Sorry Stacey, but I think Justin’s chart is more illuminating. We knew not-handsome Zuckerberg, Musk, et al were propping up GDP with their fly by night investments in data centers, IT, etc. They are among the worst enablers of the current regime.
It's all about the color. Stacey, it's all about the color. As Justin would say, sorry, mate. Love this post from both of you. The humor and intelligence and information and authenticity. I know Justin will give you a pillow anyway and, let's face it, you are probably contributing to Justin's early demise with those peanut butter bombs---but---if that's what he wants. Truly appreciate you both.
the Tariff that DT enacts are not logical to us because DT is fine with stealing from Americans. he SAYS it's to punish other countries, but that's just so you'll accept the grift
Justin, I did find your chart a little more informative for those of us who are not economists, however, since Stacey is doing this podcast regularly with you, she should have the logo pillow for her background! Give it up, Professor! ;)
Good discussion! Enjoy the humor and friendship you both show.
My vote is for Justin's chart (sorry Stacey but there will be future charts, right?) - so clear that our eggs are in one main basket... that's fine tho, right? What could go wrong
One serious question - consider for a moment if we didn't have the Ai boom booming - that's a lot of investments capital that could have gone somewhere else. What could have caught fire instead of Ai? Imagine that investment into housing, even for-profit/rental housing. We know that need exists, that demand. How does the invisible hand roll the dice and come up with Ai rather than something that's a known, if old-school, useful need for the nation?
Justin’s chart won my vote for the Wow! effect: The dramatic illustration of the significant contribution by AI and AI-related work to the U.S. economy since January 2025 — notably in red, to boot — vis à vis the rest of the economy.
However …
As Justin himself acknowledged, his chart required asterisks (i.e., caveats).
Stacey’s did not.
Ergo, Stacey deserves SOME credit for providing a chart without caveats.
If I could have split my one vote, I would have given Justin 55% of it and Stacey 45%.
Egad!
Does that mean I’m starting to show an economist’s propensity to say, “On the one hand this, on the one hand that”?
Sorry, Harry Truman. (A once-exasperated President Truman once famously quipped in a light-hearted way, “Give me a one-handed economist!”)
But seriously …
Thank you, Justin and Stacey, for another good show.
Sorry Stacey, but I think Justin’s chart is more illuminating. We knew not-handsome Zuckerberg, Musk, et al were propping up GDP with their fly by night investments in data centers, IT, etc. They are among the worst enablers of the current regime.
It's all about the color. Stacey, it's all about the color. As Justin would say, sorry, mate. Love this post from both of you. The humor and intelligence and information and authenticity. I know Justin will give you a pillow anyway and, let's face it, you are probably contributing to Justin's early demise with those peanut butter bombs---but---if that's what he wants. Truly appreciate you both.
It apparently was about the color!! 😭 I brought a knife to a gun fight. Thank you for listening!!
my pleasure
the Tariff that DT enacts are not logical to us because DT is fine with stealing from Americans. he SAYS it's to punish other countries, but that's just so you'll accept the grift
Justin, I did find your chart a little more informative for those of us who are not economists, however, since Stacey is doing this podcast regularly with you, she should have the logo pillow for her background! Give it up, Professor! ;)
Good discussion! Enjoy the humor and friendship you both show.
My vote is for Justin's chart (sorry Stacey but there will be future charts, right?) - so clear that our eggs are in one main basket... that's fine tho, right? What could go wrong
One serious question - consider for a moment if we didn't have the Ai boom booming - that's a lot of investments capital that could have gone somewhere else. What could have caught fire instead of Ai? Imagine that investment into housing, even for-profit/rental housing. We know that need exists, that demand. How does the invisible hand roll the dice and come up with Ai rather than something that's a known, if old-school, useful need for the nation?
Justin’s chart won my vote for the Wow! effect: The dramatic illustration of the significant contribution by AI and AI-related work to the U.S. economy since January 2025 — notably in red, to boot — vis à vis the rest of the economy.
However …
As Justin himself acknowledged, his chart required asterisks (i.e., caveats).
Stacey’s did not.
Ergo, Stacey deserves SOME credit for providing a chart without caveats.
If I could have split my one vote, I would have given Justin 55% of it and Stacey 45%.
Egad!
Does that mean I’m starting to show an economist’s propensity to say, “On the one hand this, on the one hand that”?
Sorry, Harry Truman. (A once-exasperated President Truman once famously quipped in a light-hearted way, “Give me a one-handed economist!”)
But seriously …
Thank you, Justin and Stacey, for another good show.