“There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
“…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
“Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
“…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
“Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
“…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
“Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
“Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
“…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
“…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
“…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
AI Summary.France's official retirement age for full benefits was 62 in 2023, versus 67 in Denmark and the US, and its average actual retirement age was the lowest in Western Europe while life expectancy at 65 reaches about 87, two years longer than in the US.
Paul KrugmanKrugman Wonks Out
Date Posted:
The sharp rise in the price of credit default swaps on French government debt implies a 1.2% of default over the next 5 years, which Krugman thinks “is too low” and cautions “France may have crossed the line from too big to fail to too big to save.”
Does France retire earlier than other wealthy countries despite longer lifespans?
Core argument: France’s official retirement age for full benefits was 62 in 2023, compared with 67 in both Denmark and the United States, and its average actual retirement age was the lowest in Western Europe.
France does stand out, even among fiscally troubled nations, in one main way: its persistent inability to get realistic about retirement. The official French retirement age — the age at which workers can collect full benefits — was only 62 in 2023. By comparison, the retirement age in Denmark was 67 (which is also the age in the U.S.). The average actual age of retirement, which is always lower than the statutory age because some people choose to accept reduced benefits, was lower in France than anywhere else in Western Europe. You don’t have to be a conservative to see France’s early retirement as unsustainable, especially given that French life expectancy at age 65 is about 87 years of age, 2 years longer than in the US. France’s reliance on the euro means that it’s all too easy to see how this loss of confidence could turn into an ugly crisis.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
France’s official retirement age for full benefits was 62 in 2023, compared with 67 in both Denmark and the United States, and its average actual retirement age was the lowest in Western Europe.
French life expectancy at age 65 is about 87, two years longer than in the United States, a gap that strengthens the case that France’s early retirement is unsustainable.
France’s reliance on the euro makes it easy to see how a loss of confidence could turn into an ugly crisis.
Related Articles:
France’s Marine Le Pen Pledges To Rein In Public Spending— France's National Rally party, historically a champion of big-state spending, has pledged to clean up the country's degraded public finances alongside tax cuts it describes as a fully financed "competitiveness shock." The party also proposed lowering the retirement age from 62 to 60 for those who start working young, estimating €15bn–€20bn in pension savings from correcting "unjust or inefficient" measures.
France is the Biggest Loser in the Global Rates Reset— French government borrowing costs now exceed the country's nominal income growth by about 2 percentage points, the most unfavorable gap between borrowing costs and growth in the rich world. By contrast, Spanish and Greek bond yields remain about 2 percentage points below their income growth rates.
Le Boomer Spread— The gap between French and German 10-year government bond yields exceeded 140 basis points, up from 40–50 basis points, which the author attributes to political choices favoring pensioners over bondholders, including a suspended pension reform leaving the minimum retirement age near 62. French over-65s hold higher average incomes than working-age people.
AI Summary.French government borrowing costs now exceed the country's nominal income growth by about 2 percentage points, the most unfavorable gap between borrowing costs and growth in the rich world. By contrast, Spanish and Greek bond yields remain about 2 percentage points below their income growth rates.
Matthew KleinThe Overshoot
Date Posted:
The change in a country’s interest rate, Klein argues, should be measured against the change in nominal income growth. By that metric, France has moved from “core Europe” into the periphery – while Italy, Spain and especially Greece have moved in the opposite direction.
Do French borrowing costs now exceed its income growth?
Core argument: France’s borrowing costs exceeded its nominal income growth rate by about 2pp as of 2026Q2, and by roughly 3pp at current yields, the most unfavorable such spread in the rich world.
The problem for France is that its bond yields are surging even as its nominal income growth has slowed relative to the 2017-2019 pace, to the point that, almost uniquely among rich countries, borrowing costs there now substantially exceed growth rates. In fact, the spread between French sovereign borrowing costs and French growth rates is now the most unfavorable anywhere in the rich world. The French economy was not quite growing by 2% a year in euro terms as of 2026Q2, which was even worse than the anemic 3% yearly average nominal growth rate recorded in 2017Q1-2019Q4. As of 2026Q2, France’s cost of borrowing was therefore about 2pp higher than its income growth rate. (At current yields, the penalty is more like 3pp.) By contrast, Spanish and Greek bond yields are still about 2pp lower than their income growth rates.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
France’s borrowing costs exceeded its nominal income growth rate by about 2pp as of 2026Q2, and by roughly 3pp at current yields, the most unfavorable such spread in the rich world.
