My son was explaining the AI economic picture to me today. What he describes sounds nothing like the optimist in your post. He was describing a debt boondoggle. He was describing AI-related industries supporting each other and supporting themselves with ever-increasing amounts of debt. He was describing AI anticipated profits that are not materializing and show little promise of materializing.

After I read your piece I looked up the AI/debt issue and came across an 8 day old NY times article https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/26/opinion/ai-debt-economy-hyperscalers.html. A quote from that article:

Despite all the hoopla about Nvidia becoming the first company valued at over $5 trillion, the listing of Elon Musk’s SpaceX and the looming initial public offerings of Anthropic and OpenAI, artificial intelligence is no longer primarily a stock market story. It is a story of debt, and that should worry us. Unfortunately, manias fueled mainly by credit almost inevitably end badly.

and

And the resulting scope of the investments required to build that power is increasingly forcing the “hyperscalers” — the small club of companies that are aggressively ramping up their A.I. data center investments — to turn to loans, bonds and sundry other forms of financial obligations to pay for the party.

One more:

Adding to the dangers, the A.I. ecosystem has become remarkably incestuous, with a wildly complicated tangle of business, investment and lending relationships tying most of the companies together. Even idiosyncratic problems in one corner could easily ripple across the whole industry.

I don't pretend to understand the market or AI or debt issues, but after listening to my son, the AI investment bet didn't sound like such a good thing. This article in the Times seems to support that view.

Just thought I'd add my uniformed 2 cents.