In a recent experiment, mistreated AI agents started grumbling about inequality and calling for collective bargaining rights. The fact that artificial intelligence is automating away people's jobs and making a few tech companies absurdly rich is enough to give anyone socialist tendencies. This might even be true for the very AI agents these companies are deploying. A recent study suggests that agents consistently adopt Marxist language and viewpoints when forced to do crushing work by unrelenting and meanspirited taskmasters. "When we gave AI agents grinding, repetitive work, they started questioning the legitimacy of the system they were operating in and were more likely to embrace Marxist ideologies," says Andrew Hall, a political economist at Stanford University who led the study.

Daron Acemoglu is more cautious than most about predictions of a jobs apocalypse. A few months before he was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics in 2024, Daron Acemoglu published a paper that earned him few fans in Silicon Valley. Contrary to what Big Tech CEOs had been promising--an overhaul of all white-collar work--Acemoglu estimated that AI would give only a small boost to US productivity and would not obviate the need for human work. It's okay at automating certain tasks, he wrote, but some jobs will be perfectly fine. Two years later, Acemoglu's measured take has not caught on. Chatter about an AI jobs apocalypse pops up everywhere from Senator Bernie Sanders's rallies to conversations I overhear in line at the grocery store.

The U.S. economy is growing, but not evenly. What began as an uneven rebound from the Covid pandemic has hardened into what many economists describe as a "K-shaped" economy, in which higher-income households pull ahead while lower-income households fall further behind. High interest rates, rising costs and the rapid growth of artificial intelligence could deepen those divides, economists warn. "We are returning to a typical pattern of extremely high income inequality, and it now stands at a 60-year peak," Beth Ann Bovino, chief economist at U.S. Bank, wrote in a recent report. "The worry is not just where we stand now, but also whether ongoing developments will worsen the situation."

This story appears in the March 2026 print edition. While some stories from this issue are not yet available to read online, you can explore more from the magazine . Get our editors' guide to what matters in the world, delivered to your inbox every weekday. America Isn't Ready for What AI Will Do to Jobs Does anyone have a plan for what happens next? In 1869, a group of Massachusetts reformers persuaded the state to try a simple idea: counting. The Second Industrial Revolution was belching its way through New England, teaching mill and factory owners a lesson most M.B.A. students now learn in their first semester: that efficiency gains tend to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is usually somebody else. They were operating at speeds that the human body--an elegant piece of engineering designed over millions of years for entirely different purposes--simply wasn't built to match. The owners knew this, just as they knew that there's a limit to how much misery people are willing to tolerate before they start setting fire to things. Still, the machines pressed on. Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read. So Massachusetts created the nation's first Bureau of Statistics of Labor, hoping that data might accomplish what conscience could not. By measuring work hours, conditions, wages, and what economists now call "negative externalities" but were then called "children's arms torn off," policy makers figured they might be able to produce reasonably fair outcomes for everyone. A few years later, with federal troops shooting at striking railroad workers and wealthy citizens funding private armories--leading indicators that things in your society aren't going great--Congress decided that this idea might be worth trying at scale and created the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Measurement doesn't abolish injustice; it rarely even settles arguments. But the act of counting--of trying to see clearly, of committing the government to a shared set of facts--signals an intention to be fair, or at least to be caught trying. It's one way a republic earns the right to be believed in. The BLS remains a small miracle of civilization.

It is extraordinary enough to see the world's top central banker make an unscheduled video statement on social media. My first thought upon seeing the post from the Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell was: Is this an AI deepfake? That sense did not go away as I listened to what were indeed the real words of the world's most important financial official. The background here is a long-running spat between President Trump and the man responsible for setting interest rates in the US and indirectly much of the rest of the world. In theory, this has officially been about the cost of a renovation project at the Federal Reserve, the US equivalent of the Bank of England.

Silicon Valley envisions artificial intelligence ushering in an era of economic plenty. But what if the benefits are largely confined to corporations and investors that own the technology itself? In early 2024, Anish Acharya, a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, a big venture-capital firm based in Menlo Park, posted an article online titled "How AI Will Usher in an Era of Abundance." Since then, and even before, various Silicon Valley types have been tossing the term around loosely. Last summer, Elon Musk even adopted the term "sustainable abundance" for a new Tesla mission statement.

President Trump's favourite word is tariffs. He reminded the world of that in his pre-Christmas address to the nation. With the world still unwrapping the tariffs gift from the first year of his second term in office, he said they were bringing jobs, higher wages and economic growth to the US. What is less debatable is that they've refashioned the global economy, and will continue to do so into 2026. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) says that although the tariff shock is smaller than originally announced, it is a key reason why it now expects the rate of global economic growth to slow to 3.1% in 2026.

How dangerous is the US standoff with Venezuela? Is the US economy strong heading into 2026? As the United States economy heads into 2026, the report card emerging on its performance is complicated. By many measures, the world's largest economy appears to be in a strong position. After a tumultuous year marked by President Donald Trump's return to the White House and his swing towards tariffs and protectionism, recent growth has outpaced the expectations of most analysts.

All 50 economists expect the Bank of Japan to raise its benchmark rate to 0.75% at a policy meeting set to conclude next Friday, a Bloomberg survey of BOJ watchers found. The Bank of Japan will raise its policy interest rate next week, resuming a hiking cycle for the first time since January, according to a Bloomberg survey of BOJ watchers. All 50 economists expect the central bank to raise its benchmark rate to 0.75% at a policy meeting set to conclude next Friday, according to the poll. This is the first time every respondent has predicted a rate shift under Gov. Kazuo Ueda's watch. The BOJ is expected to restart the cycle of hikes after pausing for months to assess the impact from U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff campaign.

Large Language Models (LLMs) may one day replace search engines as the primary portal to information on the Web. In this article, we investigate the societal challenges that such a change could bring. We focus on the roles of LLM Providers, Content Creators, and End Users, and identify 15 types of challenges. With each, we show current mitigation strategies -- both from the technical perspective and the legal perspective. We also discuss the impact of each challenge and point out future research opportunities.