JPMorgan's AI timeline doesn't match what's happening in entry-level hiring
Excerpt: JPMorgan predicts AI productivity gains in under seven years versus 61 for steam engines. But current entry-level job losses suggest the transition might be rougher than historical precedent indicates.
JPMorgan's historical analysis suggests AI will follow the steam engine playbook—disruption, then growth, just faster. Seven years to productivity gains instead of 61. Textile workers lost wages when steam arrived, but coal miners and rail workers got hired. Companies needed fewer people per revenue dollar, but economic expansion more than made up for it.
What I'm seeing right now tells a different story. College graduate unemployment exceeds the general rate for the first time in years, and we're still early in AI deployment. When Dario Amodei discusses 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs disappearing in five years, that timeline doesn't align with the precedent of the steam engine.
So I'm planning for both scenarios. Yes, AI will create job categories we can't predict today—the historical pattern holds there. But the adjustment period looks shorter and rougher than the steam era. For teams building AI products, workforce transition policies need to be ready much faster than history would suggest.
Jason Ma
