Amazon will deploy more than 5,000 satellites into orbit to provide global data and telephony services as competition in the commercial space sector intensifies.

The planned satellite constellation marks a significant expansion from the Jeff Bezos-owned company’s current fleet of 390 satellites presently in orbit.

Amazon has submitted an application to federal regulatory authorities seeking approval to launch up to 5,105 internet satellites as part of a constellation designed to deliver direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity.

The company first announced its plans to establish a D2D network in April, alongside an agreement to acquire satellite operator Globalstar in a deal valued at approximately $11.6 billion.

Direct-to-device networks provide cellular connectivity directly to smartphones and other hardware via satellites, bypassing conventional terrestrial cell towers.

In its filing with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Amazon stated that its D2D network will combine its existing infrastructure with Globalstar’s satellites and wireless spectrum.

According to the regulatory filing, Amazon is targeting users who are currently “unserved or underserved” by existing wireless communications providers.

Other intended applications include supporting emergency operations such as search and rescue, as well as expanding connectivity options for remote construction sites, vehicle fleets, and supply chains operating in areas where terrestrial networks are difficult to deploy.

“Amazon looks forward to delivering on the promise of direct-to-device connectivity, including to the millions of people who live, travel, and work in places beyond the reach of today’s networks,” the company wrote in the filing.

Amazon previously stated that it expects the Globalstar acquisition to close in 2027, with deployment of the D2D network scheduled to begin in 2028.

Since last April, the company has been working to construct its Leo space-based internet network, which aims to compete directly with Starlink, the dominant provider in low-Earth orbit internet services.

However, Amazon’s planned constellation remains considerably smaller than that of Starlink, which holds a dominant position in the mobile satellite market with approximately 11,000 satellites.

Musk also maintains what analysts consider a virtual monopoly in the launch market through SpaceX, which is reportedly planning to introduce a mobile service tailored for US consumers.

The two billionaires are also competing to design NASA’s next lunar landing vehicle, with respective models from Blue Origin and SpaceX set to begin testing next year.

Last month, the FCC granted Amazon a regulatory reprieve by approving its request for a waiver from the requirement to deploy 1,600 first-generation satellites by July 30.

However, Amazon remains obligated to deploy its full planned constellation of 3,232 satellites by July 2029.

Amazon’s D2D network will compete directly with SpaceX’s new Starlink Mobile service. SpaceX acquired wireless spectrum licenses from EchoStar to support its network and currently offers direct-to-cell service in the US through T-Mobile.

Against the backdrop of record-low birth rates across the US, major urban centers are experiencing a pronounced decline in the number of children residing in city limits.

An analysis conducted by The Wall Street Journal based on US Census Bureau data spanning from 2015 to 2024 reveals that the child population in the nation’s largest metropolises is eroding rapidly.

In a report titled “America’s Biggest Cities Are Fast Losing Kids,” the newspaper detailed that even urban centers recording overall population growth are struggling to retain their pediatric demographics.

Over the past decade, the number of children under the age of 18 residing in major US cities fell by 6%.

Nationwide, the decline in the under-18 population was limited to 1% over the same period. The trend was even more pronounced among younger age brackets; the number of children under the age of five in major cities dropped by 15%, compared to a 7% decline across the US as a whole.

The report noted that nearly two-thirds of the 38 US cities with populations exceeding 500,000 recorded a contraction in their child populations.

San Jose and New York lead the decline

In San Jose, California—where the median household income is nearly double the national average—the number of children under five dropped by 34% over the past decade. This contraction makes San Jose the most severely affected among major urban centers in the loss of early childhood demographics.

In New York City, renowned for its high cost of living, the child population shrank by 8% over the decade. Melissa Pumphrey, Chief Economist at the New York City Economic Development Corporation, stated that since 2000, the city has lost 80,000 middle-income households headed by individuals aged 30 to 54 who were married or had at least one child.

Pumphrey attributed the drop to the outward migration of middle-income families. Over the same timeframe, the number of single-person households or households without children under 18 in New York City expanded by 670,000.

In New York, parents require an annual income of $334,000 to cover the cost of raising a two-year-old child.

Citing data from the real estate and rental platform StreetEasy, the report noted that the median monthly rent for apartments with three or more bedrooms in New York stands at $5,495.

Similar demographic contractions were observed in cities with relatively lower costs of living. The child population fell by 15% in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and by 11% in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

The decline in Albuquerque was driven by negative net domestic migration and falling fertility rates. In Bernalillo County, which comprises the core of the city’s population, the number of annual births dropped by 20% over the last decade.

The pandemic and shifting birth dynamics

The exodus of families with children from major urban centers began in 2017 and accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic amid the widespread adoption of remote work.

Connor O’Brien, a researcher at the Institute for Progress think tank, noted that the pandemic prompted households to re-evaluate their lifestyles. “Families suddenly had many more options for where to live, and they took advantage of them,” O’Brien said.

Another primary driver of the trend is the nationwide decline in birth rates, which fell by 9% overall over the past decade. This shift was largely attributed to younger women choosing to have fewer children during adolescence and throughout their 20s.

Nationwide, birth rates among Hispanic women—who constitute a significant share of urban populations—declined at an even faster pace.

O’Brien noted that between 2010 and 2024, birth rates in major metropolitan areas dropped by 18%, marking the sharpest decline among all geographic region types.

