| ▲ | nicce 8 hours ago |
| More like that when it happens, how big the pop is. |
|
| ▲ | TulliusCicero 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| It's also possible it'll be more of a deflation than a pop. That's what I'm personally hoping for anyway, would rather the economy avoid a big recession. |
| |
| ▲ | cman1444 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm not. A few podcasts I've listened to recently (mostly Odd Lots) explored how a pop is often preferable to a protracted downturn because it weeds out the losers quickly and allows the economy to begin the recovery aspect sooner. A protracted downturn risks poorly managed assets limping along for years instead of having capital reallocated to better investments. Better to rip the bandaid off and begin anew. | |
| ▲ | mrguyorama 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Without AI bubble the economy is already mostly in a recession. | | |
| ▲ | kazen44 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | which is kind of sad to think about.
The US could have invested all that money to actually invest in its infrastructure, schools, hospitals and general wellbeing of its workforce to make the economy thrive. | | |
| ▲ | TulliusCicero 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's not "the US" who's investing the money. This is the same problem people run into when they say, "we should just put money into more trains and buses rather than self driving cars". Private actors are the ones who are investing into AI, and there's no real way for them to invest into public infrastructure, or to eventually profit from it, the way investors reasonably expect to do when they put up their money for something. It's the government who can choose to invest into infrastructure, and it's us voters who can choose to vote for politicians who will make that choice. But we haven't done that. So many people want to complain endlessly about government and corporations -- not entirely without merit, of course -- but then are quick to let voters off the hook. |
| |
| ▲ | TulliusCicero 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Without the AI bubble, most of that money would probably still flow to some other sector of the economy. It wouldn't just disappear. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | tetris11 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It'll be fine. When the banks burst in 2008, they were gifted 7 trillion to make up the shortfall and life went on for the rich. This time they'll be gifted 70 trillion to make up for the shortfall, and life shall continue on for the rich. It's win-win for them, there's no risk at all |
| |
| ▲ | cjbgkagh 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think the economic background has changed, in 2008 it was after a big run up in wealth so the reversion wasn’t so bad, there was some fat to cut. Since then people have been ground down to the breaking point, another 2008 wipeout will cut into the bone. I do think this time it could be different. | |
| ▲ | jghn 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | privatize profit, socialize risk. same as it always was | |
| ▲ | gizajob 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The money system breaking is one thing, companies that build chatbots going to the wall is another. |
|
