🔍 Read the full analysis: Could AI Help Explain More Growth With Similar Work Hours? on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get everyday essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
US business-sector output rose 10.0% from the fourth quarter of 2022 to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked increased 0.9%, according to calculations based on Bureau of Labor Statistics indexes. The figures show faster productivity growth, but they do not establish that AI caused it; employment and pay data also point to uneven gains.
US business output has grown much faster than hours worked since late 2022, a divergence that has prompted questions about whether artificial intelligence is changing hiring and productivity. But the official figures cited in an analysis published November 1 do not establish that AI caused the gap, and the employment and wage gains have been uneven.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis said real gross domestic product grew at a 3.4% annual rate in the third quarter of 2026, up from 2.2% in the second quarter. Consumer spending, investment and government spending all contributed, according to its October 29 advance estimate. GDP measures the economy broadly; a separate Bureau of Labor Statistics measure covers productivity in the nonfarm business sector.
For that sector, BLS data show output rose 2.5% over the year to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked increased 0.2%. Productivity, which measures output per hour, rose 2.2% over that period. The source analysis calculates from BLS indexes that between the fourth quarter of 2022 and the second quarter of 2026, business-sector output rose 10.0% and hours worked rose 0.9%—a period comparison, not proof that any one technology produced the change.
Employment has also grown unevenly across industries. In the 12 months to September, payrolls increased by 496,000, while health care and social assistance added 520,000 jobs. The information industry lost 120,000 jobs and remained 12% below its November 2022 peak, according to the figures cited in the analysis. These sector changes do not by themselves show that AI caused job losses.
Infographic 01 · More output, same hours
Ten percent more output, almost the same hours
The US business sector produces much more than three years ago with almost no extra work. The new jobs are mostly in health care.
The last 12 months
Nonfarm business sector, Q2 2025 to Q2 2026
- Outputreal, value added+2.5%
- Productivityoutput per hour+2.2%
- Hours workedall workers+0.2%
Where the jobs went
Payroll jobs, change over 12 months to Sep 2026 (preliminary)
Since Q4 2022: output +10.0%, hours +0.9%, productivity +9.1% (my arithmetic from the BLS indexes). Hiring rate in Aug 2026: 3.3% of jobs (2019 average 3.9%); layoff rate 1.0% (2019: 1.2%). Correlation, not proof of cause.
Sources: BLS, Productivity and Costs Q2 2026 (3 Sep 2026) · BLS, Employment Situation Sep 2026 · BLS, JOLTS Aug 2026.
Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
Productivity Gains, Uneven Pay
The productivity figures matter because more output from each hour worked can support economic growth without a matching increase in total work hours. In principle, higher productivity can raise incomes, reduce costs or make more goods and services available. The data cited here do not show how those benefits are being distributed, however, or whether workers will share in them over time.
The source analysis reports that the labor share of business output fell to 52.8% in the second quarter of 2026, its lowest level in the series dating to 1947. It also reports that real private-sector wages fell 0.6% over the year to September. Those measures suggest that stronger output has not automatically translated into higher inflation-adjusted pay for workers. They do not, on their own, identify why labor’s share declined.
Hiring conditions may be especially consequential for people trying to enter the workforce. The analysis cites unemployment of 8.0% among people aged 20 to 24 and 7.0% among Black workers, compared with an overall rate of 4.2%. If hiring stays slow, younger workers and other groups facing higher unemployment could have fewer opportunities even while headline output grows. The figures describe current disparities; they do not prove that AI is responsible for them.
Products Worth Considering
Anker SOLIX C300 Portable Power Station, 288Wh
Bose QuietComfort Ultra Wireless Noise-Cancelling Headphones with Spatial Audio, Black
Bose QuietComfort True Wireless Noise-Cancelling Earbuds, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Reading the Post-2022 Data
The analysis uses the fourth quarter of 2022 as a reference point, shortly after ChatGPT launched on November 30. That date is often used to mark the arrival of widely accessible generative AI, but it is not a clean test of AI’s economic effects. Businesses were also responding to post-pandemic shifts, changing investment patterns, interest rates and other forces.
Productivity is calculated as output divided by hours worked. BLS reported that nonfarm business productivity grew at an average annual rate of 2.1% from the end of 2019 through the second quarter of 2026, compared with 1.5% a year from 2007 to 2019. The source author’s calculation of roughly 2.5% annual productivity growth since late 2022 uses a different, shorter period and BLS index data; it should not be confused with the agency’s reported year-over-year figure.
The analysis also cites early-October Census Bureau data indicating that about one in four US businesses used AI. That measure indicates reported adoption, not how intensively firms use AI, whether it replaced or complemented workers, or how much output it generated. A comparison with Europe in the source points to a different pattern—more jobs alongside flat productivity—but the provided material does not give the European measures or time period in detail.
AI’s Role Remains Unproven
The available figures do not isolate AI’s effect on productivity, jobs or wages. Output rising while hours remain nearly flat is consistent with an AI-driven productivity story, but it can also reflect other changes in technology, investment, demand or the composition of employment. The analysis itself cautions against treating a timing overlap as proof of causation.
Adoption data leave key details open: the cited Census measure says about one in four businesses reported using AI, but it does not show what tasks the technology performs or whether it changed staffing. Nor do the figures establish whether job losses in information industries resulted from AI, earlier restructuring or other factors. The source material does not provide enough detail about the cited European comparison to assess it directly.
The employment and wage statistics also have limits. Payroll growth is a net change, and industry totals can conceal shifts among occupations, employers and workers. The source reports lower labor share and falling real private-sector wages, but does not establish how much those changes reflect productivity, prices, bargaining power or other causes.
Track Hiring and Productivity
The next evidence will come from updated releases on productivity, hours, payrolls, wages and business AI adoption. Comparing those measures over time—and across industries and types of work—will help clarify whether the recent gap persists and whether firms using AI show different employment or output patterns from those that do not.
For now, the confirmed development is a strong economy with productivity growth running above the pace recorded from 2007 to 2019, alongside subdued hiring in some sectors and weaker real wages in the reported period. Whether AI is a major cause, and who will benefit if productivity stays elevated, remain open questions.
Key Questions
Has AI been shown to cause the recent rise in US productivity?
No. The data show productivity and output growth alongside limited growth in hours, but they do not isolate AI’s contribution from other possible causes.
How much did output and hours worked change?
Based on the source author’s calculations from BLS indexes, nonfarm business output rose 10.0% from the fourth quarter of 2022 to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked rose 0.9%. Those figures cover that specific period and are not a causal estimate of AI’s impact.
What did the latest GDP estimate show?
The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimated that real GDP grew at a 3.4% annual rate in the third quarter of 2026, up from 2.2% in the second quarter.
Are workers sharing in the productivity gains?
The cited measures do not show a clear, broad rise in workers’ purchasing power. The analysis reports a 52.8% labor share in the second quarter and a 0.6% annual decline in real private-sector wages through September. Those figures do not identify the causes or predict future pay.
How widespread is business use of AI?
The source analysis cites early-October Census Bureau data saying about one in four US businesses reported using AI. The cited figure does not explain how intensively those businesses use it or what effect it has on jobs and output.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
