As artificial intelligence transforms from a narrative theme on Wall Street into a tangible engine of U.S. economic growth, a deeper question is emerging: has the world’s largest economy tied its fate too closely to a technology still undergoing rapid evolution? Peter Orszag, CEO of the renowned investment bank Lazard, recently offered a sobering assessment: “The U.S. economy has become a leveraged bet on the success of AI.” In Orszag’s view, the sources of U.S. economic growth have become highly concentrated on two intertwined pillars—artificial intelligence itself, and high-income consumers who benefit from the AI-driven rise in the stock market. If the AI narrative falters, both engines could stall simultaneously.
The latest data supports this observation. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, real GDP grew at an annualized rate of 2.0% in the first quarter of 2026. An analysis by Bespoke Investment Group shows that investment in software and IT equipment contributed 134 basis points to GDP growth in the quarter, meaning technology infrastructure drove 67% of economic growth—surpassing the historical record set during the dot-com bubble. In its mid-year economic outlook, Morgan Stanley pointed out that the U.S. economy is shifting from “consumption-driven” to “AI capital expenditure-driven” as support, with corporate AI investment firing on all cylinders while private consumption gradually loses momentum under pressure from oil prices and incomes. David Sacks, former AI advisor to the Trump administration, went even further: “In the first quarter, AI accounted for 75% of GDP growth. Stopping AI progress would be equivalent to stopping the U.S. economy.”
The “high-income consumers” Orszag refers to are precisely the core force driving the other end of the U.S. economy. JPMorgan previously estimated that AI-related stocks account for more than 40% of the S&P 500’s market capitalization. If their value falls by 10%, U.S. household wealth would evaporate by $2.7 trillion, and consumer spending would decrease by approximately $95 billion. However, research from Cresset Capital shows that the top 10% of earners in the U.S. contribute nearly half of all consumer spending, the top 20% of households hold about 70% of financial assets, while middle- and low-income groups face increasingly prominent issues such as slowing consumption and depleted savings—revealing the inherent fragility of economic growth.
Orszag warns that the labor market could face a “fast, large-scale shock.” According to Noor Trends statistics, as of mid-May 2026, more than 113,000 employees from over 179 companies have lost their jobs in AI-driven restructurings, with the scale of layoffs roughly one-third higher than the same period in 2025. Standard Chartered Bank announced it will cut more than 15% of its corporate functions and back-office roles by 2030, affecting nearly 8,000 jobs, with its CEO explicitly stating that AI and automation are the core drivers. HSBC is considering a restructuring plan that could impact approximately 20,000 positions, and Citigroup continues to advance its global plan to cut 20,000 jobs. A World Economic Forum survey shows that 57% of chief economists expect AI to result in net job losses over a ten-year horizon.
Despite his deep concerns, Orszag also said, “Like many bets, it could succeed or it could fail, but it is a good bet to take.” AI has become a de facto pillar of the U.S. economy—contributing two-thirds of GDP growth and driving hundreds of billions of dollars in capital expenditures. Orszag’s warning is not essentially a rejection of AI’s technological prospects, but rather a caution about concentration: an economic growth propped up by the capital expenditures of a few tech giants and the wealth effect of a small number of high-income consumers—when any link experiences an expectation gap, the feedback effect could be swift and violent.
