Wall Street's Latest Ghost Story
The Financial Times points to Wall Street's recent 'weird selloffs' in sectors like wealth management and insurance, framing it as a reaction to a looming 'AI threat' to white-collar jobs. This explanation attributes billions in market value reductions to a speculative future, diverting scrutiny from more tangible, immediate financial pressures. This isn't an isolated incident, but a predictable
pattern. In 2008, the crash was blamed on 'subprime mortgages,' as if individual borrowers were solely responsible, not the deregulated predatory lending by institutions like Lehman Brothers. In the dot-com bust of 2000, it was 'irrational exuberance,' a vague psychological state, rather than speculative bubbles driven by venture capital. Now, another abstract force, artificial intelligence,
conveniently steps in to absorb the blame for market contractions that might otherwise point to systemic vulnerabilities or overvaluation. The current narrative conveniently overlooks that the very companies championing AI are often the same ones experiencing record profits and market capitalizations, indicating a transfer of wealth rather than an existential threat. One might recall the 'Y2K bug'
fear of 1999, which also led to significant spending and market shifts based on an exaggerated, then ultimately non-eventful, technological disruption. This constant search for external, almost mythical, market forces allows the core mechanisms of capital accumulation and risk transfer to remain unquestioned. They are not 'weird selloffs' but rather the predictable mechanics of a system designed