James Thomson

Yeah, I think we had an extension on that question from Nick, who's a millennial listener.

They're the 30 to 45-year-olds who made the similar point.

His generation was locked out of property, so they turned to ETFs and startups.

And now ETFs and startups are going to cop a higher tax rate.

I think it's a reasonable point, Anthony.

I think there's relatively broad agreement that changing the dynamics of the housing market is a good thing.

The question is, do we also need to change the dynamics of other asset classes?

Do we need to make it harder for small businesses to attract capital?

Do we need to change the dynamics in the share market where you want to invest less in growth companies and more in mature dividend producing companies?

I think those are reasonable questions to be asking.

And I think the government is going to face some reasonably heated debate on those over the next little while as they try and push these changes through parliament.

Is the debate going to be nuanced enough to pick up on that idea that we need a different treatment for asset classes, though, Anthony?

That's the question I still have.

Yeah, well, and I think some of these questions, and as this was said, they were picking up on some common threads, feel like the government's listened on housing, but then sort of whacked these generations on the way down.

Andrew in Queensland says, do you think the budget will increase residential rents in two ways, the withdrawal of investors and supply and an increase in rent by remaining investors?

For years, Australian investors wore losses because they were able to negatively gear against salary and wage income.

As that rolls off over time, will rents rise to cover expenses and be high enough to at least break even?

Yeah, I think that's right.

I think you raised some good points.

And as you say, Anthony, the budget does...