Can “explosive immigration” jump-start the economy?

Adam: [00:00:25] Hello and welcome to comedian versus economist. We demystify the world of money and help you get a handle on the bigger picture. My name is Adam, and we're joined, as always, by my little older brother and real life economist Thomas, Thomas. 

Thomas: [00:00:37] Yeah, good, Adam. How are you 

Adam: [00:00:40] doing? Well, thank you. Voice is a little bit scratchy after the first week of yelling at Nippers at surf lifesaving over the weekend, so we're back on the beach. But as a result, my voice is not what it usually is, so we'll see how we go. Big Show coming up. Thank you for joining us again or welcome if you're tuning in for the first time. And Thomas, we've got some nice reviews coming in. We do love it. If you leave us a review review, who goes by the name of news and economy, dummy? Not sure if that's his real name or her real name says love. This podcast often referenced when trying to hold my own in conversation with my smart friends, so that's good, and that's certainly one strategy. As a general rule, I try to avoid making any friends who are smarter than me. But let's just say my friendship group isn't solving world peace any time soon. Also, big shout out to Maggie Maggie. Send us a message on Facebook at CV podcast. She said that sometimes she laughs so much that it gives her an asthma attack. She says the show might be hazardous to our health, so we're kind of sorry, Maggie. But at the same time, we're thrilled that you're enjoying the show, so thank you for tuning in. Sorry, not sorry. 

Speaker 1: [00:01:49] Sorry, not sorry. 

Adam: [00:01:51] We really don't wish anyone harm, but that is a great that is. It is a great post. So yeah, thank you guys. Look, massive show coming up. As I said and starting with you being a ripper mate, there is a cracker of an airline been announced for Australia, so get around that. Find out why I'm talking like a drone guy bit later on in the show. A lot of people have been talking about ghost cities and no, Thomas. We're not talking about Adelaide. For once, we're not the end of a joke. Some experts are worried one of the world's biggest banks reckons bitcoin is a systemic risk to the global financial system as a result. Bitcoin gained five percent and Thomas, I'm going to ask you the question right now. In fact, do we need immigration to kick start the Australian economy? 

Thomas: [00:02:42] Yeah. Well, this is yeah, this is what the New South Wales government's top mandarins of the heads of the public service in New South Wales. Apparently, they put together a briefing pack for the incoming premier, which we Covid a couple of episodes ago. Yeah, and they said that they called for explosive growth. That was the term, actually. They wanted to see two million immigrants over five years and so 400000 a year. This is Australia, by the way. Not not for enough. New South Wales doesn't get to determine immigration policy in in Australia. 

Adam: [00:03:15] I don't know that Dom Perrottet Hayes is making way. 

Speaker 1: [00:03:19] He's taking charge on the shots. Not heavy. Well, yeah. 

Thomas: [00:03:22] He announced that people didn't have to quarantine when they came home. And yeah, New South Wales borders were open and as like, Yeah, no, they're not. 

Speaker 1: [00:03:31] You don't even get to decide. 

Adam: [00:03:33] I like his thought on my blog just is just the start up policy, and he's like, Well, you tell me if I'm not allowed 

Speaker 1: [00:03:39] to do it? Yeah. So, yeah, so 

Thomas: [00:03:43] the briefing pack that he got from me, from his head to head, the department said that there's an opportunity to push a national dialogue on an aggressive resumption of immigration levels as a key means of economic recovery and post-pandemic growth. So that's what they're calling for. So yeah, so they're looking for two two million over five years would be explosive, but that's a that's a pretty aggressive. 

Adam: [00:04:05] So what's the what's the normal rate to give people a bit of an idea 

Thomas: [00:04:08] about 200 to 250000 over the last 10 years we've had, yeah, about two hundred and fifty to two hundred fifty thousand sort of before the sort of the ten to twenty years before that, it was around 80 to 100 thousand a year. Right. So kind of in the Howard years that sort of ramped up, we had a much bigger immigration intake than previously. And then it sort of held at a at a at that higher level. Where was that? 

Adam: [00:04:34] Where was that? When Pauline Hanson came on the scene, it was probably because she was really against that. She was really against it. If I was sitting around 100k, she must be fuming right now.

