This seems like pure slopulism to me, to be honest. It doesn't back its claim that pensions funds are fueling the supposed bubble, just that pension funds are invested in AI companies. The given solution of completely divesting from index funds (since some AI companies are in the Nasdaq) is also completely unreasonable.
>Are we on the brink of the next financial crisis? Last Thursday, there was a “bloodbath in tech stocks,” as the stock market lost $3.2 trillion in a single day.
Sounds bad, until you take a closer look and see that this was just a 4% decrease.
>In the longer term, with enough political will, we can redirect our retirement savings towards productive investment, such as building out affordable housing and funding the renewable energy transition. For example, NYC Comptroller Mark Levine announced a $4 billion affordable housing initiative in April. Pension fund trustees could follow his lead rather than direct money towards Blackstone, one of the country’s largest landlords and a major fund manager for public pensions.
The slop bells are deafening. I suspect that the author is driven more by political motives than a sincere belief that the AI industry is financially doomed.
Affordable housing initiatives in major US cities are somewhere between charity for the poor and a sinecure for people who have lived in that city for a long time as renters (that actively harms everyone else who would like to live in that city). It is not something that people should expect to make money investing in.
Anyway yeah this entire article is left-progressive slop. If you go to the About page (https://lpeproject.org/about/) you will find the text "We believe that developments over the last several decades in legal scholarship and policy helped to facilitate rising inequality and precarity, political alienation, the entrenchment of racial hierarchies and intersectional exploitation, and ecological and social catastrophe." These are all left-progressive political shibboleths.
Yeah, anytime someone doesn't use percentages for stock moves I know they have some agenda they are pushing.
Literal slop for negative expected return. No way affordable housing is an investment. The delinquency rates would kill any return.
> 4% decrease
-4.3% that day, as of today its -0.81% since then. who cares about 1 day moves? where is the new article about the 2.6T in gains? big number bad or big number good?
Hey aren't you the same guy that posted
> I'm not convinced the AI bubble exists
a few days ago?
Especially obvious political agenda when they advocate using retirement savings to fund affordable housing. Is it actually better for retirees to subsidize something that the free market struggles to fund profitably?