Tobias Burns
5.2K posts


Kevin Warsh just made an argument that, if he's right, sends interest rates significantly lower than the market expects (save this). His claim is that we're at the front end of a deflationary wave driven by AI making the cost of production fall across nearly every industry. His deeper concern is that the Fed is still running on economic models from 1978, with no institutional framework for recognizing what happens when a technology-driven productivity boom permanently changes the relationship between growth and prices. He pointed to Alan Greenspan's famous bet in the 1990s... Greenspan held rates steady and let the economy run hot because he believed the internet productivity boom was real and would show up in the data. He was right. Output per hour grew 2.7% annually while inflation dropped to 1.9%, one of the most beneficial macro environments in modern history. Warsh thinks that bet is on the table again, and that a Fed anchored to old models risks tightening into a productivity boom and strangling growth that would have otherwise been non-inflationary. The data backing the thesis goes like this: The cost of running frontier AI has collapsed from $30 per million input tokens in early 2023 to pennies today, and by the end of 2026, today's frontier capabilities will likely be available near-free. When the price of intelligence approaches zero, the cost structure of every industry that uses intelligence starts falling with it. But there's a flip side worth taking seriously. AI-related price pressures have already added roughly 0.3 percentage points to core PCE through hardware prices, software hikes disguised as AI upgrades, and electricity costs from data center power consumption. Microsoft raised M365 by 30%. Adobe raised Creative Cloud Photography by 50%. Intuit raised QuickBooks by 45%. All justified with AI features, all showing up as price increases in the inflation data. Almost everyone agrees AI will eventually be deflationary if it delivers on the productivity promise. The main fight is over timing. Is the payoff 2 years away or 10? And should the Fed act on that expectation now or wait for the data to confirm it first? Nearly 60% of economists surveyed by the University of Chicago's Center for Markets said Warsh's AI thesis would have minimal impact on inflation or rates over the next two years. If he's right, we're entering an environment where growth stops being a rate hike trigger, deflation comes through the supply side, and the companies investing most aggressively in AI now pull further ahead. If he's wrong and the old models still apply, rates stay higher for longer and the productivity payoff gets pushed further out than the market has priced in. The market is betting he's at least partially right. If you want to track how this plays out, what it means for rates, AI infrastructure investment, and the risk assets (like crypto) positioned to benefit from a Fed that finally sees that the productivity boom is real... Join Milk Road PRO, link bio: @MilkRoad





“We've stopped making babies. We've decided that being distracted by a dopamine hit around Candy Crush might be a good way to spend your time. Not if you're a full human," former Sen. Ben Sasse says in an extended interview. cbsn.ws/4cA1Jrp









