“Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
“…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
“…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
“…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
“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
“…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
“…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
“…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
“Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
“Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
“…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“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 broad archive on how economies produce more value from labor and capital. Coverage spans investment, innovation, institutions, incentives, intangible assets, startups, competition, and the reorganization of firms and work.
AI Summary.Goldman Sachs estimates that artificial intelligence–related stocks account for 57% of Chinese equity trading turnover and that nearly $5tn in AI-related market value has been created, including $2tn from new listings. China also holds dominant shares of the physical supply chain, including 97% of humanoid robot shipments, 75% of electric vehicle production, and 90% of rare-earth refining.
Paul KedroskyApplied Complexity
Date Posted:
China accounts for 77% of global token usage, but only 22% of token spending, according to a GS analysis. Kedrosky notes, “This is what widespread AI adoption at low prices looks like. And it is the channel through which Chinese competition will pressure prices elsewhere.”
How large is AI's footprint in Chinese markets and supply chains?
Core argument: AI-related stocks account for 57% of trading turnover in Chinese equities, and Goldman estimates almost $5 trillion in AI-related market value has been created since the DeepSeek moment, including $2 trillion from IPOs.
AI-related stocks now represent 57% of trading turnover in Chinese equities. Since the DeepSeek moment, Goldman estimates almost $5 trillion in AI-related market value has been created, including $2 trillion from IPOs. AI dominates Chinese equity markets even more than it does U.S. markets. It's a one-factor world. China shipped 97% of humanoid robots in the first half of 2026. Alongside China’s 75% share of EV production and 80% of battery production, China basically owns the physical side of AI and AI-adjacent technologies. The industrial base behind the AI buildout is already concentrated in China: 60% of global transformer production capacity, 60% of PCB and optical-module production, 77% of new foundry capacity, and 90% of rare-earth refining. There are more than 880 AI-related companies focused mainly on China’s domestic market, with $3.2 trillion in market value. To put it in context, this is nearly half the total market of the Nasdaq at the peak of the dot-com frenzy.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
AI-related stocks account for 57% of trading turnover in Chinese equities, and Goldman estimates almost $5 trillion in AI-related market value has been created since the DeepSeek moment, including $2 trillion from IPOs.
China shipped 97% of humanoid robots in the first half of 2026, alongside a 75% share of EV production and 80% of battery production.
China holds 60% of global transformer production capacity, 60% of PCB and optical-module production, 77% of new foundry capacity, and 90% of rare-earth refining, concentrating the industrial base behind the AI buildout.
Related Articles:
Who’s Afraid of Chinese Models?— Demand for frontier artificial intelligence models exceeds supply because computing capacity is scarce, allowing chip suppliers and their customers to resell compute at high margins. The author argues alarm over Chinese models is overblown, expecting the inference market to grow faster than training costs so labs can thrive at lower prices.
Semiquincententacles— Leading artificial-intelligence labs are moving to usage-based token pricing on a cost-plus basis that includes total ownership costs, pushing token prices higher and giving some enterprises reason to migrate to cheaper open models. Frontier models remain necessary for cybersecurity, distillation training, agents, and scientific discovery, where maximum performance is required.
Why .400 Hitters Disappeared — and What It Means for AI— Artificial intelligence models' capability gains are shrinking in percentage terms, falling from about 15% relative to the baseline early on to roughly 10% for the same absolute increment, narrowing the gap between frontier and good-enough models. The author argues this points to a commoditizing market where price, not minor model differences, becomes the main differentiator, pressuring frontier firms' margins.
AI Summary.Foreign investors made roughly $1.5tn in net purchases of US equities from the start of 2024 through July, with chipmaking economies like South Korea and Taiwan helping fund American tech firms' AI buildout. Bloomberg Economics estimates about 20% of foreign US equity holdings were AI-related in 2025, versus roughly 10% in 2019.
Shawn Donnan, Estelle Ou and Jorgelina Do RosarioBloomberg
Date Posted:
The profits of South Korean and Taiwanese firms are flowing into AI-related US equities. A Bloomberg analysis found ~20% of all foreign holdings of US equities were in AI-related sectors, up from ~10% in 2019.
Are foreign investors funding America's AI buildout?
Core argument: Foreign investors held roughly $4.9 trillion of US-listed shares in AI-centered industries at the end of June, a sum roughly equivalent to Germany’s annual GDP, according to Bloomberg Economics’ analysis of Treasury data.
