Connect with us

Business

The next big corporate risk isn’t AI—it’s antitrust

Published

on



Corporate America is fixated on the wrong headline risk. While boardrooms debate model updates and AI guardrails, the more immediate threat is hiding in plain sight: the quiet hollowing out of the workforce—and the middle class that underwrites it. In just three months of 2025, 1.147 million foreign-born workers disappeared from the U.S. labor force, nearly a third of them foreign-born women. Over the same quarter, nearly 300,000 Black women were pushed out of the workforce. Those aren’t statistical blips; they’re structural alarms.

Look under the surface, and the picture sharpens. Black women’s labor force participation fell 2 percentage points in three months—a swing so abrupt that it took 16 years for prime-age women’s participation overall to fall just 4 points. Meanwhile, foreign-born women continue to have a participation rate of around 56%, which is significantly lower than the 77% rate for foreign-born men and slightly below the 57.8% rate for native-born women. Many of these women are funneled into caregiving, hospitality, food service, and domestic work—sectors that are undervalued, underpaid, and highly exposed to volatility. Layer on credentialing barriers, visa restrictions, wage theft in informal jobs, and chronically unaffordable childcare, and the result is predictable: talent exits.

Why these exits weaken balance sheets

These exits distort the dashboard. When people stop looking for work, unemployment improves on paper even as productive capacity erodes in reality. A shrinking labor force means fewer people building, caring, coding, teaching, and selling—and fewer paychecks supporting local businesses, bank deposits, and insurance premiums. The institutions most dependent on steady payrolls, consumer banks and insurers, quietly destabilize.

Banking strategists have been blunt about it: a transforming workforce and slowing population growth are among the greatest long-term threats to banks, with demographic and labor shifts poised to have long-lasting impact if leaders fail to act. Insurers are flagging similar pressure points as aging and a thinner middle class reshape risk pools.

The losses are not theoretical. Barriers that keep foreign-born women out of good jobs cost the U.S. approximately $132 billion in GDP. Part of that is direct pay inequity: foreign-born women earn about $0.85 for every $1 earned by native-born women. Part is misallocation: college-educated immigrant women working below their skill level; clearing credentialing barriers for immigrant professionals would unlock $19 billion in GDP annually (versus GDP for the entire United States of $29 trillion in 2024). The three-month, 300,000-worker exit of Black women shaved $37 billion from GDP.  Bring Black women and foreign-born women back into the labor force at equitable pay and opportunity, and the multiplier effect ripples outward through retailers, banks, health systems, and local tax bases.

The middle class under pressure

All of this lands on a middle class already stretched thin. Since 1971, the share of Americans in the middle class has fallen from 61% to 51%, while the upper tier grew from 11% to 19%. That modest shift in household share delivered a disproportionate gain in income: the upper tier’s slice of U.S. income jumped from 29% to 48%, while the middle class’s share fell from 62% to 43%. The result is a barbell economy—thinner in the middle, heavier at the extremes—where prosperity is concentrated at the top and fragility mounts at the bottom.  For every $1 increase in middle-class wages since the early 1970s, U.S. households faced approximately $2.30 in higher education costs, $2.10 in housing, and $1.50 in healthcare—effectively neutralizing wage gains. That is fragility in macro form.

The corporate reflex: consolidation

When organic growth stalls and customer bases thin, many firms reach for consolidation. If demand is soft, merge to cut costs and gain pricing power. If talent is scarce, merge to capture it. We’ve watched this play out across sectors: airlines, media, regional banks, and beyond. But consolidation is a short-term salve with long-term side effects. Layoffs to remove duplication suppress local demand. Increased employer concentration dampens wage growth. Fewer competitors mean more pricing power but often less innovation. The pie doesn’t get bigger; slices just shift, often away from households that drive broad-based spending.

There’s also the regulatory reality. U.S. antitrust enforcers have made it explicit: when an industry trends toward concentration, any new deal faces a higher bar. The DOJ/FTC Merger Guidelines emphasize how mergers that entrench dominance or worsen consolidation are presumptively harmful. The landmark Google search Antitrust case—the most consequential monopoly trial in decades—illustrates the moment: prosecutors argue Google spent billions to lock in defaults and foreclose rivals, putting every dominance-as-strategy playbook on notice. In this environment, a growth plan that leans on M&A over market expansion courts antitrust risk: years of litigation, blocked deals, forced divestitures, reputational drag.

The real hedge: equity is an operating strategy

If the story of a shrinking workforce ending in lower demand, corporate consolidation, and antitrust crackdowns sounds grim, it doesn’t have to be the ending. There is another path forward. The antidote to an eroding middle class (and the surest route to sustainable corporate success) is investing in people.  In other words, pursuing equity as a business strategy. Expand the labor pool. Bring sidelined groups back into well-paid, upwardly mobile jobs. Remove barriers, including inequitable pay, biased promotion systems, and outdated immigration and licensing rules.

