X discussion: FT chief data reporter John Burn-Murdoch says the US productivity jump "doesn't look like AI" and is mostly tech layoffs, while Gavin Baker argues it shows "ROI on AI"
On November 1, John Burn-Murdoch, a Financial Times columnist and chief data reporter, posted a long X thread with his FT piece arguing that the productivity rise in AI-adopting US sectors began in 2020, before AI agents existed, shows up only in the US, and comes mainly from tech layoffs and hiring pullbacks rather than AI. The thread opener has about 1,344 likes, 306 reposts and 186K views. Gavin Baker, managing partner and CIO of Atreides Management, quoted the FT charts and said it is hard not to see some evidence of "ROI on AI," citing a16z and EPB Research data; his post has about 793 likes and 102K views. Burn-Murdoch replied that he is "slightly on the fence" and that the data cannot rule out a role for AI. These are two readings of the same data, not a settled finding.
Key Takeaways
- Opener: John Burn-Murdoch's thread, posted 2026-11-01 15:04 UTC, with about 1,344 likes, 306 reposts and 186K views; his X bio says he is an FT columnist and chief data reporter
- His core argument: the productivity rise in AI-adopting US sectors started in 2020, and even a 2022 re-acceleration is "too early to be AI. Back then it was chatbots, not agents"; other rich countries use AI just as widely but show no similar jump
- Splitting productivity into output and headcount, he argues the US acceleration since 2022 is mainly a tech layoffs story: output stayed on trend while employment fell
- Counterpoint: Gavin Baker's reply, with about 793 likes and 102K views; citing EPB Research, he says the 3 industries that adopted AI most went from 2.2% to 5% productivity growth, and that the US is 72% of Anthropic revenue (figures he cites from third parties; AICoder has not verified them)
- Replying to Baker, Burn-Murdoch said he is "slightly on the fence": the "this looks like AI" case is overstated, but the data cannot rule out a role for AI either