The AI boom is creating massive demand for high-end chips and new pools of savings in places that make them like South Korea and Taiwan which are flowing to fund American tech companies and their $9 trillion AI build out. Foreign investors made roughly $1.5 trillion in net purchases of US equities alone since the beginning of 2024 through the end of July. A Bloomberg Economics analysis of Treasury data shows that in 2025 roughly 20% of all foreign holdings of US equities were in AI-related sectors, up from roughly 10% in 2019. That number has grown with soaring valuations since then. But even assuming that 20% level, foreign investors had about $4.9 trillion of exposure to US-listed shares of companies in industries at the center of the AI boom at the end of June. That’s roughly equivalent to Germany’s annual GDP.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Foreign investors held roughly $4.9 trillion of US-listed shares in AI-centered industries at the end of June, a sum roughly equivalent to Germany’s annual GDP, according to Bloomberg Economics’ analysis of Treasury data.
AI-related sectors accounted for roughly 20% of all foreign holdings of US equities in 2025, up from roughly 10% in 2019, per Bloomberg Economics’ analysis of Treasury data.
Foreign investors made roughly $1.5 trillion in net purchases of US equities from the start of 2024 through the end of July, with savings from chipmaking economies such as South Korea and Taiwan flowing to American tech companies and their $9 trillion AI build-out.
Related Articles:
Califoreboding— A basket of 42 AI stocks accounts for 60%-80% of all S&P 500 earnings growth, price returns and capital spending, while 60% of S&P 500 stocks sit 20% or more below their highs and only 30% outperform the index. AI-related construction spending has risen 38%, the only positive trend as manufacturing, commercial real estate and residential construction decline.
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.
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.An artificial intelligence investment boom that is insensitive to interest rates is drawing capital, electricity and labor away from rate-sensitive sectors such as housing and autos, which the author argues will force the Federal Reserve to hold rates higher for longer. The durable fix is expanding power, chip and infrastructure supply.
Torsten SløkApollo
Date Posted:
Sløk warns the rate-insensitive AI buildout has triggered unbalanced growth in the US economy by crowding out capital, electricity, and labor from vulnerable sectors like housing and autos.
Does a rate-insensitive AI boom force the Fed to keep rates higher?
Core argument: The AI boom’s insensitivity to interest rates is draining capital, power and labor from rate-sensitive sectors such as housing and autos, producing a “Dutch disease” dynamic in the US economy.
AI's rate-insensitive boom is draining capital, power and labor from vulnerable sectors like housing and autos. Trapped between inflation driven by the AI boom and weakness in rate-sensitive industries, the Fed will have to keep interest rates higher for longer. Because monetary policy cannot resolve this sectoral imbalance, the only durable fix is expanding the supply of power, chips and infrastructure.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
The AI boom’s insensitivity to interest rates is draining capital, power and labor from rate-sensitive sectors such as housing and autos, producing a “Dutch disease” dynamic in the US economy.
Caught between AI-driven inflation and weakness in rate-sensitive industries, the Federal Reserve will have to hold interest rates higher for longer.
Monetary policy cannot resolve the imbalance between AI and rate-sensitive sectors, leaving expansion of the supply of power, chips and infrastructure as the only durable fix.
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.
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 Macro Implications of the AI Capex Boom— Artificial intelligence capital spending is estimated to add roughly 1.4 percentage points to US growth in one year and about 1.5 points the next, comparable to business investment's contribution during the tech bubble. A material part of that estimate reflects profits at Nvidia and a few other chipmakers that are unlikely to be recycled back into the economy.
AI Summary.A basket of 42 AI stocks accounts for 60%-80% of all S&P 500 earnings growth, price returns and capital spending, while 60% of S&P 500 stocks sit 20% or more below their highs and only 30% outperform the index. AI-related construction spending has risen 38%, the only positive trend as manufacturing, commercial real estate and residential construction decline.
Michael CembalestJ.P. Morgan
Date Posted:
Since January 2024, JPM’s 42 AI-related stocks drove 67% of S&P 500 returns, 58% of earnings growth, and 81% of capital spending. Cembalest notes, “the technology share of GDP growth has risen from almost zero in 2022 to ~33%,” and only 20% of states are outpacing national GDP growth, the lowest level since 1979.
How concentrated are US market and economic gains in AI?
Core argument: A basket of 42 AI stocks accounts for 60%–80% of all S&P earnings growth, price returns and capital spending since January 2024, with AI primarily benefitting AI supply chain companies rather than the companies adopting it.