The payoff is enormous. Closing gender labor force participation gaps would inject $1.9 trillion into the economy, according to my proprietary analysis of BLS/Census labor-force data and standard GDP growth modeling. Even incremental moves pay: a 10% increase in intersectional gender equity in companies yields a 1 to 2% revenue lift.

From a corporate finance perspective, equity is a resilience strategy. In its most recent statement, the Federal Reserve warned of stagflation, with the economy slowing, job gains softening, unemployment creeping higher, and inflation staying elevated. In that environment, companies that embed equity at the core of their business strategy see, on average, a 50-point advantage in stock performance compared to the broader market. That’s because inclusive teams don’t just perform better in good times—they deliver higher returns on equity, strengthen governance, and lower the risks of fraud and insolvency when volatility hits

What an equity strategy looks like

  • Smart immigration reforms. Help fill shortage roles by fast-tracking skills translation and work authorization for internationally trained talent【Katie Couric Media】.
  • Ensure fair pay and advancement. Ensure equitable pay at the moment decisions are made. Ensuring equitable pay for women would add $512B to the U.S. economy.
  • Tap underutilized talent. 1M+ college-educated foreign-born women are unemployed or underemployed. Recognize foreign credentials.
  • Build inclusive pathways into growing occupations. Expand access to skilling and transparent hiring in tech and innovation occupations where future growth is concentrated.

The growth choice ahead

Historically, women’s earnings have powered the middle class: more than 90% of middle-class income growth from 1979 to 2018 came from women’s increased earnings. Since 1970, female entry into the labor force has added $2 trillion to the U.S. economy.

Rebuild labor force participation and pay today, and you stabilize the core pillars of growth: demand (more customers with spending power), finance (deeper deposits and steadier credit performance), and insurance (broader, healthier risk pools). You also lower your regulatory temperature, because dynamic, expanding markets are less likely to trigger antitrust intervention. Equity, in this sense, is an antitrust-mitigation strategy. It grows the pie instead of re-slicing a shrinking one.

This is not an argument against AI. Used well, AI can augment human work and boost productivity per hour. But no algorithm can compensate for too few workers or too little pay. Build strategy on a shrinking labor base and a thinning middle class, and even the smartest models will optimize you into a smaller future.

Boards have a clear choice. Engineer earnings via consolidation and accept higher antitrust exposure while your addressable market narrows. Or expand your market by pulling women, foreign-born workers and especially foreign-born women back into good jobs, paying them equitable, and promoting them on merit. The first path buys time. The second builds resilience.

Antitrust doesn’t have to be your next big risk. Ignore the workforce that underwrites your business, and it will be. Rebuild the middle class and you rebuild sustainable growth. That isn’t a social agenda. That’s corporate strategy, at scale.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Borrowing by AI companies represents a ‘mounting potential threat to the financial system’: Zandi

Published

on



Tech companies are issuing more debt now than before the dot-com crash as a rapid infrastructure buildout unfolds in the AI boom, Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi said in a LinkedInpost on Sunday.

Even after adjusting for inflation, big tech companies are issuing more bonds than during the late 1990s. And the companies aren’t just refinancing existing debt—they’re taking on additional debt.

“While the increasingly aggressive (and creative) borrowing by AI companies won’t be their downfall, if they do fall short of investors’ expectations and their stock prices suffer, their debts could quickly become a problem,” Zandi wrote. 

“Borrowing by AI companies should be on the radar screen as a mounting potential threat to the financial system and broader economy.”

The 10 largest AI companies, including Meta, Amazon, Nvidia and Alphabet, will issue more than $120 billion this year, Zandi said in a LinkedIn analysis last week.

And this time is different from dot-com era debt issuance, as internet companies back then didn’t have a lot of debt, he pointed out. Instead, they were funded by stocks and venture capital.

“That’s not the case with the AI boom,” Zandi added.

Even though hyperscalers like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft could pay for the AI buildout with their profits, bond issuance is the “cheapest and cleanest” way to finance an infrastructure buildout of this scale, which will likely last more than a decade and be worth trillions of dollars, Shay Boloor, chief market strategist at Futurum Equities, told Fortune.

“These companies are a lot more comfortable issuing 10- to 40-year papers, for example, at very low spreads, because the market now views them as quasi-utility names—because they’re building all this infrastructure—not just a pure tech company anymore,” Boloor said.

He added that in the previous six months, tech companies have shown “proof in the pudding” that future demand for AI is booming.