French nominal growth was running just under 2% a year in euro terms as of 2026Q2, below the 3% yearly average recorded in 2017Q1–2019Q4, even as French bond yields surged.
Spanish and Greek bond yields remain about 2pp below their nominal income growth rates, in contrast to France’s unfavorable gap.
Related Articles:
Soaring Yields Find Europe’s Weak Spot— A rapid rise in long-term US Treasury yields has highlighted vulnerabilities elsewhere, notably France, where risks are elevated. Because France is in the euro zone, any crisis there would extend to the currency area, and European stocks have sold off alongside a weakening euro.
France Seeks To Rein In Pensions And State Salaries In 2027— France plans to narrow its budget deficit to 5% of GDP by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes. Deteriorating public finances have left France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece, with 10-year bond yields reaching their highest since 2002.
Global Debt Report 2026— Gross central government borrowing across OECD countries rose 7% to a record $17tn, about 23% of GDP, and is projected to reach roughly $18tn, or 24% of GDP. The United States and Japan account for close to 80% of the area's refinancing requirements, with the US share rising from 57% to 70%.
AI Summary.A rapid rise in long-term US Treasury yields has highlighted vulnerabilities elsewhere, notably France, where risks are elevated. Because France is in the euro zone, any crisis there would extend to the currency area, and European stocks have sold off alongside a weakening euro.
John AuthersBloomberg
Date Posted:
The spread between 10-year French OATs and German Bunds is pricing a second eurozone sovereign-debt crisis. Authers suggests that the recent surge in US long-term yields has “shone a light” on France’s fiscal weakness, raising its salience to investors.
Do rising US long-term yields expose vulnerabilities in Europe?
Core argument: The speed of the rise in US long-term Treasury yields has raised the risk of dislocations elsewhere, with France a point of elevated vulnerability that would extend to the rest of the euro zone.
The speed of [the upward move in US long yields] brought the risk of dislocations elsewhere, like in France. Much as a surprising hawkish shift from the Fed under Alan Greenspan in 1994 revealed underlying weaknesses in the Mexican financial system that led to the Tequila Crisis, so this Treasury scare has shone a light on where the world’s greatest vulnerabilities are to be found. As France is part of the euro zone, any crisis must naturally extend to the rest of the currency area, at a time when most of its members are moving in a nationalist direction and likely reluctant to help. That is beginning to have an impact on stocks. The main European bourses sold off even as US equities rallied on Thursday. In combination with a weakening euro, the continent’s stocks have now given up almost all their gains since Trump took office.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
The speed of the rise in US long-term Treasury yields has raised the risk of dislocations elsewhere, with France a point of elevated vulnerability that would extend to the rest of the euro zone.
The Treasury scare echoes the Fed’s surprising hawkish shift under Alan Greenspan in 1994, which revealed weaknesses in Mexico’s financial system and led to the Tequila Crisis.
Europe’s main bourses sold off even as US equities rallied, and combined with a weakening euro, the continent’s stocks have given up almost all their gains since Trump took office.
Related Articles:
France Seeks To Rein In Pensions And State Salaries In 2027— France plans to narrow its budget deficit to 5% of GDP by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes. Deteriorating public finances have left France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece, with 10-year bond yields reaching their highest since 2002.
Soaring Bond Yields, Gaping Deficits and Towering Debts: What Could Go Wrong?— An analysis of 22 rich countries estimates that if each refinanced its entire debt at current five-year bond yields, Britain would need the largest primary surplus to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, about 1.5%, followed by Italy at 1.4%, France at 1.2% and America at 1%.
Global Debt Report 2026— Gross central government borrowing across OECD countries rose 7% to a record $17tn, about 23% of GDP, and is projected to reach roughly $18tn, or 24% of GDP. The United States and Japan account for close to 80% of the area's refinancing requirements, with the US share rising from 57% to 70%.
AI Summary.The Congressional Budget Office projects that if interest rates rose to 1 percentage point above its baseline, federal debt held by the public would reach 222% of GDP by 2056, 47 percentage points above baseline, with primary deficits averaging 2.3% of GDP and annual growth 0.1 percentage point slower.
CBO StaffCongressional Budget OffIce
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
If interest rates rise 1pp above CBO’s current extended baseline (a mean rate of 4% over 2026–2056), CBO projects federal debt held by the public will be 222% of GDP in 2056, versus 175% under the current baseline.
How much would higher interest rates raise projected federal debt?
Core argument: CBO projects that under a scenario in which interest rates rise to 1 percentage point above its extended baseline, debt held by the public would reach 222% of GDP in fiscal year 2056, 47 percentage points above the extended baseline.