A basket of 42 AI stocks accounts for 60%-80% of all S&P earnings growth, price returns and capital spending since Jan 2024. At the same time, 60% of S&P 500 stocks are down 20% or more from their all-time highs despite the market being close to all-time highs. Only 30% of stocks are outperforming the S&P 500, one of the lowest figures since 1991. AI is primarily benefitting AI supply chain companies rather than the companies adopting it. The technology share of GDP growth has risen from almost zero to 2022 to ~33%. Only 20% of US states are growing faster than the national average, almost the lowest figure since 1979. AI accounts for the only positive trend in US construction spending, having risen by 38% since January 2024. Unfortunately the other three main categories are down since then (manufacturing -28%, commercial real estate -13% and residential -6%). That’s why the decline in planned data center projects is something to watch.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
A basket of 42 AI stocks accounts for 60%–80% of all S&P earnings growth, price returns and capital spending since January 2024, with AI primarily benefitting AI supply chain companies rather than the companies adopting it.
60% of S&P 500 stocks are down 20% or more from their all-time highs even as the index sits near record levels, and only 30% of stocks are outperforming the S&P 500, one of the lowest figures since 1991.
AI accounts for the only positive trend in US construction spending, rising 38% since January 2024, while manufacturing is down 28%, commercial real estate 13% and residential 6%.
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.
How Much Revenue Does The AI Buildout Need In 2030?— The authors estimate AI capital spending of $560bn in 2026 and, in a high-investment case, $3.5tn of net AI capital in service by 2030, requiring roughly $1.3tn in annual infrastructure revenue once depreciation, operating costs and a 15% return are covered. That implies 7.4x growth from current annualized revenues, with downstream revenues of $1.9–2.6tn.
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.Corporate profit margins, long regarded as one of the economy's most reliably mean-reverting series, have risen continuously so far this century. Measured through the national income accounts used in calculating GDP, profits now take a larger share of the economy than on the eve of the 1929 crash.
John AuthersBloomberg
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Since 2000, post-tax corporate profits as a share of GDP have trended upward across cyclical setbacks and are now near an all time high, above their 1929 level.
Have corporate profit margins stopped reverting to the mean?
Core argument: Corporate profits measured in the National Income and Product Accounts take a larger share of the U.S. economy than on the eve of the 1929 Great Crash.
Throughout the 20th century, profit margins were regarded as one of the purest mean-reverting series in the economy. So far this century, however, margins have done nothing but rise. Measured with the National Income and Product Accounts, part of the GDP calculation, profits are currently taking a bigger share of the economy even than on the eve of the Great Crash in 1929. The series comes with a lag, so we can assume the profit share on this basis is comfortably at a record by now.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Corporate profits measured in the National Income and Product Accounts take a larger share of the U.S. economy than on the eve of the 1929 Great Crash.
Profit margins were regarded throughout the 20th century as one of the purest mean-reverting series in the economy, yet so far this century they have done nothing but rise.
The National Income and Product Accounts profits series comes with a lag, so the profit share on this basis can be assumed to be comfortably at a record.
Related Articles:
US Focus: The Effect Of Soaring Profits— US nominal pre-tax corporate profits in the national accounts grew 23% over the past year, a pace not seen outside post-recession spikes since the mid-2000s. Wider margins were the key driver, as domestic profit growth far exceeded the 8% rise in corporate value added, pushing margins near all-time highs while the labor share hit new lows.
The Post‑COVID Decline in the Labor Share— The share of US national income paid to workers fell 1.6 percentage points below its pre-pandemic level, reaching a post-war low. The authors find this decline stems mainly from changes within industries rather than shifts in activity across sectors, following cyclical patterns seen in earlier recessions.
Are US Corporate Profit Margins Too High?— US after-tax non-financial corporate profit margins remain elevated by historical standards, estimated at 7.6% versus a post-1949 high of 8.2%, while employee pay as a share of non-financial corporate gross value added has fallen from 66% to 56%. One argument holds that subdued demographic growth leads companies to prioritize maximizing margins over expanding capacity.
AI Summary.Large US cloud and artificial-intelligence companies have raised $48bn in European-currency bonds, more than triple the prior year's total, spread across €27bn, £13bn and CHF7.5bn. The issuance adds highly rated US borrowers to European credit indices and deepens the thin market for longer-dated maturities, with few signs so far of crowding out other issuers.
