. He wrote a book called the Mobile Wave. It was on the iPhone five, came out, I want to say? - Yeah. - Maybe even before. Anyway, and he's basically like, it's obvious at this point. It's obvious. Now he's obviously making something else that is obvious, and I won't use the B word, but, the lesson from it was, "A, not only can you reach a point where we go from science fiction to, "Oh, yes, this is a thing, but that thing will take a long time to mature, "and it will take a long time to season." And he used my favorite example in this space, which is Buffett's Apple acquisition. Do you know what the PE of Apple was when Buffett bought it? - No, I tell me. - It was like 13. - Wow, yeah. - You go, "Oh, and what was the narrative at that time?" And the narrative was, "Well, they're just a phone company, and everyone else is going to copy them." - That's right. - Right? And he was going like, "Your kids at that time would have said, "Oh, yeah, everyone in the world is going to want one of these, "and every time a better one comes out, they're going to want one of those." And by the way, that's not just the thing itself. It's the platform that enables every, this is insanely good. We are never going back to dumb phones. It is never ever, in the same way that you will never be going down the M4 in Sydney overtaking most vehicles on the road are horse-strong carriages. That is a world that is never ever coming back. And I think we're through that moment now with AI, even if it's Plato. So I'm not talking about advanced superintelligence, AGI kind of stuff. I'm just extrapolating to the Nth degree here. Even if it plateaus in five years' time, and we have no more breakthroughs, you can see that this technology is going to be everywhere and it's going to change. And so what do you do with that? Is that you acknowledge it, you position yourself for it. And the most important part of the lead up that I'm trying to make here is that you be patient with it. Because this is what's going to, how do you stuff this up? Deal, listen up, as an inventor. How do you stuff up the incredible fortune of you being born and alive today when this is happening to humanity? With the last 10,000 years, pretty much not much happened at all. And in the last 100 years, everything happened. You were born and you were alive in this point in time, right? And it's real, man, and it's happening. And it's like, great. But what happens with investors? They go, this is brilliant. It's going to change the world. Boom, they pile on, share prices go up. Two years later, the progress has been more incremental than you imagined. And then everyone loses faith. And the whole thing plummetes down and goes, this is a waste of time. And then in 20 years' time, you're trying to explain to your grandkids why granddad or grandma had the biggest opportunity of their life. And they actually saw it early and then they dropped the ball because they were just too impatient to allow this to mature in any sensible way. So I'm trying to motivate people here as well as to balance it. Balance up the enthusiasm, absolutely. But understand that it's real and understand that it's going to take a long time to season in human time, like three years before ever. You recognize that when you have kids, this useless little pupae kind of thing there that doesn't do anything. And then you blink and they're asking to borrow the car keys. It just things happen real. And it feels like forever. And that's the, I think that's when you think on those timeframes, the op, I don't know, man. I'm getting choked up on my own. I'm excited. It's so, it's the, and your time frame is the right thing to highlight. Because in hindsight, you look back at the 16 year old kid and go, my god, how do they get 16 so quickly? Yeah. When they're just born, you think, I can't imagine they've ever been 16. We're in the thing. Right. I'm getting up carrying times a night. This is never going to end. This is horrible. We just can't, we can't forecast forward. We are, we are the, I think the only animal who can think about the future apparently is what they say, at least in any meaningful sense. I mean, screw up with nuts or effort winter. But you can, you know, it turns like considering the future. And yet we are so, so incredibly, incredibly unavolved in the way we actually just contemplate and contextualize the future in time and space. Yes. You can think about being retired. You can't really think about being retired. It's why super works, right? Because if I just go, I think God, that's going to be like, I'm 48, I'm 24, I'm 32. Why don't I have to say for a time? I mean, that's a million years away. I'm never going to, and you get to go, oh, she's out was good. And that would happen. Right? So yes, keep getting that in mind, as Ram said, look back on the massive growth of internet, the iPhone, AI itself to this point. No one knows what the future looks like, but, but we prepared for it to happen more quickly. I think even though that might be numbers of years and feel like forever as you go through it. Yep, absolutely. All right. That'll do as my, I reckon, shall I go through the fix and ask if you come back on Sunday? Actually, what you should do, let me do it. Okay. I will come back on Sunday. Thank you. Because I'm just going to go make a coffee and then I'm going to instantly come back and then travel through, travel through a wormhole to appear on Sunday. Right. Come on, yes. But we did a bunch of prerecords over the Christmas break. Yes. So, that's the opportunity to get through some backlog of some questions and we've still got some there. But let's put the call out for some more questions. You're awesome. Thank you. You know, I'll feed back or anything like that if there's, you know, even if it's like, can you guys just stop talking about your pet topics like an address, something else? What does we mean? We'll take it. We'll take it. We'll send it through because it gives us a lot of, it gives us a lot of, um, fuel to, to riff on and, and we want to, we want to talk about stuff that you're interested in. So email, uh, a full, what's her, what's the address? Info. At fool.com.au. That's the last gosh I should know. You're gonna set it like every week in the last five years. Is that, hello? Okay. So you're just, I'm going quickly. Well, right, we were young when we started this podcast, mate. Right. There you go. See, it feels like a long time, it's an hour and a half of our podcast, but in hindsight, it's got really fast. It's a good, super quick. Super quick. All right. Talk to you Sunday. For a while. Cheers. The Motley Fool and people appearing in this program may have positions in the companies mentioned. General advice only. Please speak to your financial professional to understand how it may pertain to your situation. Subscribe to the free newsletter at fool.com.au/listner. The Motley Fool operates under financial services license 4.00691.