Under a scenario in which interest rates increased until they were 1 percentage point higher than in CBO’s extended baseline, primary deficits—that is, deficits excluding net outlays for interest—would average 2.3% of GDP over the 2026–2056 period, 0.2 percentage points larger than in the extended baseline. Debt held by the public would grow to 222 percent of GDP in fiscal year 2056, 47 percentage points larger than in the extended baseline. Average annual GDP growth over the 2026–2056 period would be 0.1 percentage point slower than in CBO’s extended baseline, and the average interest rate on federal debt would be 0.7 percentage points higher.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
CBO projects that under a scenario in which interest rates rise to 1 percentage point above its extended baseline, debt held by the public would reach 222% of GDP in fiscal year 2056, 47 percentage points above the extended baseline.
Primary deficits, which exclude net outlays for interest, would average 2.3% of GDP over 2026–2056 in CBO’s higher-interest-rate scenario, 0.2 percentage points larger than in its extended baseline.
Under CBO’s higher-interest-rate scenario, average annual GDP growth over 2026–2056 would be 0.1 percentage point slower and the average interest rate on federal debt 0.7 percentage points higher than in its extended baseline.
Related Articles:
The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036— The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal deficit will grow from $1.9tn (5.8% of GDP) to $3.1tn (6.7%) over a decade, above the 3.8% averaged over the past 50 years, with rising net interest costs driving much of the increase. Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise from 101% to 120% of GDP.
How Might Fiscal Policy Respond to the Rise of Artificial Intelligence?— The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a permanent 0.5 percentage point increase in annual productivity growth would lower publicly held federal debt after 30 years by 39% of GDP, offsetting roughly half the projected rise from 101% of GDP to 175%. Higher revenue and slower spending growth outweigh higher interest costs.
Soaring Bond Yields, Gaping Deficits and Towering Debts: What Could Go Wrong?— An analysis of 22 rich countries estimates that if each refinanced its entire debt at current five-year bond yields, Britain would need the largest primary surplus to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, about 1.5%, followed by Italy at 1.4%, France at 1.2% and America at 1%.
AI Summary.Because investors can buy bonds across borders, an investment boom in one country such as the United States can draw in loanable funds from abroad and push up interest rates in other nations. The linkage is not one-for-one, since investors also weigh expected exchange-rate changes and the resulting capital gains or losses.
Paul KrugmanKrugman Wonks Out
Date Posted:
The nominal 10-year Treasury yield is ~ where it was during the mid-2000s housing boom, but below its level during the late-1990s and early-2000s technology boom. Krugman asks, “If we’re now looking at an even bigger investment boom, why wouldn’t we expect to see interest rates at least that high?”
Does an investment boom in one country raise interest rates abroad?
Core argument: Because investors can buy bonds across borders, an investment boom in the United States draws loanable funds from other nations and pushes their interest rates up as well.
Investors can buy bonds across borders, so an investment boom in the United States can draw in loanable funds from other nations and drive up their interest rates. The international linkage between interest rates isn’t always one-for-one. That’s mainly because investors deciding which nation’s bonds to buy don’t just look at interest rates -- they also take into account expected changes in exchange rates. For example, there was a sharp rise in U.S. interest rates in the early 1980s that was only partially matched by a rise in German rates. The reason was that this was also a period of an extremely strong dollar, which many investors believed (correctly) would prove temporary. So German investors buying U.S. bonds had to set the high interest rates they could earn against the capital losses they were likely to experience when the dollar came back to earth.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Because investors can buy bonds across borders, an investment boom in the United States draws loanable funds from other nations and pushes their interest rates up as well.
The international linkage between interest rates is not always one-for-one, mainly because investors choosing among nations’ bonds weigh expected exchange rate changes alongside interest rates.
The sharp rise in U.S. interest rates in the early 1980s was only partially matched by German rates, as German investors buying U.S. bonds set high yields against likely capital losses when the strong dollar fell back.
Related Articles:
Financing the AI Buildout— The authors estimate roughly 57 gigawatts of operating US data center capacity against a planned development pipeline of about 509 gigawatts, which is not a completion forecast since projects may be delayed, scaled back, or abandoned. Their central scenario has 182.8 gigawatts of added capacity becoming operational through 2032, 117.2 gigawatts completed later, and 226.9 gigawatts never completed.
