Morgan Stanley frames AI-related capital expenditure as one of the largest investment waves ever recorded. This is not just a sector trend but a primary economic driver, projected to be larger than the shale boom of the 2010s and the telecommunications spending of the late 1990s.

While there's a popular narrative about a US manufacturing resurgence, the massive capital spending on AI contradicts it. By consuming a huge portion of available capital and accounting for half of GDP growth, the AI boom drives up the cost of capital for all non-AI sectors, making it harder for manufacturing and other startups to get funded.

A recent Harvard study reveals the staggering scale of the AI infrastructure build-out, concluding that if data center investments were removed, current U.S. economic growth would effectively be zero. This highlights that the AI boom is not just a sector-specific trend but a primary driver of macroeconomic activity in the United States.

Traditional metrics like GDP fail to capture the value of intangibles from the digital economy. Profit margins, which reflect real-world productivity gains from technology, provide a more accurate and immediate measure of its true economic impact.

For 2026, AI's primary economic effect is fueling demand through massive investment in infrastructure like data centers. The widely expected productivity gains that would lower inflation (the supply-side effect) won't materialize for a few years, creating a short-term inflationary pressure from heightened business spending.

The tangible economic effect of the AI boom is currently concentrated in physical capital investment, such as data centers and software, rather than widespread changes in labor productivity or employment. A potential market correction would thus directly threaten this investment-led growth.

A surge in business technology investment was misinterpreted as an AI-powered economic boom. It more likely reflected companies front-loading purchases of semiconductors and electronics to avoid paying impending 25% tariffs, rather than a fundamental acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure.

AI's contribution to US economic growth is immense, accounting for ~60% via direct spending and indirect wealth effects. However, unlike past tech booms that inspired optimism, public sentiment is largely fearful, with most citizens wanting regulation due to job security concerns, creating a unique tension.

While AI investment has exploded, US productivity has barely risen. Valuations are priced as if a societal transformation is complete, yet 95% of GenAI pilots fail to positively impact company P&Ls. This gap between market expectation and real-world economic benefit creates systemic risk.