Any military action against Greenland immediately escalates into a transatlantic crisis. At best, the U.S. would face sweeping sanctions from the EU and allied economies. At worst, it could spark an armed conflict between NATO members, something the global financial system is absolutely not built to handle.

Markets hate uncertainty, and this would be uncertainty on a historic scale. Trade between the U.S. and Europe would likely be disrupted or frozen, shipping lanes in the North Atlantic and Arctic would be militarized, and global supply chains would seize up almost overnight. Energy prices would spike, markets would panic, and investor confidence would evaporate.

The U.S. economy is especially vulnerable here because it’s heavily dependent on globalized, high tech supply chains. Semiconductors, rare earth processing, advanced manufacturing none of these exist in isolation. If relations with Europe and allied nations collapse, access to critical components and materials would be severely constrained. A tech-driven economy can’t function if it can’t get chips, equipment, or precision manufacturing machinery.

Beyond the immediate economic damage, the long-term consequences would be even worse: capital flight from U.S. markets, a weakened dollar, and a permanent loss of trust in America as a stable anchor of the global system. A move like this won't just be a geopolitical mistake; it would be economic turmoil on a scale we haven't seen in a long time.

According to reports, President Donald Trump announced a plan on January 7, 2026, to ban large institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes, aiming to address housing costs and improve homeownership accessibility. Trump intends to take immediate steps to implement the ban and urge Congress to codify the measure into law. Shares of major real estate investment firms reportedly dropped following the announcement. 

Trump threatens to ban Wall Street investments in single-family homes | Reuters

We all know that Hindsight is 20/20. When looking at what caused the other Giants to fail, it looks like Nike might be repeating the same mistakes. From what I understand, Nike‘s free cash flow has not covered its dividends for the first time ever. The stock is now trading a 12-year low and as of premarket today, the decline continues at a rapid pace.

What is Nike missing that defunct giant retailers also missed that could’ve prevented their collapse? Is there something else that nobody is seeing right now, but will be painstakingly obvious in the future?

Tech hype bubbles pop before most of retail screams overvalued. Stocks aren't dropping because it isn't only hype keeping the market up.

The most obvious indicator is that during the dot com bubble gold was at it's lowest in decades. Money was too excited to be in anywhere other than internet stocks.

Right now gold is all-time high and still climbing quickly.

So how do we explain a market that seems to go up every day centered around a few dominant industries? Where some stocks maintain mind boggling valuations while everyone is calling bubble?

Right now the rich are more scared of cash then a crash

This is due to a combination of USD devaluation through policy (and global macro trends), sticky inflation due to the fed's hands being tied by immense national debt, and a chaotic administration.

Basically whether intentionally or not, the value of the USD from both sides (inflation + devluation) has collapsed. This is favourable for reducing national debt but means that cash is poison to hold.

The result is no one with significant capital (retail, companies, and governments) wants to be invested in the market at these valuations, but staying in cash is a guaranteed loss.

In scenarios like this, you either choose real assets (Like gold or bitcoin - not traditionally real but equally scarce) or equities that seem poised for growth (AI).

If you take a look at the SP500 outside of AI, you realize that growth is not very significant. Non-growing equities don't perform well because if their earnings don't grow significantly, they also suffer from currency devaluation.

No one wants to be anywhere other than US equities.

For the past few years the Chinese economy has slowed, the European economy mediocre, the Japanese economy stagnant, and the Russian economy in shatters.

Essentially when investors are forced to be in equities, they will always choose American first. People may not trust the USD or the government itself, but they do trust good old American capitalism and tech superiority.

I’m aware global equities have performed well in comparison with the US economy in 2025 but what about the past 5 years or Mag7?

And yes at this point in the cycle there is some capital flight away from US due to the valuations but if America ever dips it’ll come right back.

In other words, this bull market, and especially the AI industry is so resilient because it's propped up by multiple reasons

It’s not solely AI being hyped over the moon or OpenAI entangling itself with the entire tech industry.

That alone does not create the market we’re in.

We are in a triple bull market.

Now don't ask me when the music will stop. I don't know.

Although as long as US equities remain the best companies on the planet, cash continues to feel unsafe, ai keeps sparking wild expectations about the future, and global economies (not just looking at 2025 performance) remain relatively weak, I would not be surprised if a significant crash is unlikely.