America’s Risky Debt: What Markets See That Policymakers Don’t— Two market-based measures suggest the safety premium investors pay to hold US Treasuries has compressed toward zero and at times reversed: the spread between top-rated corporate bonds and Treasuries after stripping out default risk, and the gap between currency-hedged foreign G10 government yields and Treasury yields at the same maturity, where longer-maturity comparisons now favor foreign bonds.
Don’t Draw The Wrong Conclusion From Treasury Yields— Ten-year real yields equal the average expected overnight rate over the next decade plus a term premium, and fiscal credibility or debt sustainability concerns would show up as a higher term premium. With the term premium and inflation expectations contained, the increase in bond yields reflects higher expected long-term overnight rates.
AI Summary.Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US stocks and investment fund shares over 12 months, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985. Foreign demand for US debt securities moved in the opposite direction, falling to a net $188bn in the second quarter from $314bn in the first.
Michael Taffe and George SteerFinancial Times
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Foreign investors bought a record net $426B of US equities and fund shares in Q2, up 62% y/y, part of a record $942B in the 12 months through July. Overseas investors bought a net $188B of US debt securities in Q2, down from $314B in Q1.
Are foreign investors shifting from US debt into US stocks?
Core argument: Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985.
Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, accelerating a shift in overseas investment towards American stocks and away from debt. The flows represented the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985. Net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares by foreign investors jumped to $426bn in the second quarter, up 62% from the same period in 2025, and surpassing the previous quarterly record of $299bn in 2022, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Foreign demand for US debt moved in the opposite direction. Overseas investors bought a net $188bn of US debt securities in the second quarter, down from $314bn in the first.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985.
Net foreign purchases of US equities and investment fund shares reached $426bn in the second quarter, up 62% from the same period in 2025 and above the prior quarterly record of $299bn in 2022, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Overseas investors bought a net $188bn of US debt securities in the second quarter, down from $314bn in the first.
Related Articles:
World’s Unusually High Dollar Exposure Risks Fueling Selloff— Pension funds and insurers in Canada, Denmark, Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Finland hedged just 41% of their foreign-currency exposure, the lowest share since at least 2015. With some of the largest holders of US assets carrying little protection against a weaker dollar, the currency is at risk of steeper declines if sentiment turns.
Foreign Investors Prefer US Stocks To Treasuries As Debt Worries Grow— International flows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP over a year, overtaking flows into US Treasuries at 2% of GDP for the first time this century outside brief episodes during the Covid-19 pandemic and after the global financial crisis, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.
A Catalyst For The AI Bubble Break— Historically, controlling for valuations, a 1% rise in the share of the market represented by initial public offerings has been associated with roughly a 4% decline in prices. With large artificial-intelligence company listings expected and share issuance exceeding buybacks, equity supply could shift from shrinking about 1% a year to growing near 5%, implying returns roughly 20% below average.
AI Summary.Historically, controlling for valuations, a 1% rise in the share of the market represented by initial public offerings has been associated with roughly a 4% decline in prices. With large artificial-intelligence company listings expected and share issuance exceeding buybacks, equity supply could shift from shrinking about 1% a year to growing near 5%, implying returns roughly 20% below average.
Ben Inker and John PeaseGMO
Date Posted:
GMO estimates net US equity supply could increase by ~5% or more of total market capitalization over the next year. Inker and Pease note that in 1999–2000, “IPOs peaked at ~5% of total market cap. It doesn’t take much new supply to overwhelm the market.”
How does rising equity supply from new listings affect stock returns?
Core argument: Controlling for valuations, a 1% increase in the market share of IPOs has historically led to an approximate 4% decrease in prices, a multiplier the author applies to a coming surge in equity supply.
Controlling for valuations, a 1% increase in the market share of IPOs has historically led to an approximate 4% decrease in prices [Exhibit 2 in gallery]. Consider what is happening to equity supply. SpaceX’s non-Elon sales alone exceed 1% of the U.S. stock market’s value. We are likely to see IPOs from both Anthropic and OpenAI—together valued at about 5% of the U.S. stock market’s total investable market cap —over the next 12 months. For the first time in twenty years, with the brief exception of the GFC, we are seeing net dilution in the U.S. stock market (i.e., share issuance exceeding share buybacks), as the hyperscalers continue their capital expenditure spree. In aggregate, we are going from a world where equity supply was shrinking by roughly 1% per annum (with buybacks exceeding primary or secondary issuance) to one in which equity supply will be increasing by close to 5%, if not more. If you believe the 4x multiplier [implied by the regression line in Exhibit 2], this means we should expect returns that are some 20% below average (roughly 6% real) over the next 12–18 months from the headwind of rising equity supply alone.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Controlling for valuations, a 1% increase in the market share of IPOs has historically led to an approximate 4% decrease in prices, a multiplier the author applies to a coming surge in equity supply.