Huw van SteenisApollo
Date Posted:
Hyperscalers have raised $48B in European-currency bonds this year, more than 3x all of 2025. They now account for 3% of euro IG issuance, 10% of sterling and 22% of Swiss franc, versus 8% in the US.
Are European bond markets funding the US AI buildout?
Core argument: Hyperscalers have raised $48 billion in bonds denominated in European currencies this year — €27 billion, £13 billion and CHF7.5 billion — more than triple the full-year 2025 total.
Hyperscalers have raised $48 billion in bonds in European currencies this year, already more than triple the entire amount raised last year. This breaks down as €27 billion, £13 billion, and CHF 7.5 billion. There are few signs of crowding out: non-hyperscaler IG issuance remains strong and little changed YoY, and corporate spreads remain tight. Rather, hyperscalers are adding highly rated US borrowers (AA- or higher) to European credit indices that have traditionally had more A-to-BBB exposure. Hyperscalers account for 7% of euro issuance with maturities of 10 years or more, versus 3% across all maturities, and 3% of the 10-year-plus euro IG index versus 1% of the overall index. This adds depth at longer-dated maturities—thin outside sovereign issuance—at a time when some governments, including the UK, have been shortening duration.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Hyperscalers have raised $48 billion in bonds denominated in European currencies this year — €27 billion, £13 billion and CHF7.5 billion — more than triple the full-year 2025 total.
Hyperscaler issuance shows few signs so far of crowding out European borrowers, with non-hyperscaler investment-grade issuance little changed year-over-year and corporate spreads still tight.
Hyperscalers account for 7% of euro issuance with maturities of 10 years or more versus 3% across all maturities, adding borrowers rated AA- or higher to indices traditionally weighted toward A to BBB.
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.
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.
AI Is Driving Up Treasury Yields: ‘It Just Touches Everything’— Investment-grade companies have sold nearly $1.5tn of bonds, up 36% from a year earlier, and some investors have sold US Treasuries to buy higher-yielding corporate debt. Bank of America economists estimate the surge in corporate-debt sales, along with more mortgage-backed securities issuance, pushed 10-year rates up by about 0.3 percentage point.
AI Summary.Incorporating tariffs into the standard cost-of-capital framework, researchers estimate US tariffs raised the economy-wide marginal effective tax rate on new investment by 4.2 percentage points to 17.0%, with equipment hit hardest at 26.1 percentage points. That increase offsets the 3.5 percentage point reduction from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Kyle Pomerleau, Thomas Brosy, Robert McClelland and John WongAmerican Enterprise Institute
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
The IEEPA tariffs through January 2026 raised equipment’s user cost of capital 9%, from 17.7% to 19.3%. With depreciation unchanged, the required pre-tax net return rose 1.6pp, 4.3% to 5.9%, a tax at purchase that expensing cannot eliminate.
Do tariffs raise the effective tax rate on new investment?
Core argument: Tariffs in force before the February 20, 2026 Supreme Court ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump raised the economy-wide marginal effective tax rate on new US investment by 4.2 points, from 12.8 percent to 17.0 percent, and the cost of capital by 2.7 percent, the AEI authors estimate.
The standard Hall-Jorgenson user cost of capital framework defines the minimum gross required return on an additional unit of capital. The service price of capital (SS) is the minimum pretax gross return required on a new investment; the minimum pretax net return (ρrho) equals SS minus economic depreciation. Consider imported equipment requiring a 25% gross return: 20% to cover depreciation and 5% shareholders’ demanded return. A 10% tariff raises the cost of capital to 27.5%. [Thus the minimum pretax net return—the hurdle rate—rises from 5% to 7.5%]. For equipment, tariffs raise the cost of capital 9%, from 17.7% to 19.3%: 86% of the burden is direct, 14% indirect. 100% bonus depreciation reduced the equipment METR from 19.1% to 4.1%; tariffs raised it to 30.3%, more than offsetting the tax cut.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
Tariffs in force before the February 20, 2026 Supreme Court ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump raised the economy-wide marginal effective tax rate on new US investment by 4.2 points, from 12.8 percent to 17.0 percent, and the cost of capital by 2.7 percent, the AEI authors estimate.
Equipment bore the largest estimated burden, with its marginal effective tax rate rising 26.1 points from 4.1 percent to 30.3 percent and its cost of capital up 9.0 percent, while mainframes and PCs saw a 26.6 percent cost-of-capital increase.
