No Alternatives Left: The S&P 500’s Dominance in a TINA - FOMO World

For decades, the professional managerial class—corporate executives, bureaucrats, and institutional elites—has consolidated control, stifling independent wealth creation while pushing an economy built on debt and financial manipulation. They championed globalization as a way to open new markets, diversify supply chains, and reduce reliance on the United States. Yet, after years of aggressive attempts to establish investment alternatives, no true competitor to the U.S. financial system, the S&P 500, Nasdaq, Dow, or the U.S. dollar has emerged.

*P.S. I’ve held this perspective consistently for over a decade.

---

The Push to Erode the U.S. Economy—and the Failure to Build Alternatives

The establishment elite spent decades attempting to weaken the U.S. economy to justify their push for a more globalized financial order. This effort included shifting manufacturing overseas, encouraging multinational expansion into emerging markets, and increasing reliance on foreign trade. Between 2000 and 2024, China’s trade grew by an astonishing 1,200%, surpassing the U.S. in 2012 as the world’s largest trading nation. In contrast, U.S. trade grew by only 167% during the same period.

Yet, despite this shift in global trade patterns, capital did not follow in the same way. Financial markets in emerging economies failed to evolve into viable alternatives. The reality is that while trade has been redirected, no emerging or frontier market has developed the legal protections, liquidity, or stability required to displace the U.S. as the center of global finance.

---

USAID and Foreign Economic Aid: Failed Attempts to Develop Alternatives

Beyond trade, direct financial aid has been another failed tool of globalization. Institutions like USAID, the World Bank, and the IMF have poured trillions into developing nations, attempting to create economic hubs that could one day rival U.S. financial centers. Between 2000 and 2020, the U.S. spent over $900 billion in foreign aid, including $85 billion in economic development programs meant to foster investment-friendly environments.

Despite these efforts, most recipient nations never developed the infrastructure needed to attract significant global capital. The funds often went to temporary infrastructure projects, government initiatives that failed to take hold, or simply disappeared through corruption. Instead of creating an alternative economic order, these programs proved that simply injecting money into developing nations does not create sustainable financial centers.

---

The Historical Struggle to Develop True Competitors

Even before the modern era of globalization, no nation has managed to truly rival the U.S. as an investment hub. Over the last 100 years, several economies have briefly risen to become the world’s second or third-largest by GDP—Germany in the early 20th century, the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Japan in the 1980s, and now China—but none have offered an investment climate that could replace the U.S.

• Germany: The country rebounded after World War II and became an economic powerhouse, but its reliance on exports and the constraints of the Eurozone have prevented it from becoming a global financial hub.

• The Soviet Union: For decades, the USSR was the second-largest economy, but it was never an investment alternative due to its centrally planned system. While its military and industrial sectors were massive, capital was tightly controlled by the state, private enterprise was nearly non-existent, and foreign investment was impossible. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, its economy unraveled, showing that its GDP figures had been largely inflated by non-market forces.

• Japan: In the 1980s, Japan’s stock market appeared poised to rival Wall Street, with the Nikkei reaching an all-time high in 1989. However, its economic model—built on government intervention and a banking system favoring stability over risk—stifled its ability to create wealth at the scale of the U.S. After the collapse of its asset bubble in the early 1990s, Japan entered a long period of stagnation, proving that its financial system was not a true alternative.

• China: Today’s China faces similar issues. While its economy has grown dramatically, its capital markets remain tightly controlled by the state, limiting foreign investor confidence and restricting its ability to serve as a global investment alternative. The Chinese yuan accounts for just 3% of global currency reserves, compared to the U.S. dollar’s 59%. The Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges lack the liquidity and institutional confidence to rival U.S. markets. While China has become the world’s factory, it has not become the world’s financial hub.

The establishment elite believed they could engineer alternative markets through deregulation, liberalization, and global trade agreements, but they failed to replicate the unique strengths of the U.S. economy: deep and liquid capital markets, strong property rights, and a legal system that protects investors.

---

The Trade Deficit Created Trade Alternatives, Not Investment Alternatives

One of the unintended consequences of globalization was that while the U.S. trade deficit surged—reaching $948 billion in 2022—this did not lead to viable investment alternatives abroad. Instead, it allowed China to become the dominant trading partner for much of the world, as seen in the dramatic shift from 2000 to 2024.

However, the capital needed to sustain financial dominance never followed in the same way. Financial markets in alternative economies never reached the level of trust and transparency required to attract sustained foreign capital. Despite decades of trade expansion, 70% of global foreign exchange transactions still involve the U.S. dollar.

Recognizing this, the counter-elite—those outside the traditional power structures—are shifting their focus back to strengthening the American economic core.

---

The Counter-Elite and the Strategy to Shore Up U.S. Trade and Investment

Unlike the establishment, the counter-elite understands that securing economic dominance requires reinforcing investment at home while using technology to drive productivity. Their strategy involves:

---

1. Securing Critical Trade Alliances

• The renegotiation of NAFTA into the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) was a direct move to stabilize North American trade before addressing larger global trade imbalances.

• This approach created a template for future negotiations, proving that the U.S. could extract better terms even from deeply integrated trade partners.

---

2. Contesting China’s Global Influence

• While China has expanded its trade dominance, its financial markets remain state-controlled and unstable. The counter-elite understands that to maintain U.S. dominance, investment must stay within a framework that prioritizes American interests.

• Initiatives like reshoring manufacturing and investing in semiconductor production (such as the $280 billion CHIPS Act) are part of this strategy.

---

3. Leveraging AI and Automation for Domestic Productivity

• Generative AI alone is projected to add $2.6 trillion to $4.4 trillion annually across industries, with banking ($200–$340 billion) and retail ($400–$660 billion) among the biggest beneficiaries.

• AI adoption is expected to increase global GDP by up to 7% over the next decade and could boost labor productivity growth in advanced economies by nearly 1% annually.

• Programs like STARGATE, with its $150 billion investment in AI and quantum computing, signal a commitment to maintaining U.S. technological supremacy. These investments are projected to add 0.5% to annual GDP growth through 2030.

---

The Future: No Alternative to U.S. Markets

In a system where per capita productivity directly determines economic output—currently around $70,000 per worker in advanced economies—those who produce more will accumulate more wealth and rise faster within the counter-elite. AI, automation, and technological infrastructure are allowing this new class to build wealth outside traditional corporate hierarchies.

The counter-elite isn’t trying to replace the establishment with another centralized power structure; they are leveraging networks, emerging technologies, and new trade alignments to strengthen America’s economic core.

For all the attempts to globalize investment, no alternative to the U.S. markets has been created. While China and other nations have taken a larger share of global trade, their financial systems remain unable to absorb capital at the scale the U.S. The counter-elite recognizes this reality and is taking steps to ensure that America remains the dominant force in global finance and investment.

Move fast or get left behind.