[atleastoptimal]

Not sure what your point is. Stock markets are based on money going into securities based on estimated future value. Even if AI were doubling productivity at a non-AI company, there is more leverage to that money going into an AI company.

The question is, is AI leading to massive productivity gains in companies that implement it? AI productivity gains take time to diffuse, but so far companies in the S&P 500 are seeing very high growth. YOY earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 is 21.7% https://advantage.factset.com/hubfs/Website/Resources%20Sect...

[toasty228]

> YOY earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 is 21.7%

Now remove the companies selling the AI shovels: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HIAjbZxacAARHwD.png

> Not sure what your point is.

My point is that they're selling us Skynet and the end of employment as we now it, things that we shouldn't even have to measure to perceive the results of, yet no one is able to measure any of it

Pointing a finger at nvidia, google, and the other few companies stuck in circular investment schemes that shouldn't even be legal and saying "OOGA BOOGA line go UP, UP GOOD!" doesn't count in my book

[Jtarii]

Charitably the lag time for this technology to have noticeable effects could just be ~5 years away. Similarly to how computers didn't have a big impact for a decade after they were introduced as people got used to using them.

[no-name-here]

Your grandparent comment:

> Take any stock index, remove AI stocks, what do you see? That's right! Nothing...

Parent comment:

> Now remove the companies selling the AI shovels: https://pbs.twimg....

From your linked image, "excluding AI stocks" is "+16%" (the figure with AI stocks is far higher).

Your sole source says +16% excluding AI - in what kind of market is +16% “nothing”?

[toasty228]

> in what kind of market is +16% “nothing”?

It's nothing because it happens all the time, it's not statically relevant, like not at all: https://www.macrotrends.net/2526/sp-500-historical-annual-re...

This forum is full of techies with very strong opinions about their toys but 0 economical, political or historical education, and it shows

[no-name-here]

Those kind of returns would generally be considered at least ‘good’ even if they weren't excluding some of the best performing stocks such as AI as was done here. Some periods truly have no returns or even negative returns, even without excluding some of the best performing stocks like was done here.

And even more so since inflation was 2-3%, not considered high, during most of that period.

[atleastoptimal]

Is the image you provided depicting revenue, or stock value? My point is about revenue.

[toasty228]

Revenues don't matter when you sell a dollar for 50ct and half of the deals are circular anyways

[atleastoptimal]

So you're claiming that the revenue growth of the S&P 500 over the last few years is largely due to "selling dollars for 50ct" and circular deals?

[toasty228]

Yes.

https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/this-is-how-the-ai-bu...

> AI-related stocks have accounted for 75% of S&P 500 returns, 80% of earnings growth and 90% of capital spending growth since ChatGPT launched in November 2022.

[atleastoptimal]

has it occurred to you that AI companies may be making huge returns because AI is genuinely increasing productivity and driving actual economic growth via their products?

If all these false practices can pull revenue out of nothing, why doesn’t every company do it? How come AI companies seem to be able to pull off financial magic that no other company can match?

All your analyses still ignore the revenue point.