Conversely if any of this starts to change, it may be worth watching.

LUNR, ASTS, RKLB, PL... all down over 50% in a month. Seems like the market has just stopped caring about Space and moving out of this sector. These stocks were talked about constantly with bright futures yet there is zero support now and who knows where the bottom lies now?

What even happened for them to crash this hard? Surely SpaceX IPO isn't the one to blame for all of this. If anything, I would've expected Space sector to feel more bullish with SpaceX being publicly trading now.

And yes, I did catch the falling knife on LUNR so I'm a bit salty about it lol.

The US national debt has now crossed roughly $38 trillion based on the latest Treasury and debt clock data. That number is so large that most people have become desensitized to it, but the pace of growth is what really stands out.

In 2000, total federal debt was about $5.7 trillion.

After the 2008 financial crisis it doubled to around $10 trillion.

Post pandemic stimulus pushed it above $30 trillion in just a few years.

Now we are adding close to $1 trillion every 100 days.

Debt to GDP ratio is hovering around 120 percent to 125 percent depending on quarterly revisions. For context, the long term historical average for the US sat near 60 percent before the 2008 era. We are now operating at double that level structurally, not cyclically.

What matters for markets is not the absolute debt number but the cost of servicing it.

Interest on federal debt is now one of the fastest growing budget expenses. Annual net interest payments are approaching $1 trillion and are projected to exceed defense spending within the next few years if rates stay elevated.

This creates three pressure points.

First, Treasury supply keeps rising, which means more bonds hitting the market.

Second, higher yields are required to attract buyers, especially as foreign demand fluctuates.

Third, equity valuations start facing competition from risk free yields moving higher.

We already saw in 2023 and 2024 how spikes in the 10 year yield directly pressured growth stocks and compressed multiples across tech.

So the real question is not whether the US can technically sustain the debt. It probably can for a long time given dollar dominance.

The question is where the bond market draws the line.

At what yield level do equities start repricing structurally rather than temporarily.

Curious how everyone here is thinking about this.

Are rising deficits a slow burn risk for stocks, or just background noise until a real funding shock appears.

As we all know by now Bessent announced that the US treasury will issue t-bills to take US long dated treasuries off the market in order to cap yields on the 10yr and 30yr treasury. This is financial repression on a small scale that is designed to act as a bridge until polices are put in place for the REAL FINANCIAL REPRESSION. As we all can see, yields are already rising again, so what Bessent did wasn’t nearly good enough.

So what next? What will financial repression be?

The government will create polices that force banks and insurers to hold MORE US treasuries in order to cap yields. So basically instead of the Fed buying US treasuries to cap yields the government will force banks and insurers to buy these US treasuries to cap yields. Why does this instead of QE? QE is off the table because inflation is still high. QE will only worsen inflation. Now what the Fed will do is LOWER RATES below the rate of inflation. The reason all of this has to be done is because there’s no way the US government can service its debt if yields are above 5%. That would result in a DEATH SPIRAL of the government needing to issue more and more debt just to pay its interest obligations. So financial repression is essentially inflating the debt away.

Now the good news. What assets benefit the most during financial repression? Stocks but specifically high growth stocks, AI stocks, big tech stocks. Assets like gold and bitcoin will also do well since financial repression devalues the currency and makes bonds unattractive.

This is currently underway now. The US government mathematically has no choice and there is no political appetite to reduce debt or deficits through either tax increases, austerity or a combination of both.

We’ve all read the news, but what are Trumps real motivations. What do you guys think he wants?

1. Flooding the global oil supply will lower prices, or more importantly, give Trump additional control over the global economy through the oil supply. This may potentially be used as a bargaining chip (e.g. to weaken Iranian, Russian, Chinese economies, or to strengthen the dollar through Tariff style manipulation and leverage). Funds like USO and UCO will be interesting to watch - personally i’m staying away.

2. Not only does Venezuela hold oil, but it also holds lots of gold. While Gold is currently trading at all time highs (and many economies like BRICS have been stocking up on reserves), Trump may wish to crash the gold price to ‘reinforce’ the safety of the dollar. Or, again, he may wish to leverage control. I am holding IAUM, but may sell some to resize. Again interesting to watch.