Thomas: [00:04:46] Yeah, she was. She was. She wasn't a big fan of of parities comments. We can say that. Yeah, I mean, there's sort of her thing. It has sort of shifted when she came. I think it was late 90s when she got maybe early 2000s and there was a whole swamp by Asian speech in parliament. And yeah, so they sort of she was about the particular places that immigration was coming from, more so than the numbers of immigration. I think she was, you know, wanting it to be a bit whiter than perhaps than she thought it was. Yeah. So that sort of dimension to it. But here here, we're just talking about sheer numbers, and I don't think it. Really, we're not really talking about where people are coming from. 

Adam: [00:05:27] So was why is the New South Wales government in particular pushing for it? Like, I mean, what? What's their agenda? 

Thomas: [00:05:33] They have one. It's odd that it's coming from the state. State governments and from the from the public service departments like, I don't get that. I don't get where that's coming from. Because you remember, like immigration levels is set by at a federal level. So federal, the federal government controls how many the immigration intake and that's set by Treasury, funnily enough. So it seems to be largely used as an economic lever. So they when I want to ramp up the growth numbers, they bring in more people. But the state governments have to deal with the consequences of that because the state governments are the ones providing hospitals and schools and roads and all that sort of things of the things that people actually use when they live. And so it's not so much in their interests, not normally like this. It's historically there's been a bit of a tension between the federal government and the state governments around this. You know, my neighbour, Bob Carr back in the 2000s had announced that Sydney was full and that that caused a big stir at the time. But he was kind of saying, Look, we've reached reached our limits of growth here. We can't keep expanding and adding more people while maintaining the same standards of living. So we just we don't we're not keeping up with with population growth as it is, and we need that. We need to sort of slow it down. Mm-Hmm. Do you think about it like two million over five years? That's a that's a city the size of Perth. So if we're going to add that to the population, we need as much infrastructure as Perth has. We need as many hospitals, as many schools, road networks, all of that. So we need to

Adam: [00:07:03] force that in 

Thomas: [00:07:04] 40 of year or two. Yes, but so like so an explosive growth in immigration like that needs to go hand in hand with an infrastructure. Mm-Hmm. You know, explosive growth in infrastructure to keep pace. Otherwise, we're going to see living standards decline. But by definition, but there's not clear that that those things are necessarily married up. And because and historically, they're not because you've got federal governments controlling controlling immigration rates. Mm-Hmm. State governments controlling infrastructure. And it's one of just a happy coincidence if those two things marry up and often they don't seem to. 

Adam: [00:07:39] Yeah, right? So they can't. I mean, like they kind of rely on like the co-dependent right. So the federal government wants more immigration. They really need the state governments to build the infrastructure. And the state governors probably want to do the infrastructure, but they can't really commit to building a lot more unless they know that we're getting, you know, a bigger influx. Hmm. 

Thomas: [00:07:59] Yeah. Yeah, they go. They go sort of hand in hand. I mean, the other thing is interesting. So there was a newscom did a poll of this in the saying that 80 per cent of people wanted lower levels of immigration than pre-pandemic levels? So only 12 per cent of people supported the explosive growth. Eight percent, just eight per cent wanted the pre-pandemic levels somewhere around 200000, and everyone else, which is 80 percent wanted it wanted it to go back to 80000 or very little or no immigration. Yeah, right. And then there's there's been a string of studies that have shown a similar result now that the public by and large doesn't want supercharged immigration. They're sort of like immigration as a concept is popular. Mm-Hmm. People like immigration. They like what it's doing for the country. And, you know, I'm a big fan. This has been awesome. But like, there's there's a there's a limit to it and explosive growth, I think does alarm that idea alarmed people, particularly if they're dealing with congested roads and crowded schools, crowded hospitals middle of a pandemic. We're already talking about the hospital system. You know, being stretched didn't seem like there was a lot of given the system already. And so people are a bit like one. And I like the way, yeah, I'm I'm I'm pro-immigration, but like, I don't want to like one, I want to get crazy. And there's been a number of studies that seem to have support like that that results come through. 

Adam: [00:09:20] So I'm curious to I, what does it do to like unemployment and wages, like if we get an influx of two million people? There's more, there's more workers in the market.

