🔍 Read the full analysis: The US Economy Grew With Similar Work Hours. Is AI Part Of The Story? on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Prime made for students and young adults
- Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
- Prime Video and Amazon Music included
- Member-only deals
TL;DR
U.S. output in the nonfarm business sector rose 10.0% from the fourth quarter of 2022 to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked increased 0.9%, according to calculations from Bureau of Labor Statistics indexes cited by ThorstenMeyerAI.com. Productivity has accelerated, but available data do not establish that AI caused the change; employment and wage trends are uneven.
U.S. economic output has risen much faster than the hours people work, a gap that has fueled questions about whether artificial intelligence is changing the labor market. Data cited in a November 1 analysis by ThorstenMeyerAI.com show nonfarm business output up 10.0% from late 2022 to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked rose 0.9%; the figures indicate stronger productivity but do not establish AI as its cause.
The latest headline growth figure is also strong: the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ advance estimate put real U.S. gross domestic product growth at a 3.4% annual rate in the third quarter of 2026, up from 2.2% in the second quarter. The source says investment, consumer spending and government spending all contributed. GDP growth measures the economy’s overall output; it is distinct from the nonfarm business-sector productivity figures.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that nonfarm business productivity grew 2.2% over the year to the second quarter of 2026. Output in that sector increased 2.5% over the same period, while hours worked increased 0.2%. The sector covers private businesses outside farming and excludes government, nonprofits and households. The longer-run comparison in the source puts annual productivity growth at 2.1% from the end of 2019 to the second quarter of 2026, compared with 1.5% from 2007 to 2019.
Employment and pay figures complicate the picture of broad-based gains. Payrolls increased by 496,000 over the 12 months to September, the source reports, with health care and social assistance adding 520,000 jobs. Information industries lost 120,000 jobs and remained 12% below their November 2022 peak. The analysis also reports a 52.8% labor share in the second quarter, described as the lowest since records began in 1947, and a 0.6% decline in real private-sector wages over the year to September.
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 Job Growth
When output grows faster than hours worked, businesses are producing more per hour. Sustained productivity growth can support higher living standards and economic growth without requiring a matching increase in labor input. But that aggregate measure does not show which workers or industries benefit, nor whether increased output is being shared through higher wages, more hiring or other returns.
The source’s figures point to an uneven labor market: job gains are concentrated in health care and social assistance, while information-sector employment has fallen. It also reports unemployment of 8.0% for people aged 20 to 24 and 7.0% for Black workers, compared with 4.2% overall. Those rates describe different groups and do not, by themselves, explain what caused the differences. For workers and employers, the central issue is whether productivity growth will translate into more opportunity and better pay, or mainly higher output with limited hiring.
Popular right now
Ninja DualZone Smart XL Air Fryer, 10-Qt, 6-in-1, DZ950
De'Longhi Magnifica Evo Fully Automatic Espresso Machine with Manual Milk Frother, Silver
Dyson Ball Animal 3 Upright Vacuum
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the Post-2022 Numbers Compare
The analysis uses the end of 2022 as a reference point because ChatGPT launched on November 30 of that year, making it a commonly used marker for the arrival of widely available generative AI. From the fourth quarter of 2022 through the second quarter of 2026, the source’s calculations from BLS indexes show output up 10.0% and hours up 0.9%. Those are changes across the stated period, not evidence by themselves that one development caused the other.
The sector data offer reasons for caution about attributing the shift to AI. The source cites an early-October Census Bureau measure showing about one in four U.S. businesses reported using AI. It also notes that tech employment began shrinking before generative AI was in wide business use. Separately, computers and software reportedly accounted for about a third of third-quarter growth, much of it tied to AI investment, according to the analysis. Investment in AI-related equipment and software may contribute to economic output without proving that AI tools have raised productivity across the wider economy.
The article says the Financial Times published a John Burn-Murdoch opinion column on October 31 asking whether the employment and productivity pattern was early evidence of AI’s labor-market impact. The Wall Street Journal published a headline about growth that does not benefit everyone on November 1. ThorstenMeyerAI.com says it could access only the FT headline and summary and the WSJ headline, not either article in full; its analysis relies instead on official statistics from U.S. agencies and Eurostat.
“Numbers can show that two things happen at the same time. They rarely show that one causes the other.”
— Thorsten Meyer, ThorstenMeyerAI.com
AI’s Role Is Not Established
The figures establish a gap between output growth and hours worked, but they do not isolate the cause. Productivity can change for several reasons, including investment, shifts in the types of goods and services produced, changes in business organization, and measurement effects. The source says the pattern is consistent with an AI contribution, but also with other explanations.
It is also unclear how widely AI is being used in ways that change measured output or staffing. The cited Census Bureau estimate that about one in four businesses used AI does not, on its own, specify how intensively those businesses used it or whether adoption improved productivity. The source does not provide a causal estimate linking AI adoption to the reported productivity gains. Nor do aggregate figures resolve how gains are divided among wages, profits and investment.
Some figures in the source are labeled as its own calculations from official indexes, rather than as a single published BLS comparison. The third-quarter GDP figure is identified as an advance estimate and may be revised. The full arguments in the cited newspaper articles are also not available in the source material, so their conclusions cannot be assessed here.
More Data Needed to Test AI’s Effect
The next evidence will come from subsequent releases of GDP, productivity, employment, wage and business-adoption data. Revisions to the advance GDP estimate and later quarterly BLS reports may alter the measured pace of growth. Further Census Bureau surveys can show whether reported AI use is spreading, although adoption rates alone will not prove an effect on output or jobs.
A clearer test would require evidence connecting firms’ AI use with changes in output per hour, hiring, hours and pay, while accounting for other differences between businesses. Until such evidence is available, the careful conclusion is that U.S. productivity has strengthened and labor-market outcomes are uneven, while AI’s contribution remains uncertain.
Key Questions
How much did U.S. business output and work hours change?
According to calculations from BLS indexes cited by ThorstenMeyerAI.com, nonfarm business output rose 10.0% from the fourth quarter of 2022 to the second quarter of 2026, while hours worked rose 0.9% over that same period.
Does the data prove AI caused productivity to rise?
No. The figures show output growing faster than hours worked, but they do not identify the cause. The source says the pattern could fit an AI explanation, while also fitting other explanations.
What does the latest productivity report show?
The BLS figures cited in the analysis show nonfarm business productivity up 2.2% over the year to the second quarter of 2026, with output up 2.5% and hours worked up 0.2% over that year.
Are employment gains spread across industries?
No. The source reports that health care and social assistance added 520,000 jobs over the 12 months to September, while information industries lost 120,000. These figures show different industry trends, but they do not establish why they occurred.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
