3 ms·
Given how much of the investment goes into the stuff inside of the data center and then the power to run it both of which don't really go out to the US economy
by rtkwe 1y ago
Given how much of the investment goes into the stuff inside of the data center and then the power to run it both of which don't really go out to the US economy so much as the builders' wages I feel pretty safe in saying it's not the remaining 60% of GDP growth.
- cs702 1y agoThe incremental revenues to software and hardware vendors and energy providers is also used to hire new people, build new infrastructure (manufacturing plants, energy production systems, etc.), with second-order economic effects too. There are higher-order effects too, also more diffuse.
- rtkwe 1y agoAgain I'm not denying second order effects exist. Just saying it's not 150% of the direct effects.
- cs702 1y agoAh, got it. I'd say it's possible but no one knows for sure. There's too much related spending that's hard to measure, including, for example, organizations spending to try out newfangled AI services. I don't think that kind of spending is counted in the investment figure, because it's not capex.
- overfeed 1y agoYou're right, but I find your take too clinical and ignoring the human factors, such as overall market confidence. Another way to look at this is asking if AI investments get wiped out, would they take down GDP growth with them? I think there would be a pull back across the board. I will speculate that without AI investment juicing growth, we would have seen broad investment pullbacks in the 2nd quarter, and a shrinking GDP.