Thomas: [00:09:29] Yeah, yeah, typically. I mean, like we kind of see we got a little case study in this now where net immigration has gone from 200 to 300000 down to zero in, you know, in a very short time. And then with the unemployment rate's tanked and we're talking about wage pressures, but they're sort of they're sort of short term and long long term effects in the short run. It must be true that if you bring in workers at a particular skill level that wages around that skill level will be suppressed because it's just supply and demand. And kind of that's kind of how we run. The Skilled Visa Migration Programme is that companies go to the government and say, Look, there's not enough accountants. I'm having to pay accountants too much money. I can't afford it. I need you to bring in some more accountants who've got a skills shortage of accountants. And the government goes, Okay, right? We're adding accountants to the skilled migration list, the skill visa list, and then we bring in more accountants that increase in supply pushes down. Wages, and that's kind of the point. Hmm. So that's sort of in the short run in the long run. The studies are a bit equivocal. It like it. It seems to suggest that it's in some segments. It does suppress wages, but there's sort of an overall improvement in productivity and actually the aggregate skill level and that that sort of balances out in the longer runs in the longer run. It's not as clear cut, but in the short run, you would think it does have an impact on on wages and an unemployment rate. And then that sort of sorts itself out a little in the long run. 

Adam: [00:10:57] As kind of self-fulfilling, though, isn't that too like if you allow more immigration and then you go, Well, we're going to need more infrastructure? Ah, yeah, there's

Speaker 1: [00:11:05] going to be able to say what we need for employers and workers in build

Adam: [00:11:13] this infrastructure to support the people that we're flying in 

Speaker 1: [00:11:16] like. 

Adam: [00:11:16] Yeah, it's kind of, you know. All right. Very good. Look, Thomas, I'd love to talk more about serious matters like immigration, but there's some big news during the week, and that is that there is going to be a new low cost airline on the way called bonds.

Speaker 1: [00:11:33] The bonds of the Australian airline. Of course it. Let's go. What else would you call it? Yeah. You know, apparently 

Thomas: [00:11:42] there's announced the new airline is going to be starting up in 2022, called Bonds Airlines. 

Speaker 1: [00:11:50] It's even everybody would use that. What do you love about it? Is it's backed by 

Thomas: [00:11:59] the US investment firm 777 Partners or Triple Seven Partners, 777 Partners, which sounds like they've just ripped it straight off a gaming lounge at the hour. So with the Triple seven,

Speaker 1: [00:12:11] triple seven sevens. 

Adam: [00:12:13] Is there a Boeing Triple seven? 

Thomas: [00:12:14] Uh, I don't know. It'll make more sense. They've got a launching with a new fleet of new Boeing 737 eight. 

Adam: [00:12:22] Yeah, man, I wonder what the Bonzo Club Lounge is going to be like. 

Speaker 1: [00:12:30] Excuse everywhere. Food and drinks, both Covid Candace salad in there, cooking your budding barbecue. Get it right. I going a Bunnings outlet store at the airport. Oh yeah, that'd be the best 

Adam: [00:12:49] one step ahead of the game we were to go to Bunnings at the airport. How about that? But are you hearing? Yeah. Well, it's right next to IKEA. We imagine the 

Thomas: [00:12:55] coming down the aisle. Would you like onions with your sausage 

Speaker 1: [00:13:00] over whereas a safety hazard? Like, OK, health and safety 

Adam: [00:13:03] is that there's no way they're saving onions. Are you? 

Speaker 1: [00:13:06] Snag them bread or apply. What are you doing to get us all killed? 

Adam: [00:13:15] Man, where they where are they flying? 

Thomas: [00:13:17] When they go in, they're going to do. 

Thomas: [00:13:19] So the founder and CEO of Bon the Tim Jordan 

Thomas: [00:13:23] correct 

Thomas: [00:13:24] say Australia is ripe for what we're planning for. He said We are about the leisure traveller. 

Thomas: [00:13:30] Of course they are. It's like a it's like a brand of Kmart. Menswear is the leisure traveller. You Wells and Katie 26AS in a pair of leisure travellers. 

Adam: [00:13:51] You can tell us no for the discerning fly, like you say. 

Thomas: [00:13:57] So the leisure travel, apparently this is the distinction. I didn't realise that this leisure traveller and then there's business travellers into the not. Then you might guess they're not and they're not targeting the business market. 

Speaker 1: [00:14:07] They're all, no. Yeah. And they're also they're 

Thomas: [00:14:09] also going through for the regional route. So they avoid avoiding, which is something that I've learnt is called the Golden Triangle, which is 

Speaker 1: [00:14:18] raising tourists as like an interview for the trip to Ballarat. 

