>But it is not debt. It combines $821 billion of leases that have not started with $829 billion of purchase and construction commitments. These payments are spr

>But it is not debt. It combines $821 billion of leases that have not started with $829 billion of purchase and construction commitments. These payments are spread over one to 30 years. i am not a finance guy, but is this kind of like arguing "it's not debt, its a financial liability" (while pushing their glasses up their nose, and starting with an 'actually')? is this just a semantic distinction without a material difference? i feel like i need jumpcrisscross or someone financially savvy to translate. my gut says the ai tech company's words on big ai tech debt should be handled with several grains of salt. (i am typically hesitant to say so, but this article gives me strong vibes of a response to a "is the hidden 1.65T debt news real?" prompt)