Despite AI bubble concerns, Nvidia delivered a strong earnings report for its third quarter last month, saying its AI data center revenue increased by 66% from last year. 

Still, critics warn that the buildout may not keep up with how rapidly AI is developing.

Computer hardware, which makes up most AI data centers’ cost, may be more susceptible to becoming obsolete and replaced by more advanced technology during the AI boom as opposed to wireless and internet buildouts, much of which still runs today, George Calhoun, professor and director of the Hanlon Financial Systems Center at Stevens Institute of Technology, told Fortune.

“The cycle of innovation in the chip industry is much faster than for wireless technology or fiber optics,” he said explained. “There is a real risk that much of that hardware may become competitively disadvantaged by newer technologies in a much shorter timeframe,” before being fully paid off.

At the same time, big players in the AI boom—namely OpenAI—do not have the profits currently to cushion their massive investments at the moment, increasing their risk, Calhoun said.

“If OpenAI fails, the snowball effect of that is gonna be substantial,” Futuruum Equities’ Boloor said. Though larger tech companies won’t likely be impacted much by a potential OpenAI bust, companies that largely rely on its business like Oracle could, he added.

Still, Boloor is optimistic about the AI buildout, saying the main bottleneck for its success is U.S. energy capacity.

“I think that the risk is that trillions of dollars of AI capacity gets built faster than the North American grid can support it, which could slow realization,” he warned. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

International deals race forward to end China’s hold on critical minerals since US can’t do it alone

Published

on



Pini Althaus saw the signs. In 2023, he left the company he founded, USA Rare Earth, to develop critical minerals mining and processing projects in central Asia, after realizing that the U.S. will need all the international help it can get to end China’s supply chain dominance.

“I realized we only have a handful of large critical minerals projects that were going into production between now and 2030,” Althaus, chairman and CEO of Cove Capital, told Fortune. “I understood that we’re going to have to supplement the United States critical minerals supply chain with materials coming in from our allied and friendly countries.”

Over a series of decades, China built up its stranglehold on much of the world’s critical minerals supply chains, including the 17 rare earths, used to make virtually all kinds of high-performance magnets and parts for vehicles, computers, power generation, military defense, and more. The rest of the world deferred to Beijing in exchange for cheap prices.

Amid an ongoing tariff war with the U.S.—and a temporary truce—the Trump administration is racing to build up domestic mining and processing capabilities, while also developing the global partnerships necessary to eventually undermine China, which controls 90% of the world’s rare earths refining.

In October, Trump inked a deal with Australia for both countries to invest $3 billion in critical minerals projects by mid-2026. Australia is home to the largest publicly traded critical minerals miner in the world, Lynas Rare Earths. Trump then signed a series of bilateral critical minerals deals in eastern and southeastern Asia, including Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Cambodia. The U.S. also has new deals with Ukraine, Argentina, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Kazakhstan, and more.

Althaus is specifically developing mining and processing facilities for tungsten—a heat-resistant metal used in electronics and military equipment—and rare earths in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. He sees the most potential in former Soviet Union nations in central Asia.

“The Soviets spent many decades exploring and developing mines. Many of their databases have been left and are quite meticulous,” Althaus said. “This gives companies looking to develop projects in central Asia a jumpstart compared to what would be here in the United States, where most of the opportunities are greenfield—very early stages, very high risk, and very little appetite for investment.”

In November, the Ex-Im Bank offered Cove Capital a $900 million financing letter of interest for the $1.1 billion Kazakh tungsten projects. A separate letter of interest was received from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation.

Jeff Dickerson, principal advisor for Rystad Energy research firm, said only a long-term, coordinated effort—essentially a “wartime” approach—both domestically and with international partnerships can lead to success. But it cannot be done without new projects with foreign allies. “The challenge is that the U.S. doesn’t have a strong pipeline of mature mineral projects that are shovel ready,” he said. 

“The cycle of China extracting concessions on the back of mineral geopolitics and weakening the U.S. strategic negotiating position will likely continue without a coordinated, long-term response during the current moment of heightened attention to critical minerals,” Dickerson said, questioning whether the U.S. will maintain a concerted focus for years to come.

New emphasis

The Trump administration is increasingly making financial partnerships with critical minerals developers—even becoming a majority shareholder of U.S. rare earths miner MP Materials—and offering deals for floor-pricing mechanisms to offset China’s recurring dumping practices that aim to eliminate competition.

A native Australian turned New Yorker, Althaus is, naturally, a big fan of this approach. Chinese price dumping has crippled global competition and scared away potential investors, he said.

