When you write something like "Of course tech is/will lead the economy boom" you give the impression that you don't know much economic history. In the USA the b

When you write something like "Of course tech is/will lead the economy boom" you give the impression that you don't know much economic history. In the USA the booms starting in 1983 and 2002 were both lead by real estate construction. The long boom of the 1960s was powered in part by spending on the Vietnam War. The limited recoveries of the 1970s were both brought about by partial relief regarding the price of oil. During the last 50 years, only the boom of the 1990s could clearly be classified as a tech-lead boom. Your words seem to suggest that it is somehow natural for booms to be tech-lead, when in fact that has been very rare. It is one thing to say that technology is contributing to the economy, it is something very different to suggest that technology is the primary driving force pushing growth.