Of the 38 US cities with populations exceeding 500,000, only 13 recorded an increase in their child populations. A significant portion of these growing cities are located in Southern Sun Belt states, where housing remains relatively more affordable for middle-class families. In these cities, the child population increased by 7% over the past decade, while total population grew by 12%.

A January report by Bloomberg indicated that, contrary to official projections by the US Census Bureau, the US could face a net population decline as early as 2026.

Current baseline estimates by the Census Bureau projected that the national population would continue growing until 2080 before contracting at the turn of the 22nd century.

However, the Congressional Budget Office warned in a report last year that deaths will exceed births within eight years. The CBO projected that population growth will rely entirely on net immigration by 2033, after which point the total US population could begin to shrink.

The global economic balance sheet reached approximately 1.8 quadrillion (1,800 trillion) in 2025, rising from $1.7 quadrillion in 2024.

According to a report published by McKinsey, the world is wealthier than ever before. However, this wealth relies on increasingly inflated valuations of paper assets rather than real output. How this contradiction resolves itself will determine the future of the world’s leading economies, the report stated.

The report noted that several asset classes have further expanded their imbalance with the “underlying” economy. This dynamic heightens the probability of corrections occurring through inflation, asset valuation losses, or, in the best-case scenario, productivity gains.

Unlike growth in the capital stock that generates real output, the tendency to rely on elevated valuations fuels the risk of a painful correction—either through falling asset prices or prolonged inflation.

Nevertheless, a more optimistic scenario exists in which the world essentially grows into these high asset valuations, supported by an artificial intelligence-driven productivity boom.

Researchers found that global household wealth reached $570 trillion, representing a $40 trillion increase compared to 2025.

Yet only 20% of this increase stemmed from genuine capital accumulation—namely net new investments in machinery and equipment, housing and buildings, infrastructure, and intellectual property.

The remainder was driven by a combination of inflation and price appreciation in the market value of existing assets.

In the US and Canada, equity values served as the primary driver of wealth expansion. In China, France, and Germany, paper wealth declined under the weight of falling real estate prices. In the UK and Japan, inflation pushed asset values higher.

This marks a more extreme iteration of a long-standing trend: from 2000 to 2024, net investments accounted for 30% of global wealth growth.

Examining the structure from the baseline up, real assets encompass real estate, infrastructure, machinery and equipment, and intellectual property owned by households, governments, and corporations. These carry a combined value of $620 trillion and constitute global net assets across all sectors.

Financial assets held outside the financial sector include equities, bonds, loans, foreign currency and deposits, and pension funds. Every financial asset carries a corresponding liability, and these balance each other out on a global level.

This “financial layer” functions to separate wealth from asset ownership and stood close to the total value of real assets.

The financial sector, meanwhile, intermediates between these financial assets and liabilities. With a volume of $550 trillion, the financial sector has reached 90% of the value of real assets.

Wealth is ultimately the balancing item on balance sheets, equaling the difference between total assets and liabilities. This stood at $600 trillion in 2025.

In 2025, the growing detachment of balance sheets from the real economy was driven by the world’s two largest economies.

With the share of corporate profits in GDP doubling since 2000, US equity valuations rose to 2.4 times the net asset value of corporations.

In China, corporate debt reached 80% of real assets, compared to a global average of 50%.

US public debt is hovering near all-time highs, while the fastest increase was recorded in China.

On a global scale, a major share of corporate and household debt, as well as real estate assets, approached 25-year averages relative to GDP.

Inflation contributed to this normalization; however, values remain well above pre-2000 levels. Against a backdrop of flat investment, the ratio of productive assets to GDP remained stagnant.

Jan Mischke, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute, told Axios: “We can now say that every asset on this planet has been financialized.”

There are several plausible paths through which these elevated asset valuations could uncoil. One is a simple “muddle through” approach: low growth leads to low interest rates, which allows high valuations to persist. This is roughly what occurred in major economies during the 2010s.

However, more dramatic possibilities exist—some positive, others alarming.

The best-case scenario for the global economy involves a productivity leap driven by AI or other sources that sparks a GDP boom, thereby justifying the high valuations of equities and other asset classes. This is essentially what occurred in the late 1990s.

A more pessimistic possibility is that sustained inflationary pressure erodes the real value of assets, forcing them back toward historical norms and leaving people poorer in real terms. This occurred, arguably, during 2021–2022.

The most concerning scenario is a global asset price reset of the kind witnessed in 2002 and 2008.

“Overstretched scenarios have a tendency to mean-revert, including in positive ways like productivity acceleration,” Mischke said. “But occasionally, you also get a major debt crisis or a market crash.”

Arvind Govindarajan, one of the co-authors of the report, posed the central question: “For us in the US, the real question is: Will productivity and GDP be higher—in which case we see a productivity boost—or will we slide into an inflationary scenario?”

Entering 2026, major economies followed diverging roadmaps, according to the report. The US operated under a “productivity acceleration” scenario, though high public debt and stretched equities keep the possibility of “persistent inflation” or a “balance sheet reset” on the table.

Europe drifted toward “secular stagnation,” as sluggish demand pulled down growth and interest rates.

In China, while a partial balance sheet reset unfolded amid falling real estate values, public spending and corporate investment continued to support balance sheet growth.