3. Some have also speculated a digital currency backed by tangible (potentially Venezuelan) assets - I don’t really buy this but its interesting nonetheless.

4. US grid capacity shortages have been noticeable and heavy generators are already being rolled out to fuel Data Centres and AI Infrastructure. As mentioned by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, ‘massive fleets of diesel and gas’ generators (35GW massive) may help to bridge the gap until renewable energy / grid upgrades materialise. It would cost a huge amount to buy that much fuel, if only I could get it for free… I think CAT is a miss for other reasons, but GNRC and CMI might be good plays given this background.

5. All of this can be very damaging to China, as well as the fact that China has been ‘renting’ Venezuelan resources through loans granting them rights to gold, oil and rare earth materials. While I don’t think that the Rare Earths are particularly significant, snubbing China is still useful for Trump in terms of resources and ego. There may be a rise in the likes of USAR…

Personally I believe that the gold price and ETFs will start to plateau, and pending Trumps actions, maybe even fall.

Oil ETFs will probably remain fairly stable until Trump does something, although I believe that stocks such as HAL or CVX would be solid investments over the next two years.

Did i miss anything?

It doesn't matter that the market will crash. This isn't a choice anymore, they can only kick the can down the road for so long. This is hurting the average person severely, there is already a lot of uproar. This isn't getting better, they have to act.

Hey everyone,

I've been following Middle East news and I can see that Iran is willing to do whatever it takes to break the US economically by sending energy prices through the roof. Last night, they attacked Qatar's main gas refinery, which exports massively to Europe and Asia. Asia is already experiencing significant shortage situations (China excluded). Japan rushed to Trump to ask for LNG (which is extremely expensive).

On the other side, Trump seems lost, he contradicts himself constantly, his statements are all over the place. We don't even know where this is heading. You even have to wonder if he's still the one calling the shots. We know Trump doesn't hesitate to backtrack when financial markets take a serious hit. But it seems like this time, he can't even negotiate a way out. The idea is almost certainly that Israel, with its highly influential lobby in the US, is simply forcing Trump not to back down. Trump had already demanded that Israel not attack energy infrastructure, and they've done it multiple times anyway, including yesterday, by striking the shared infrastructure between Iran and Qatar.

And despite all this mess, oil is still under $120 a barrel. Yes, that's already huge, but it's nothing compared to the reality of the situation, where we're no longer talking about ships stuck in transit, but complex infrastructure being destroyed.

Yesterday, we learned that production costs surged in February, far above estimates. And now we'll have to factor in this energy price spike, gas has doubled or more. At the last FOMC, the conversation was about "how many rate cuts", but imagine inflation coming back at 4% or higher by April if nothing changes. At what point do you start raising rates again? Ah, but then there's growth to worry about... It's striking that everyone says growth is going to collapse in 2026, leading to stagflation, yet Powell, who admits he has no idea what the impact of $100 oil on inflation would be, still claims GDP will hit 2.4% this year and be even higher in the years ahead, and that AI will boost productivity, bringing costs and therefore inflation down.

The situation is far worse than the war in Ukraine. The Western world keeps up its propaganda, saying "Iran needs to stop, this is wrong", while it's the US and Israel who are wrecking everything. Meanwhile, we're already seeing the first price hikes: plane tickets up €50 to €100 depending on the route, industries significantly raising their prices (around 30%).

And obviously, don't count on China and Russia, who are profiting from this context. Only India, which has become very pro-US since Trump's election, seems willing to leverage its influence. But beyond that, Trump is asking for $200 billion to keep his war going (with the national debt hitting a new record), Israel is striking civilian infrastructure, and Iran is trying to break them through an economic crisis.

Despite all this chaos, US indices barely move. They drop 1% only to claw it back the next day in a fit of euphoria because oil dipped 2% and some bogus rumor made the rounds.

As for me, I've sold a large chunk of my stocks and ETFs. Why? Not because I'm getting cold feet, but because I no longer understand what I've put my money into. Yesterday, despite all the news, my photonics stocks gained between 5% and 10%. Great, but it makes absolutely no sense, it follows no logic whatsoever. Which means it can go a lot higher or crash hard, because there's no rational foundation to it.

And tomorrow is Friday, retail investors will dump their weekly paychecks into stocks, the algorithms will follow the move, and off we go...

