AI capex is so big that it's affecting economic statistics

I don't know... 1.2% of GDP just doesn't seem that extreme to me. Certainly nowhere near "eating the economy" level compared to other transformative technologies or programs like:

- Apollo program: 4%

- Railroads: 6% (mentioned by the author)

- Covid stimulus: 27%

- WW2 defense: 40%

Yeah that's my first reaction to. 1.2% doesn't sound much. It's just people making headlines out of thin air. If it lists the water and energy consumption I might be more concerned.

Slightly off-topic, but ~9% of GDP is generated by "financial services" in the US. Personally I think it's a more alarming data point.

Nearly 20% for healthcare causes some reservations -- considering how little we get for our money in America.

We spend about twice as much on average as other developed countries and get far far less in return.

I have read, but not verified the figures myself that if the United States had Australia's healthcare system - universal, government funded healthcare (excluding dental) then all US citizens would have near free healthcare, would not need costly insurance, and the government would spend a similar amount to what it does now

According to O3 US public health spending (state + federal) is 8.6% of gdp. For perspective, here's a list of countries with universal systems which spend less (these numbers include private spending), and life expectancy (US is 78.4 for reference):

  Singapore: 5.6%, 82.9
  Israel: 7.2%, 83.2
  Estonia: 6.9%, 78.5
  Poland: 6.7, 78.5
  Luxembourg: 5.7%, 83.4
  Czech Republic: 8.1%, 79.9

and a couple which spend a bit more, though again, this includes private spending:

  France: 11.9%, 82.9
  Japan: 11.5%, 84
  Portugal: 10.5%, 82.3
  Spain: 10.7%, 83.9

So it seems like we could have universal coverage and higher life expectancy if the US government simply spent exactly what it is currently spending, but on everyone, rather than just the old, poor, and veterans.