Let me be clear: I believe in the promise of AI. As a power user, I rely on multiple foundation models daily to streamline my work and solve problems faster than ever. The productivity is real, the tools are evolving quickly, and the cost per use keeps dropping. Naturally, I want to invest in the future I’m already living. And like many of my colleagues, I’ve tilted my portfolio to give a little extra love to AI-heavy tech stocks. But here’s the thing… I’m also an economist. Which means I’ve seen this movie before. And I know how it ends.

Wealth built on asset bubbles feels exhilarating until the floor gives out. As investors, professionals, and decision-makers, we owe it to ourselves to remember a basic truth: price may ride the wave, but value is tethered to the ocean floor. When the current recedes, the fundamentals remain. That is where wealth actually lives.

This article is a guide to navigating the excitement of asset bubbles, especially the AI boom, while staying grounded in financial reality. It draws on economic history, hard data, and the cautionary tales of past bubbles to offer a simple message: Invest, yes. But don’t forget to check your parachute.

The federal funds rate is not some simple light switch. You cannot flip it down and flood the economy with prosperity, nor crank it up and instantly stamp out inflation. Yet, time and again, politicians sell it that way.

The latest example comes from the President’s aggressive campaign to slash interest rates by as much as three percentage points, to around 1%. The adminstration insists this will supercharge growth, lower mortgage costs, and save the government trillions in debt payments. But there’s a catch: no serious Fed official supports it.

The effort has become entangled with an even more troubling move. The White House is attempting to remove Federal Reserve Governor Dr. Cook, an accomplished economist whose scholarship spans international and innovation economics. Removing a sitting governor, would be unprecedented. It would also mark a dangerous intrusion of political bias into an institution deliberately insulated from politics.

To understand why this matters, we need to step back. What is inflation? What drives economic growth? And how does the federal funds rate, the obscure-sounding overnight lending rate between banks, actually connect the two?

The answers resist sound bites. That is precisely why treating the Fed’s rate as an on/off switch is both wrong and dangerous.

In early 2024, a friend of mine (let’s call her Jane) launched a skincare startup with a mission that was equal parts personal and global. Her serums blended botanical oils from Southeast Asia with rare extracts from Latin America, promising customers something fresh, clean, and effective.

By mid-year, boutique retailers had taken notice. Online orders were ticking upward. She was finally seeing the promise of her idea come to life until a spreadsheet of customs estimates landed in her inbox. A critical ingredient, once affordable, now carried a tariff surcharge in excess of 100%. Essentially, Jane’s next shipment would cost more in tariffs than the goods themselves.

When I walked into the TechEx AI & Big Data Expo in Santa Clara last week, I didn’t expect clarity. I expected noise: buzzwords ricocheting off LED screens, startups pitching productivity miracles, enterprise executives nodding sagely to sales demos. And all of that was definitely there. But what stayed with me wasn’t the flash. It was a quieter insight: most professionals aren’t worried that AI will replace them. They’re worried they’re already being measured against it.