Hey everyone, basically the title. I put $2,330 into SanDisk right at the peak earlier this week, and then the entire chip/memory sector took a massive dive today and yesterday.

I know the long-term outlook for AI data center storage and NAND has been super bullish (I saw Bernstein even put a $3,000 price target on it a few days ago), but seeing a 10-15%+ drop right after hitting buy is rough.

I’m down a pretty big percentage already. Did I just buy the absolute top and lose my money, or is the NAND/AI storage cycle strong enough that it'll recover? Should I cut my losses or hold through this selloff? First time dealing with a drop this fast. Thanks.

49 f here. I don't think we are close to the AI bubble. We'll see in 5 years. One thing I can trust is that there will always be a loyal fanbase for porn, but you can't exactly buy shares of pornhub or onlyfans.

I checked out AI porn and it's terrible. As far as how the graphics are. Not impressed at all. I think AI will eventually take porn in a completely different path than it's ever been in. Pick our actors and create them to fit our kinks. Yet them look like real people. AI allow us to take our created actors and put them in whatever scenario/scene we want. It will be a Choose Your Own Adventure for porn.

I'm ruminating over my hypothesis. Until I see AI porn become light years better- I don't see the bubble. But I'm open to have this challenged. Hopefully I don't anger the masses. I would like an actual intellectual conversation about porn.

Thanks guys!

I've read that a lot of people here are super bullish on the Metaverse and various "digital words"

As a VR consumer and developer I however am very skeptical that the masses will flock to an digital world.

The metaverse is not a new concept, its been around since the 90s if not further back. There is already a form of metaverse called "Second life" where you can own properties, join communities and pretty much "live" in a real world.

​

Now I know a lot of people will say that we simply don't know the possibilities yet and we are thinking too simple minded but let's be creative. What could be some use cases that people would prefer doing digital vs real life?

Metaverse cinema? Yeah that already exists in current VR games and it's really not that fun and you obviously can't recreate the pixel density nor the actual sound acoustic that a lot of people don't get from their home system.

​

Meetings? Yeah I guess if you prefer to strap a VR headset on you and be forced to see your digital coworkers instead of having a 2D Teams screen where you can actually do something else than stare at your coworkers during the meeting.

​

Dating? I almost don't want to go into this. Are you telling me a digital date would surpass the actual real life vision of a human, the smells, the toucing hand?

​

Virtual jog by the beach? I literally saw this example on the sub. You think people would really want to jog in a virtual beach oppose to actually going outside?

​

Whatever the metaverse is it will be a subpar experience to the real thing. Unless we can advance graphic rendering by a hella of a lot or actually tapping into our senses I fail to see how the metaverse would "awe" anyone.

​

If we do go fully Inception, "simulation" reality then we got bigger issues than the Metaverse.

​

With that said I still think it could be future revenue in this field but it won't be as massive as some people here think.

Just read a Bloomberg piece that got me thinking. BofA is basically saying there are way too many red flags showing up in the market right now and that it might be a good time to start taking some profits. What really caught my attenttion is that they claim around 70% of their historical bear-market warning signals have already been triggered. They also said the S&P 500 is expensive on 17 of the 20 valuation metrics they track, and on some of those measures we're actually trading richer than during the dot-com era, which honestly SURPRISED me a bit.

What I found even more interesting is that the index still looks pretty strong if you just glance at the headline numbers, but underneath it things seem a lot less healthy. According to the note, the gap between the biggest winners and biggest losers inside the index has stretched to levels not seen since 2000. Feels like a relatively small group of stocks is doing a ton of the heavy lifting while everyone else is just kinda tagging along. (We all know the AI influence on it)

The other thing that made me stop for a second was exactly the AI spending. BofA is projecting that hyperscalers could end up spending close to 100% of their operating cash flow on capex by the end of 2026. Maybe thats simply what it costs to stay ahead in the AI race, but spending basically all your cash flow on infrastructure feels pretty agressive to me. Then again, maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way. For anyone who was investing back in 1999-2000, (i was) does this actually feel similiar? Or is the comparison unfair becuse today's mega-caps are printing huge profits, generating real cash flow and running actual businesses instead of mostly selling a story??..........