Adam: [00:14:24] Ladies and gentlemen, first off, as a mother is making 

Speaker 1: [00:14:27] your partner on Bonzo, today will be a big day, be their resort specialist. I Deep Dive will be navigating the Golden Triangle. Oh yeah, it keeps on giving, isn't it? Yeah, it's a golden triangle with Sydney, 

Thomas: [00:14:44] Brisbane and Melbourne. And that's that's one of the densest routes, apparently. So Qantas had 46 flights a day from Sydney to Melbourne prior to the prior to the pandemic. Wow. Yeah, so very. It's a very crowded market. I love it. This new Neil Hansford is the chairman of Strategic Aviation Solutions. With the interview, the ABC ABC said It's an absolute gamble. You can't. You can't.

Thomas: [00:15:07] The crew is having a fun bottles. Bonds are airlines. It was Sportsbet if you were to fly. Yeah. Well, it's funny, actually, because he 

Thomas: [00:15:17] said, if you asked me for some odds of whether it would get off the ground, meaning if five or six aircraft fleet, I would give you odds of no greater than five per cent against 20 to one. 

Adam: [00:15:28] It's good. Well, I heard that. So they're planning on flying to these regional areas, right? But they're flying 737s, which are apparently too big for most regional airports. 

Thomas: [00:15:42] And it's not the white, 

Adam: [00:15:44] but it's the width of the runways is not big enough as it needs to be 30 metres wide and most of like 20 metres wide. But others reckon like it couldn't get any more than that. 

Thomas: [00:15:54] Call it like going. You get really led the 747 of that skinny little runway. That's right. Well, the Hercules of surfboard. All right. Why don't we?

Adam: [00:16:10] Why don't we leave that frivolity behind us? Good luck to Bonzo and all people associated with it. Share. That's if you're if you're flying bonds or in the next couple of years. Good luck to you. We'll take a short break now. Get away from our sponsors and be back with more comedian vs. economist right after this. Welcome back here on comedian versus economist, don't forget, you can find us on Facebook and Instagram at CBC Podcasts. We'd love it if you followed our pages there or send us a message like their posts, all of the above. Thomas, we actually had a listener question come in and you can send us an email CV Equity Mates dot com or on the website Equity Mates dot com forward slash CV. Rhiannon asked us summarise, but you heard a lot about ghost cities in China, and we're just interested to know more about what they are and how they happened. And I thought you'd be the man to ask. Mm hmm.

Thomas: [00:17:03] Yeah. So if you build a city on top of an ancient indigenous burial ground, 

Thomas: [00:17:11] it's right 

Thomas: [00:17:12] to evergreen. And this is in the news at the moment because every grand and the biggest developer property developer in China is going bust, and it seems to be dragging down a whole bunch of big construction companies with it. Fantasia's in real trouble. And then that sort of, you know, bleeding through the financial system, potentially going global. So it's a sort of a hotspot that people are worried about at the moment. And the sort of the unique thing about China is there's there's a huge amount of empty homes. So at the last count, there was 65 million empty units. 

Adam: [00:17:51] 65 million. 

Thomas: [00:17:52] Yeah, yeah, 65 million. So they could yeah, you could you could house the entire population of France in China right now without without displacing anyone. Wow. Hmm. And you're right. Yeah. So huge. Huge amount of empty stock. And yeah, so CBS broke this story that 60 Minutes in the American version of 60 Minutes ran a story back in 2013, documenting China's ghost towns, where they went around to a bunch of these new developments where there was just High-Rise Tower after High-Rise Tower. Pretty much completely empty.

Adam: [00:18:26] So 2013. So that's eight years ago. They already had like ghost cities and ghost towns. 

Thomas: [00:18:32] Yeah, yeah, ghost villages. 

Thomas: [00:18:35] But how the whole array of ghost infrastructure. 

Adam: [00:18:43] And so that was eight years ago, and they've kept building. Yeah. And who did? The writing wasn't on the wall. 

Thomas: [00:18:50] Well, I think it 

Thomas: [00:18:51] was a problem. They sort of just it just sort of do dealt with it. And it was sort of it was well known. So there was like the famous case was a place called Ordos. Newtown, also known as Kyung Bashi, is in Inner Mongolia. It was designed to whole sort of city designed to house a million people. But midway through, they scaled it back to 300000 and then bit of 2016 there was only 100000 people living in it. 

Adam: [00:19:17] Now, you know, Inner Mongolia is like in the winter. Yeah. 

