The podcast highlights a contradiction in the argument that an AI productivity boom justifies rate cuts. Standard economic theory suggests that higher productivity increases the economy's potential, raising the equilibrium interest rate (R-star). To prevent overheating, the Fed should theoretically raise, not lower, its policy rate.
Related Insights
AI challenges traditional monetary policy logic. Historically, lower interest rates spur capital investment that creates jobs. However, if lower rates now incentivize investment in job-reducing AI, the Fed's primary tool for boosting employment may become less effective or even have ambiguous effects, a new dynamic policymakers must understand.
It's possible to have strong GDP growth without a corresponding drop in unemployment. Goldman Sachs' forecast squares this by pointing to accelerating productivity growth, meaning the economy can expand its output without necessarily hiring more workers.
While economic principles suggest AGI will be hugely deflationary, Sam Altman points out a paradox. The massive, urgent investment required to build AI compute could drive a strange, inflationary period where capital is extremely valuable, creating profound uncertainty about interest rates.
Despite his reputation as an inflation hawk, Fed Chair nominee Kevin Warsh is arguing for lower interest rates. He claims a coming AI-driven productivity boom will be disinflationary, allowing for looser monetary policy. This stance strategically aligns with President Trump's desire for rate cuts, making his nomination politically palatable.
AI is creating a secular trend of higher productivity but lower labor demand, leading to a 'jobless recovery' and structurally higher unemployment. This consistent threat to the Fed's maximum employment mandate will compel it to maintain dovish monetary policy long-term, irrespective of political pressures or short-term inflation data.
A popular chart showing U.S. job openings diverging from the S&P 500 post-ChatGPT is misleading. The actual inflection point aligns with the Federal Reserve's earlier rate hiking cycle, indicating that macroeconomic policy, not AI, has been the primary driver of this labor market trend so far.
The global shift away from centralized manufacturing (deglobalization) requires redundant investment in infrastructure like semiconductor fabs in multiple countries. Simultaneously, the AI revolution demands enormous capital for data centers and chips. This dual surge in investment demand is a powerful structural force pushing the neutral rate of interest higher.
A single neutral interest rate may not exist. There could be one R-star for the investment-heavy AI sector and another for housing. A separate R-star might even be needed for financial stability. This divergence means the Fed faces a policy trade-off where a rate that balances one part of the economy could destabilize another.
The convergence of positive global growth indicators raises a crucial question for monetary policy. If the economic backdrop is genuinely strengthening, as these diverse signals suggest, it undermines the justification for central banks to implement further rate cuts. This creates a potential divergence between improving economic reality and market expectations for easing.
A rapid, broad adoption of AI could significantly boost productivity, leading to faster real GDP growth while simultaneously causing disinflation. This supply-side-driven scenario would present a puzzle for the Fed, potentially allowing it to lower interest rates to normalize policy even amid a strong economy.