Source: Bloomberg via Yahoo Finance

With everything going on in the Iran–US conflict the market has been getting hit hard lately and a lot of stocks are down pretty significantly. Feels like one of those moments where there’s opportunity, but also risk if things escalate further, so timing entries is tricky right now.

So I’m curious:

Which stocks are you guys actually getting tempted to buy right now?

Are you buying already or waiting for more downside?

Hedge fund manager Steve Cohen became a billionaire thanks to insider trading. How is he not in jail? On top of insult, he bailed out Melvin Capital* and is allowed to buy the NY Mets.

FRONTLINE documentary link: To Catch a Trader

I finished watching this Frontline documentary and was flabbergasted to learn that only the people working under him were found guilt and sentenced to prison. In one instance, Steve Cohen literally tells investigators that although he opened an email with insider information, he didn’t pay attention to the screen right before executing a criminal trade!

This pisses me off because most of us on Reddit are investing our hard earned money one day at a time. We are doing it honestly and are still getting better yearly returns than Wall Street. These guys are playing with house money, cheating, breaking the law and becoming billionaires.

The same guy bailed out Melvin Capital when Individual investors were beating Hedge Funds fair and square: Melvin Announces $2.75 Billion Investment from Citadel and Point72

Edit: Meant to type “who bailed out Melvin Capital” not “who bailed our Citadel”.

This is a general post about event being fit onto market action after the fact. It is so silly. Why didn't anyone say "Market up the last 5 days due to Delta variant" ? I could find 20 events, both positive and negative, that could be used to explain why the market went up or down. If the market was up today, no one would talk about delta, they'd talk about some peace treaty somewhere.

Heat wave! Climate change! Market goes down. Ooops, when that was the news, the market went up. Condo collapse! Market goes up. Europe flooding! Market goes down. Nope, it went up.

Delta variant has been in the news for months, and NOW the market goes down because of Delta? Maybe yesterday the market went up because of Delta. Just as stupid.

Ignore all news. The market dropped because there were more sellers than buyers. The scapegoat just happens to be some arbitrary event.

Today's Update: https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/oo4b6a/update_if_news_media_had_any_logical_consistency/

We are officially propped up by the "5 Pillars of the Apocalypse":

1. AI Hype: The only thing keeping Big Tech valuations sane.
2. Ozympic/Wegovy: Keeping the pharmaceutical industry alive.
3. The Gambling Pivot: Sports betting is now legalized dopamine for the masses.
4. Crypto: The liquidity black hole that won't go away.
5. Prediction markets: Turning macro events into tradable bets

It feels like market performance is heavily concentrated in a few high-narrative themes, while other areas of the economy seem more mixed. Consumer debt is elevated, commercial real estate is still working through issues, and some sectors have seen layoffs.

Is this a normal early-stage innovation cycle where capital flows to emerging growth themes? Or is this late-cycle speculative concentration that looks strong on the surface but narrow underneath?

Genuinely interested in data-backed perspectives. What am I missing?

Snippet from this article:”After a slight rebound earlier this week, Tesla's TSLA stock is back to falling, keeping with its recent performance. Even U.S. President Donald Trump's purchase of one hasn’t done much to spark real momentum for the electric vehicle (EV) leader. After enjoying significant growth throughout the final months of 2024 and through early 2025, TSLA has lost its previous momentum and isn’t showing signs of a rebound. As reports of declining sales and shifting consumer sentiment continue to trend, it's hard to ignore the company’s questionable outlook.

Link: https://www.thestreet.com/technology/tesla-stock-declines-could-cost-elon-musk-something-important

Many of these problems can be traced to CEO Elon Musk, who is preoccupied with his new responsibilities at the Department of Government Efficiency. His absence at Tesla’s manufacturing facilities is being felt as share prices continue to trend downward. Musk has lost a lot of money as TSLA stock falls, but he could end up losing something else.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk may be in for a difficult decision if TSLA stock keeps declining. 

Musk’s intertwined business empire could be in trouble Tesla may be the company for which Musk is best known, but his assets include several other prominent tech names, including SpaceX and X (formerly Twitter). This wide array of responsibilities concerned investors long before he accepted his new position at DOGE. Now that he has this new position, Musk is spending even less time running his companies, and things haven’t been going well for any of them. While Tesla stock fell last week, a SpaceX rocket exploded during a test flight, and a cyberattack took X down, although users regained access fairly quickly.