“By providing a price floor, it removes the question marks; it removes the instability; it removes the most significant risk in funding a project that’s about to go into production,” Althaus said. “It creates a predictability where you can take geology all the way through to profitability. I think there should be a global effort to create transparent markets and prices for the key critical minerals.”

Critical minerals are increasingly included in U.S. negotiations for all foreign deals. In the tariff agreement with Indonesia, for instance, the Asian nation agreed to lift export bans on nickel. The White House leveraged its military support for Ukraine by demanding the rights to its critical minerals in return. And the recent U.S. bailout of Argentina included a partnership on critical minerals mining.

In addition to its strategic defense location, rare earths are even a reason Trump continues to show interest in annexing Greenland from Denmark.

Veteran geologist Greg Barnes, who founded the massive Tanbreez mining project, which remains in development, briefed Trump at the White House during his first presidential term. This year, Critical Metals acquired 92.5% ownership of the Tanbreez project.

Critical Metals CEO Tony Sage is keen to supply the U.S. with desired rare earths, and the company recently received a letter of intent for a $120 million Ex-Im Bank loan. The goal is to start construction by the end of 2026.

“There’s an absolute need to make sure that more than 50% of the supply of these heavy rare earths come from outside of China—mined and processed outside of China,” Sage told Fortune.

Regardless of any long-shot annexation bids, Sage said Greenland can and should be a key ally to the U.S. for critical minerals. “They definitely don’t want to be part of the U.S., but I think they’ll be pro-U.S.,” he said.

For his part, Althaus said he sees all the international deals as progress, and not as competition for his Cove Capital.

“I think it’s a positive, and I think we’ll start to see a lot more happen in the coming months in terms of the U.S. and collaboration with other countries.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Amazon’s new Alexa aims to detangle chaos in the household, like whether someone fed the dog

Published

on



It’s 10 p.m. after a long day when you walk in the door and wonder aloud: “Did anyone feed the dog? Who fed the dog,” Panos Panay says he calls out to his family of six.

Turns out, nobody fed the dog and so all the kids “scatter to their corners,” he told Fortune’s Brainstorm AI audience in San Francisco on Monday. 

The senior vice president of devices and services at Amazon says the new generative AI-powered Alexa+, which runs on Echo hardware and can integrate with other devices like Amazon’s Ring security cameras, aims to ease the constant mental load in a household: remembering whether the pets ate, restaurants each family member pitched and saw vetoed, and regular grocery orders. The idea is to have “ambient” artificial intelligence around your house so that devices can assist in tasks, chores, and other household command center issues, said Panay.

The new Alexa+ is much more conversational, Panay said, and you no longer have to pronounce everything perfectly and discretely in order for it (or her, as Panay refers to the virtual assistant) to understand you.

“She’s the best DJ on the planet, in my opinion,” said Panay. “You have a personal shopper, you have a butler, you have a personal assistant, you have your home manager. Different people use Alexa for different things, and now she’s pretty much supercharged,” Panay said.

In addition to confirming that the dogs have not been fed, Panay said he used Alexa+ on Sunday night to head off another age-old debate: where the family should go for dinner. Both dinner decisions and pet chores are “classic fight[s] in my house,” Panay told the Brainstorm AI audience.

His youngest had previously suggested a few restaurants she wanted to visit for a quick bite and hadn’t yet been to, and Panay asked Alexa to remind them which ones his daughter suggested specifically. It was a sushi joint and she enjoyed it, Panay said. That type of ambient listening and assistance with debate is the point, he said, and stops people needing to pull out their phones and start typing and scrolling for information.   

From there, Panay said Alexa can also take more concrete actions like making a reservation on dining platform OpenTable, ordering delivery on nights in, getting an Uber, and handling home issues such as telling you how many packages were delivered or the number of guests who stopped by. Panay said Amazon has more than 150 partners to aid in these integrations, although there is work ahead to get more partners on board, he added.  

Thus far, Alexa+ has been rolled out to early-access users and this week the product is available to those on a lengthy waitlist, said Panay, and it’s been boosted by Amazon’s advertising. This week, the product is being released to anyone with an Echo device. The business monetization model involves “flywheels” from Amazon’s $2.4 trillion retail ecosystem, particularly around shopping for clothes, groceries, and other consumer items. “If you’re shopping on the grocery list and order groceries often enough, Alexa knows what you’re doing, and ultimately, can just order ahead of time for you moving forward,” he said.

Ultimately, Panay envisions users wanting “your assistant everywhere you go” because “the more it understands about you, the more informed it is, the better it can serve your needs.” And while Panay said there will be continued innovation from Amazon in this space, he refused to reveal any specific products. He said Amazon has a “lab full of ideas,” but most won’t make it out of that lab. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.