U.S. equity supply is shifting from shrinking roughly 1% a year, with buybacks exceeding issuance, to growing close to 5% or more, the first net dilution in twenty years apart from the Global Financial Crisis.
Anthropic and OpenAI, together valued at about 5% of U.S. investable market cap, are likely to go public within 12 months, while SpaceX’s non-Elon sales alone exceed 1% of the U.S. stock market’s value.
Related Articles:
Momentum, Rotation and the Value in Growth— After a fifteen-year stretch in which US equities, technology and growth stocks led, equity gains have broadened geographically, with the US the weakest of the major regions. The five largest US stocks now trade at a price-to-earnings ratio only marginally above the other 495, after holding a consistent premium since 2017.
SpaceX and OpenAI Are Ending Wall Street’s Era of Stock Scarcity— JPMorgan projects that share sales will add roughly $1.5tn of stock to the US equity market over the next two years even after buybacks, which would be the strongest net equity issuance since at least the late 1990s. Equity has grown cheaper relative to debt as a funding source.
One Hundred Years in the U.S. Stock Markets— Over a century, U.S. publicly traded stocks generated roughly $91tn in shareholder wealth enhancement, with returns strongly positively skewed and dominated by a relatively small number of high-performing firms. Because most possible outcomes fall below the mean in a skewed distribution, the authors argue financial planning should focus on median outcomes or the full distribution.
AI Summary.The authors estimate roughly 57 gigawatts of operating US data center capacity against a planned development pipeline of about 509 gigawatts, which is not a completion forecast since projects may be delayed, scaled back, or abandoned. Their central scenario has 182.8 gigawatts of added capacity becoming operational through 2032, 117.2 gigawatts completed later, and 226.9 gigawatts never completed.
Stijn Van NieuwerburghBrookings Papers on Economic Activity
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important
Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh projects ~$10.3T will be spent on the AI buildout over 2025–2032, averaging 3.63% of GDP. He estimates 2/3 of that spending reflects IT equipment and one-third real estate and associated power infrastructure.
How much of the planned data center pipeline gets built?
Core argument: Using Cleanview project-level data from July 2026, the authors estimate roughly 57 GW of operating U.S. data center capacity against a planned development pipeline of roughly 509 GW, which they stress is not a completion forecast.
The required investment is enormous. A representative 200 MW AI training campus costs roughly $8.2 billion, about two-thirds of which reflects IT equipment and one-third the real estate and associated power infrastructure. We estimate that 183 GW is completed by 2032 with a further 118 GW completed after 2032. This pipeline will trigger about $10.3 trillion dollars of investment over 2025–2032. At an average of 3.63% of GDP per year, the projected buildout would be larger relative to the economy than the major U.S. canal, railroad, electrification, highway, and telecommunications investment booms. It would double the electricity consumption of the entire U.S. residential sector.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Using Cleanview project-level data from July 2026, the authors estimate roughly 57 GW of operating U.S. data center capacity against a planned development pipeline of roughly 509 GW, which they stress is not a completion forecast.
The authors’ central scenario allocates the announced pipeline so that 182.8 GW of additional U.S. capacity becomes operational during 2025–32, including 19.0 GW tied to projects already operational in 2025 or 2026.
The authors’ scenario has 117.2 GW of planned data center capacity completed after 2032 and 226.9 GW never completed, applying lower realization rates to more distant and less fully documented projects.
Related Articles:
Rear Window— Major cloud providers posted annual revenue growth of 37% at Amazon Web Services, 43% at Microsoft Azure and 82% at Google Cloud, with rising revenue backlogs of $514bn and $496bn respectively at Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services. Earnings growth appears highly contingent on continued hyperscaler capital spending and research, which rose from $460bn to $870bn.
AI Set to be Largest CapEx Cycle Ever … and Soon Majority Externally Financed— Hyperscaler and data-center investment is tracking toward $1.5tn annually by 2030, which in real terms would exceed the 2005-06 housing boom, the 1990s fiber peak, and the 1882 railroad peak combined. External debt and equity are projected to fund close to 90% of the buildout, making it dependent on credit markets.
The Summer I Turned Pretty— A warning sign in a boom cycle is when companies closest to final demand weaken while capital spending beneficiaries keep thriving, as when telecom operators' shares rolled over while communications equipment stocks kept rising. Semiconductor stock prices and free cash flow are soaring while large cloud providers' shares stagnate and their free cash flow plummets.
