Nouriel Roubini

The maximum from an empirical point of view could be a negative 50 basis points downside to potential growth.

So you have an upside of 200 from technology, you have a downside of 50, it's a ratio of 4 to 1.

So tech trumps tariff.

So the stuff that is technology is first order, everything else, including geopolitics, is second order.

You know, I believe that there is some fraughtiness, of course, in the AI sector, but if you talk to all these companies, I think that they would all argue that we are maybe at worst five years away or at best three years away from AGI, however you want to define it.

Now, if we are achieving artificial general intelligence, the valuation of the, say, not every of the Mach 7 is going to reach AGI, but maybe three or four will.

So the value of a firm that's going to be having AGI is going to be 5x of its current value.

So that's the race.

So if you think of it this way, yeah, there is some fraughtiness.

There can be a correction.

But with US growth at 2% for the last few decades, the average return on S&P 500 was 12%, including dividends.

Of NASDAQ, it was 16%.

And it was with 2%.

Suppose growth is not two, three, let alone three and a half, four.

American exceptionalism has to become even stronger, because if it was American exceptionalism with 1.8% growth, with higher growth, it has to be better than that on average.

Now there'll be winners and losers, both within the publicly traded firms, old economy versus new economy, and among the startups, many of them are gonna go bust.

But if you're looking at the medium-term horizon, with higher growth, you're going to have higher returns.

And we're seeing, based on the data on real revenue growth for S&P 500 firms, that most of those productivity gains are gotten by the firms.

Real wages are growing less than productivity.

Unilever costs are falling.