87,714 Jobs Have Already Been Lost This Year To AI, But Billionaire Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Says AI Taking Jobs Is ‘Complete Nonsense’

87,714 Jobs Have Already Been Lost This Year To AI, But Billionaire Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Says AI Taking Jobs Is ‘Complete Nonsense’ Caleb Naysmith Wed, June 10, 2026 at 9:27 PM GMT+2 3 min read NVDA AMZN IBM CHGG XYZ Jensen Huang is not tiptoeing around the AI jobs debate. The Nvidia (NVDA) CEO called the idea that artificial intelligence (AI) is reducing jobs "complete nonsense" in a recent interview with Bloomberg. Rather than making workers’ anxiety disappear, Huang’s comment simply changes the argument.

His point is that companies may want more software engineers, not fewer, when each engineer can produce more with AI. More News from Barchart Dear Nvidia Stock Fans, Mark Your Calendars for June 11 Dear Marvell Technology Stock Fans, Mark Your Calendars for June 22 Oracle Earnings Could Reveal a Massive $100 Billion Spending Surge. Here Is Why You Should Still Buy ORCL Stock.

Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now! The most provocative part of his case is the productivity math.

Huang framed the possibility of a single AI-enabled engineer producing "$9 trillion worth of productive work," using that extreme example to argue that demand for engineering work can expand when the output ceiling rises. While this might seem great in theory, the anxiety for many doesn’t come from an abstract, generalized fear of layoffs. It comes from actual headlines and executive decisions from some of the largest companies around the world.

Huang’s argument doesn’t line up neatly with the messy reality of the current layoff cycle. Companies are increasingly pointing to AI directly in their explanations for smaller workforces. IBM (IBM) said it would pause hiring for thousands of back-office roles that could be replaced by AI over time.

Dropbox (DBX) cut about 500 employees while saying it needed to be “at the forefront of the AI era. ” Duolingo (DUOL) cut roughly 10% of its contractor workforce as it leaned on AI for content production and translation work. Chegg (CHGG), hit by students turning to AI tools, announced major workforce reductions as it tried to adapt to what it called the “new realities of AI.

” The list has only grown. In February, Block (XYZ) laid off 4,000 employees, directly citing AI and intelligence tools as a reason for the move. Shortly after, Dorsey, Block’s founder, took to X to say he believes within the next year, most companies will do the same.

“I think most companies are late. Within the next year, I believe the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion and make similar structural changes. I’d rather get there honestly and on our own terms than be forced into it reactively,” Dorsey said.

Story Continues Salesforce (CRM) CEO Marc Benioff said the company reduced its customer support headcount from about 9,000 to 5,000 because AI agents meant he needed “less heads. ” Amazon (AMZN) CEO Andy Jassy told employees that as the company rolls out more generative AI and agents, it expects to reduce its corporate workforce over the next few years. More broadly, Challenger, Gray & Christmas has also tracked AI as a rising stated reason for job cuts, with companies citing AI for 54,836 announced layoffs in 2025 and 87,714 cuts through May 2026.

And Goldman Sachs (GS) currently estimates that approximately 11,000 jobs per month are being lost due to AI. So even if Huang is right that AI can create more work in the long run, workers are hardly imagining the short-term pressure. Plenty of employers are already using AI as part of the case for fewer people.

Even worse, after these companies made these announcements, markets largely rewarded them. Many saw substantial stock gains, giving companies a direct incentive to continue this trend. Block’s stock soared as much as 24%, largely due to the announcement about AI-related layoffs.

On the date of publication, Caleb Naysmith did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Barchart.