#circularcapitalism

The AI boom has been hailed as the next industrial revolution, but beneath the headlines of soaring valuations and record‑breaking funding rounds lies a more unsettling pattern: an economy feeding on itself. In “Is the AI Boom Eating Its Own Tail? The Strange Economics of Circular Capitalism” on aiandbeyond.ai, the author explores how much of the current AI surge is not fueling real‑world productivity so much as funding a self‑referential loop of hype, infrastructure, and speculative capital. The result is what the piece calls “circular capitalism”: a cycle where AI dollars are reinvested into AI‑centric assets, from data centers to GPUs to AI‑driven financial products, creating a feedback loop that risks inflating expectations faster than actual value.

The Circular Capital Flow

In this circular model, the pattern goes like this: cloud providers and chipmakers sell AI hardware and compute to AI startups; those startups raise venture capital by promising AI‑driven disruption; some of that capital then flows back into cloud infrastructure, data‑center construction, and semiconductor ecosystems. Simultaneously, banks and investment firms use AI to optimize trading, risk modeling, and customer targeting, which in turn feeds more data and demand back into the AI stack. The article argues that a significant portion of AI investment is not directed at transforming end‑users or solving deep‑rooted problems in sectors like healthcare, education, or logistics, but at greasing the wheels of the AI economy itself — making it bigger, faster, and more complex, yet not necessarily more impactful.

Infrastructure First, Impact Later

A key point in the piece is the prioritization of infrastructure over outcomes. Trillions of dollars are being spent on AI chips, hyperscale data centers, and specialized cloud clusters, often justified by the promise of “foundation models for everything.” Yet, many enterprises still struggle to translate these powerful models into measurable improvements in revenue, customer satisfaction, or operational efficiency. The article suggests that we may be in a phase where the means of AI — compute, scale, and algorithmic sophistication — are being over‑invested at the expense of the ends — clear use cases, business‑model innovation, and human‑centric benefits. This imbalance risks turning the AI boom into an elaborate, self‑sustaining casino where the house is always the AI stack itself.

Hype, Valuation, and the “AI Premium”

The piece also highlights how the market increasingly applies an “AI premium” to any company that can reasonably brand itself as AI‑enabled. Traditional software firms reposition as “AI‑native”; banks and payment processors tout AI‑driven fraud detection; even legacy manufacturers announce AI‑driven optimization. Often, the underlying AI components are relatively thin, but the label alone can inflate valuations and attract investors chasing the trend. This circular dynamic — where AI branding attracts capital that then funds more AI infrastructure — raises the specter of a bubble: performance becomes more about narrative and less about tangible returns, and the AI economy begins to resemble a hall of mirrors, reflecting its own complexity back at itself.

Breaking the Cycle

The article does not dismiss the value of AI, but urges a reset in how capital is allocated. It calls for more rigorous scrutiny of real‑world impact, more emphasis on “AI for productivity” rather than “AI for AI,” and a stronger push toward measurable outcomes in sectors that matter — like healthcare, climate, and education. Instead of feeding an endless loop of circular capital, the next chapter of the AI boom, it argues, should focus on deep integration, ethical deployment, and genuine value creation. If the AI industry wants to avoid eating its own tail, it will need to redirect a meaningful share of that circular capital back into the real economy, not just into more data centers, more chips, and more AI‑driven speculation.