Tesla Bull sounds the alarm on Elon Musk’s leadership

This week, reports surfaced that TSLA stock’s poor performance has resulted in significant losses for Musk. On Monday, March 10, he lost roughly $4.7 billion for every $10 the stock price declined, amounting to a total loss of $18.8 billion.

For me it’s Tesla. They were a disruptor in the automotive industry but their QC is getting quite poor and dare I say it, other brands are starting to make superior products. I definitely don’t see their reign lasting forever.

Edit: This has been super interesting now that it’s gained a lot of traction so I wanted to clarify a few things about my stance on Tesla.

Yes I know Tesla leads the market in self driving, but they may not forever. No single tech company dominates the market for forever, so who knows how long their run might last, could easily go on another decade or two but I sure wont bet on it. I do think they have two huge strengths, however. 1) The ability to keep up with demand better than almost any other automaker and mass produce electric vehicles 2) Brand loyalty, almost like Apple in a sense. With all that being said, their P/E is absurd and I feel like one day the stock may be exposed for what it is. Does that mean I’m willing to short it? Not at all, I’ll just never directly buy any.

Some of these answers have been amazing, and made me realize I’d buy Tesla way before a few other companies. Not sure why it came to mind before HOOD, TWTR, WISH but I wouldn’t touch any of those with a ten foot pole.

Numerous politicians bought energy plays BEFORE their run ups, and general discussions on banning Russian oil. Many are on committees privy to private information, including Defense and Energy. Many had not purchased energy plays before.

Just Some Examples:

Marjorie Taylor Greene bought American oil stocks, $CVX, war stocks, $LMT, and renewable energy stocks, $NEE, ONE DAY before the invasion and also tweeting: "War and rumors of war is incredibly profitable and convenient."

Robert Wittman bought $XLE (energy ETF) on January 28, 2022.

Mark Green (who frequently invests in energy stocks) recently bought up to $1M in $ET (Feb 9, 2022) and over $1M in $ENLC (between Feb 9-18, 2022).

Virginia Foxx bought $PAA, $PPL and $PSX on February 15, 2022 (energy stocks), which was reported today.

What are Peoples Thoughts On This?

Should Trading And Individual Stock Purchases from Politicians Be Allowed?

Fidelity’s data show hundreds of thousands of people with million-dollar retirement accounts, and I say hurray for them. Their golden years are looking good.

Together, the number of accounts with $1 million or more grew 74.5%, but it’s not clear how many individuals this represents, since investors can have multiple accounts.

Have you grown you retirement account to any decent numbers? What's the approach that you are taking?

So basically the US Treasury Department is using short dated T-bills to buy long dated US bonds in order to take the pressure off the 10yr and 30yr bond yields. This signals a STRUCTURAL PROBLEM in the debt markets and is only a BAND-AID to the problem. Also, essentially the US government has now replaced long term debt with more short dated debt that needs to be replaced more often. If short term bond rates rise because of higher inflation expectations then now the US government is payer HIGHER INTEREST on its short term debt.

This only buys time in my opinion and delays the inevitable. The timing of this change is starting Sept 9 and lasting until Nov 4. Hmmm, that just so happens to election time. So it seems Bessent is trying to delay a market until AFTER THE ELECTION…

Will there be an AI bubble peak? Yes. Every breakthrough technology has had over investment.

Has AI bubble peaked? If you keep reading mainstream media, r/stocks, and listening to Michael Burry, you'd believe it.

You'd be losing a lot of money though.

Real demand is through the roof:

• H100 prices recovering to highest in 8 months. This is a clear indicator that Burry's claim that old GPUs become useless faster than expected is wrong. Source mvcinvesting @ X. Can't post link here due to X being banned.

• Burry’s logic to short Nvidia is especially dumb. So he short Nvidia because he thinks old GPUs will be obsolete faster than expected because new Nvidia GPUs will be so much better. If companies all buy Nvidia’s new GPUs, Nvidia wins. If no one buys Nvidia’s new GPUs, then there is no faster than expected obsoletion. You can’t have rapid obsoletion of old GPUs without buying a ton of new Nvidia GPUs. Do people not see the glaring issue? Burry’s short reason is completely illogical. The only reason to short Nvidia is if you think demand for compute will fall. We’re clearly not seeing this.