Thomas: [00:19:22] I think the thing about China is that so much of it is controlled at the government level. Mm hmm. Right. And population movements include included. So they with Kyung Bashi, what they did is they sent some of the top schools to to that area and then people followed. Families followed because they wanted to send their kids to those schools. And that's and then they they managed to do that. And so that's sort of something that the central planning that's possible in China makes a problem. Let that kind of manageable because the government just goes well. We'll just find a way to make people move there and they make it happen. And they were also for a long time. They're very pro construction. They really they really wanted to push the construction sector, mostly because it's it's a big, it's a big, it's a powerhouse of the economy. So it's it's so easy to stay here every year trying to build fifteen million new homes. That's five times as many as the US and Europe combined. Wow. And that accounts for something like a fifth of the Chinese economy. 

Adam: [00:20:22] But what are they if I don't get it? What are they counting on happening like the population isn't growing at that fast?

Thomas: [00:20:29] Is it like in urbanisation? The key thing here? 

Adam: [00:20:32] So they were moving from the country? 

Thomas: [00:20:33] Yeah. So at the turn of the century, thirty six percent to just over a third of people lived in the city. Hmm. As of last year is up to 61 percent. So that's of urbanised 30 percent of their population in 20 years. And and so that's sort of the trend that they're sort of doing. So the the the local government and the local governments there, they really pre-construction their leasing the land. You don't sell land in China, you, Lisa, they're leasing it to developers, the developers are building. And then the other thing is, it's it's mum and dad. Investors are sort of often paying for it, and they're sort of happy for it to be sort of empty for a while because it's sort of a store of wealth and not so much buying it as a as a as an in how we think of an investment and we getting a rental return. They're sort of they're sort of buying into the store of wealth. 

Adam: [00:21:23] Yeah, right. That's well. Well, who owns them at the moment?

Thomas: [00:21:28] Well, I think a. The mum and dad investors, the mum and 

Adam: [00:21:30] dad investors are in them, 

Thomas: [00:21:31] yeah, yeah, but my mum and dad, we're talking about a sort of a thin, a quite a wealthy segment of Chinese society. Isn't this nice? Not everyone that sort of, you know, the top 10, 20 per cent. So they're 

Adam: [00:21:43] not for sale, then most of these ghost cities or ghost 

Thomas: [00:21:46] apartment because I don't think so. 

Adam: [00:21:48] No, they're built by a developer. They've already been sold to private owners. Mm hmm. And that is choosing not to live in them en masse. 

Thomas: [00:21:58] Yeh, well, there isn't anyone who wants to live on them. Yeah, live in them yet. Yeah, but but I think that's going to happen.

Adam: [00:22:07] It seems very speculative play. We're going to buy a house. I'm going to buy it somewhere where nobody wants to live now and I can't see anyone going. I want to live there soon. And even if people do want to live there, there's going to be just a swathe of other properties available to live in. 

Thomas: [00:22:25] But I think I think this this is this is life in a centrally planned economy because you're buying it because the government saying at some point in the near future there are going to be 20 million people living here. And we know that's true because we say it's true and we and we're going to make it happen one way or the other. And so you've you can't. The government's got you back there. The other thing that happens is you don't you can't get a run of on on property prices. So like in a property price crash, which is which are very rare, then almost never happen. But you think about Ireland in the in post GFC. What happens is there's a lot of surplus stock, people are holding it and then prices start to slide. They've bought it speculatively. Maybe interest rates are starting to rise and then people who are holding it who can't afford to hold it go, Oh, I've got to get out, I'm going to start going to sell, we're going to liquidate. I can't. I don't want to be caught holding the baby. Once everyone thinks that, then you get a run on prices and prices can crash. That can't happen in China because the government can stop people selling property. So the government can just stop transactions. Really? Yeah. If the if the if that government thinks the price is too low, they won't give you a certificate of sale genius. Yeah, yeah. And so so what happens in China is that prices don't fall, but the transactions dry up completely. Right? Yeah, OK. You end up, you end up stopping property prices crashing. It's like it's like it's like a market freeze in the share market with a, you know, in the ASX or whatever the prices sharemarket falls. Such a certain percent, the ASX just freezes. And guys, okay, we're just going to take a breather. Everyone get their heads back together. Let's not get carried away and then we'll reopen. The market is kind of like that. And so that's how but with property, which is sort of which is massive. So it's it's a very different beast. 

Adam: [00:24:17] So if go cities all go bad, then I don't know. How are you going to call it right? Maybe right along, Thomas add bitcoin is a systemic risk, apparently, according to a major bank who's saying this now? 

Thomas: [00:24:37] Yeah, no, it's not. A major bank is the Bank of England. 

Adam: [00:24:40] It seems pretty major to me.

Thomas: [00:24:41] Yeah, it's 

Thomas: [00:24:42] the major bank. 

