We are about halfway through the market day. Over the next few days, I will be looking at neurodivergence. I have been hearing talk about how society may move toward a neurodivergent state of being. This is not surprising giving all the hoopla we are hearing about more people, particularly the young, being let go from working in a world that has emphasized linearity in mindset.
Linearity in mindset appears to be opposite of the definition of neurodivergence. Neurodivergent, as summarized by friends at Copilot, describes people whose brains develop or function differently from what is considered typical, encompassing a range of cognitive, learning, and neurological differences.
The Cleveland Clinic believes that a person’s brain processes information, thinks, or experiences the world in ways that differ from the statistical majority. That majority is referred to as neurotypical which refers to individuals whose neurological development and cognitive functioning align with what is considered as typical within their culture or society.
Again, over the next several days I will delve into what being neurodivergent means for how the banking and legal environment impacts this group. At first blush it may mean that the banking and legal environment may change in order to better accommodate this group. I have friends who may be a part of the group of neurodivergency without knowing that neurodivergency exists or that they may be neurodivergent themselves.
From a national policy view, we may be led by neurodivergents who are unaware of their status as such. If they do know of their status, they may be crafting policies that support neurodivergent positions and/or outcomes. Is America ready for this? I do not think so.
I draw this conclusion based on two examples. First one involved an acquaintance of mine who argues that he saw America’s population increasing over the next 50 years as a result of positive changes in the labor market. He believed that there will be new areas of demand for intellectual growth that would require increases in labor.
I begged to differ. I see the current level of Earth’s population topping out around eight to ten billion people with a decrease starting in twenty years. I was not trying to be messy, especially giving my lack of knowledge about populations and neurodivergency, but I do not see world population especially given our lack of resources growing over the next fifty years.
Second, neurodivergence in my opinion may result in a shift from the current number of intellectuals to a growing number of instinct- driven individuals. Specifically, intellects who are thriving in a world where they get money to buy resources with money and thought may find themselves in a jam where, for example, the internet has turned thought into a dime-for-a-dozen activity and its supporting economy has moved us from natural food to artificial flavorings and additives (just read the back of a tuna can.)
The instinct-driven among us may decide that natural foods from the Earth along with “analog” technology are the best route for humanity and make a routine for that world. In that case they may decide to have families in smaller, like-minded groups where the limited but apparent group of children provide Earth with a constant population.
I think these ideas are worth exploring.
Alton Drew
14 September 2026
Lawyers Write the Bets. Bankers Sell the Bets. 