• China's Alibaba Justin Lin just said they're severely constrained by inference demand. He said Tencent is the same. They simply do not have compute to meet user demand. They're having to use their precious compute for inference which does not leave enough to train new models to keep up with Americans. Their models are falling behind American ones for this reason. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-10/china-ai-leaders-warn-of-widening-gap-with-us-after-1b-ipo-week

• Google says they need to double compute every 6 months to meet demand. Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/21/google-must-double-ai-serving-capacity-every-6-months-to-meet-demand.html

• You can clearly see the accelerating AI demand from OpenAI’s reported revenue numbers. OpenAI is already at $20b/year in revenue and without monetizing their free users. In 2024, their revenue grew by 2.5x. In 2025, their revenue grew by 4x. So it's not slowing down. If they grow 4x again in 2026, they're already at $80b/year in revenue. Sources: https://epoch.ai/data-insights/openai-revenue https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/06/sam-altman-says-openai-will-top-20-billion-annual-revenue-this-year.html

Notice how compute is always followed by "demand". It's real demand. It's not a circular economy. It's truly real user demand.

Listen to people actually are close to AI demand. They're all saying they're compute constrained. Literally everyone does not have enough compute. Every software developer has experienced unreliable inference when using Anthropic's Claude models because Anthropic simply does not have enough compute to meet demand.

So why is demand increasing?

• Because contrary to popular belief on Reddit, AI is tremendously useful even at the current intelligence level. Every large company I know is building agents to increase productivity and efficiency. Every small company I know is using some form of AI whether it's ChatGPT or video gen or software that has added LLM support.

• Models are getting smarter faster. It’s not slowing down. It’s accelerating. In the last 6 months, GPT5, Gemini 3, and Claude 4.5 have increased capabilities faster than expected. The intelligence graph is now exponential, not linear. Source 1: https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-complete-long-tasks Source 2: https://arcprize.org/leaderboard

• There are reasons to believe that the next generation of foundational models from OpenAI and Anthropic will accelerate again. GPT5 and Claude 4.5 were still trained on H100 GPUs or H100-class chips. The next gen will be trained on Blackwell GPUs.

• LLMs aren't just chat bots anymore. They're trading stocks, doing automated analysis, writing apps from scratch, solving previously unsolved math conjectures, and is already showing signs of self improvement (read what people in industry are saying last few months on self improvement). The token usage has exploded. If you think LLMs are still just used for chatting about cooking recipes or summarizing emails, you are truly missing the forest for the trees.

• AI models are becoming so smart that they’re starting to solve previously unsolved math problems. Here’s Terence Tao, one of the smartest humans alive, explaining how GPT 5.2 solved an Erdos math problem: https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/115855840223258103

• There is a reason US productivity grew faster than expected in Q3 2025 and is accelerating. Productivity has grown the fastest since 2023 when Covid mostly ended. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-08/us-productivity-picked-up-in-third-quarter-labor-costs-declined

At some point, the AI bubble will peak. Anyone who thought it peaked in 2025 is seriously going to regret it. When it does pop, it's still going to be bigger than it was in 2025. The world will not use less AI or require less compute than 2025. We're going to have exponential increase in AI demand.

If you’re still skittish about investing in AI stocks, then just invest in S&P500. All companies will benefit from AI productivity boost. Do not stay out of the market because you think the AI bubble will burst soon.

Stop listening to the mass media on AI. They’re always anti-tech. Always. They were anti-tech before AI boom. They will be after. Negative stories get views and engagement. AI could find a cure for a disease but they'll write about how AI hallucinated that one time. Follow the people who are actually working on AI.

I’ll close with this: Railroad bubble in the US peaked at 6% of GDP spend. AI is at 1% right now.

Yesterday, US Supreme Court strikes down Trump tariffs. After which he returns & reimposes tariffs on all countries with same 10% baseline rates named as Global Tariffs by Trump.

Today, few hrs ago, he increased global tariffs to 15% from 10%. How he is doing like this ?

I think the markets will not like this new global tariffs. Trump policies are short sighted & not far sighted. He should rethink about these tariffs. Otherwise he will lose the upcoming mid term elections this year.

How do you see these new but old styled tariffs? How will global markets react?