Thomas: [00:24:44] They go, Yeah, there's the Bank of England. It's it's the 

Thomas: [00:24:50] Reserve Bank of Australia of England, 

Thomas: [00:24:54] but they are dead. So so the deputy 

Thomas: [00:25:00] governor, Sir John Cunliffe, you know my family's name ever. Yeah, he sort of came out and he's he's he's warning that bitcoin could trigger a financial meltdown unless government to get tough with regulations. Yes, I think it's just silly. It's going too fast and where he's worried about leverage in particular and saying that there's growing leverage in the system, and that's that's potentially a problem. So it's saying that cryptocurrencies have grown to $2.3 trillion now in total and saying that still relatively small, the global financial systems 250 trillion dollars. So it's still, you know, it's still it's not nothing, but it's still relatively small compared to the whole financial system, he says. But as the financial crisis showed us, you don't have to to account for a large proportion of the financial sector to trigger financial stability problems. Subprime was valued at about 1.2 trillion in 2008. Mm-Hmm. So the subprime, I'm sure, you know, but I'll just refresh it for our listeners. 

Thomas: [00:25:57] Yes, for the listeners. Yeah.

Thomas: [00:25:59] So the subprime gave us, said GFC. So in in the run up to the GFC, there was super loose housing credit available. You had this thing called Ninja Loans, which was an acronym. No income, no job and no assets. Yeah. And you could you could. Nirvana? Yeah, loose acronym. But you could you could get a mortgage in 2007 with no income, no job and no assets. Right. And. And that's the sub, that's the prime, yeah, and there was a

Adam: [00:26:32] Optimus Prime some. 

Thomas: [00:26:37] Yes. So and that is when those loans went bad. There was sort of they were never there were never they were never going to go good when when everyone woke up and realised how bad they were. That gave us the global financial crisis and collapsing banks and all that sort of business. Yeah. And that was a global phenomenon that they kind of trashed the whole. Every nation on Earth felt the impact of the GFC. But that was with the, you know, subprime was just 1.2 trillion. Crypto is now 2.3 trillion. And he's saying it's 

Adam: [00:27:10] kind of so they're talking now. There's lots of people borrowed money to buy crypto. 

Thomas: [00:27:15] Yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's right. And I don't think he's talking about the mum and dad punters here. Well, you know, he's saying like are seeing the emergence of leveraged players. So I think it's like we're talking hedge funds now and and players like, that's a bigger money coming in and leveraging up and getting into crypto. And he's saying, that's that's what he's worried about, right? 

Adam: [00:27:37] Because I kind of say I posted a link to the article on Reddit and nobody seemed worried at all. It was all 

Thomas: [00:27:44] my favourite

Adam: [00:27:49] is looking forward to a 

Thomas: [00:27:50] dip. Yeah. 

Adam: [00:27:53] VTF day. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Thomas: [00:27:56] So yeah, yeah. I mean, 

Thomas: [00:27:57] money quote for me saying financial stability risk currently are relatively limited, but they could grow very rapidly if, as I expect, this area continues to develop and expand at pace. So you it their first bitcoin to the Moon, says the bank, 

Thomas: [00:28:11] which says the Bank of England's game is lighting up, is lighting up. But it's going to develop 

Thomas: [00:28:21] and expand that space. It's going to bring down the financial system just as everyone's in the 

Adam: [00:28:26] bitcoin community, these predicted. Brilliant. Yeah, because I was going to say that's what people want. People who are into bitcoin are like, Duh, that's what this is exactly why we bought in to disrupt and displace the global financial system. Mm hmm. So this day, it's just like, Hell, yeah, he's he's is his handle. Big Dog. Forty seven on 

Thomas: [00:28:48] Reddit. Yeah, back to England. Yeah, this 

Thomas: [00:28:53] is just a transcript I got from a Tik-tok VIDEO And

Thomas: [00:28:58] uh, really? All right. 

Adam: [00:29:00] I reckon we might live there. That does us for another week. Thank you so much there for tuning into our show. We really appreciate it. Don't forget, you would really love it if you went and left us a review. Or, as I say, you can send us an email and CVE @Equity Mates.com or on the website Equity Mates dot com forward slash CV. Find us on socials at Covid podcast and don't forget. Bunch of other fantastic podcasts out there from Equity Mates Media Get Started Investing feed Equity Mates Investing Podcast. You're in good company and talk money to me, Thomas. Thank you for talking money to me. Thank you. We will see you again next week. Bye for now.