The estimated 4.2 point tariff-driven increase in the marginal effective tax rate offset the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s 3.5 point reduction, leaving a net 0.8 point rise economy-wide and an 11.1 point net increase for equipment.
Related Articles:
Blunt Tariffs Undermine Efforts To Reshore High-Tech Manufacturing— Computer and electronic products manufacturers import 37% of their intermediate inputs and capital equipment, chemical manufacturers 33%, and transportation equipment manufacturers 27%. Broad tariffs may push some sourcing domestically over time, but many inputs will simply cost more, making American manufacturers less competitive globally.
Help for the Heartland? The Employment and Electoral Effects of the Trump Tariffs in the United States— The authors find that the combined effect of U.S.-China trade war import tariffs, retaliatory tariffs, and farm subsidies on employment in exposed U.S. locations was at best a wash and possibly mildly negative, while residents of tariff-protected areas became less likely to identify as Democrats and more likely to vote Republican.
Tariffs are Dumb Enough to (Almost) Work— A universal 15% tariff on imported goods could raise roughly $300–$400bn annually, a fraction of what a value-added tax would generate but real revenue given U.S. imports of about $4tn. The author argues tariffs are a poorly designed form of consumption tax that could build political groundwork for replacing them with a more efficient value-added tax.
AI Summary.Measuring AI-driven job losses in the arts is difficult because media firms are reticent about their AI use and the effects are hard to separate from factors like Hollywood consolidation, offshoring of content production, and the shift to social media creators. All subsectors of the digital arts industry are losing jobs while in-person entertainment continues to grow.
Joseph PolitanoApricitas Economics
Date Posted:
The US has lost more than 200,000 jobs in “creative” industries – notably TV and movies – since mid 2022. “The clearest evidence of AI’s influence is just that all subsectors of the digital arts industry are losing jobs, while in-person entertainment is still growing at a healthy pace.”
Is it hard to measure AI's job losses in the arts?
Core argument: All subsectors of the digital arts industry are losing jobs while in-person entertainment continues to grow at a healthy pace, which the author presents as perhaps the clearest evidence of AI’s influence.
Proving the exact amount of AI-driven job loss in the arts is extremely difficult. [U.S. creative industries have nevertheless lost more than 200,000 jobs over four years, including roughly 50,000 in the last year. Movie and TV employment alone has fallen by more than 100,000, nearly one-third of the sector, while publishing has lost more than 70,000 jobs]. The effects of AI are hard to disentangle from other factors currently affecting arts businesses, like consolidation in Hollywood, offshoring of content production, or the continued displacement of traditional media providers in favor of social media creators. Yet perhaps the clearest evidence of AI’s influence is just that all subsectors of the digital arts industry are losing jobs, while in-person entertainment is still growing at a healthy pace.
Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI
All subsectors of the digital arts industry are losing jobs while in-person entertainment continues to grow at a healthy pace, which the author presents as perhaps the clearest evidence of AI’s influence.
Media firms disclose little about their AI use, both to avoid public backlash and to preserve the legal basis for their copyrights, leaving the exact amount of AI-driven job loss in the arts extremely difficult to prove.
AI’s effects on arts businesses are hard to disentangle from consolidation in Hollywood, offshoring of content production, and the displacement of traditional media providers by social media creators.
Related Articles:
The Jobs Apocalypse Is Postponed. An AI Jobs Boom Is Here— Employment in five industries tied to the data-centre build-out, including electrical contracting and equipment manufacturing, has risen roughly 320,000 above what broader construction and manufacturing trends would suggest. Engineers, software developers, mathematicians and data scientists have added about 730,000 jobs above the trend for professional employment overall.
AI is the Democratic Party’s Next Villain— Mentions of billionaires in Democratic fundraising emails quadrupled to a peak above 20% of all emails sent and have held near 15%, making anti-billionaire messaging a mainstay. Anti-AI populism remains far smaller and is entering Democratic rhetoric not as a jobs or safety issue but as something billionaires are building.
Forget AI. The California Job Market Is Powered By Healthcare— California's healthcare sector drives its job growth despite the state having the sixth-youngest population by share aged 65 or older and residents reporting fewer chronic conditions than almost anywhere else. State policy is one plausible partial explanation: expanded Medicaid coverage, including for undocumented residents, cut the uninsured share to 5.9%, while spending per enrollee is rising faster than enrollment.
