AI makes everything more efficient. And that can become a problem.

I recently read the article “THE 2028 GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE CRISIS – A Thought Exercise in Financial History, from the Future” by Citrini & Alap Shah (published on February 22, 2026 by Citrini Research).

👉 https://www.citriniresearch.com/p/2028gic

The text is not a prediction, but a deliberately constructed scenario. It poses an uncomfortable question: What happens if our optimism about AI proves correct – and this very success destabilizes the economic equilibrium?

The scenario describes a development that seems logical at its core. Companies massively increase their productivity through AI. They reduce personnel costs and reinvest the saved funds directly into computing power, automation, and intelligent systems. For the individual company, this is rational and efficient.

However, this can create a spiral in the overall economy.

When well-paid office jobs disappear or become significantly worse paid, the purchasing power of precisely those households that account for a large share of consumption decreases. Less income means less spending on real estate, travel, restaurants, services, or investments. Companies feel the decline in demand and react in turn by cutting costs – which means, once again, more AI.

The result is a feedback loop: More AI → lower labor costs → less consumption → more margin pressure → even more AI.

The article uses the term "ghost GDP" to describe this phenomenon. Productivity is increasing, output is measurably present, but money no longer circulates back into the real economy through private households as it used to. Machines don't buy houses, they don't book vacations, and they don't consume services.

A second, often underestimated point is the elimination of friction. Many business models rely on people not constantly comparing prices, canceling subscriptions, or renegotiating terms. AI agents do exactly that – permanently, automatically, and without any convenience. When friction disappears, margins come under pressure. Platforms, intermediaries, and subscription models must reinvent themselves.

What particularly concerns me about this scenario is not the technology itself. It's the speed. Institutions, financial systems, and political decision-making processes react more slowly than technological advances. When economic conditions change faster than the adaptability of businesses and governments, uncertainty arises.

This does not mean that a collapse is inevitable. It does mean, however, that stagnation is becoming riskier than movement.

AI is not a short-term trend or a mere efficiency tool. It is changing value creation, income structures, business models, and competitive logics. The crucial question is not whether this change will occur, but how well prepared we are for it.

Anyone who still considers AI optional today risks finding themselves in a market tomorrow whose rules have already shifted.

If you want to know how AI can be structured, economically sound, and strategically integrated into existing processes – without hype, but with a clear implementation logic:

👉 https://www.e-conomics.gmbh

Now is the time to actively engage with these developments. Not just when external pressure arises.