AI executives predict the elimination of half of entry-level, white-collar jobs in the next one to five years, while public anxiety regarding job automation and the technology’s consumption of resources has sharply increased. A global poll conducted by U.K.-based research firm Public First found that American respondents' belief that AI would improve society plummeted from a 4-point margin in 2025 to a 13-point margin believing it would be worse for society this year among young adults aged 18 to 24. This growing pessimism reflects the material conditions workers face as capital deploys new technologies.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has warned that AI will be able to eliminate half of entry-level, white-collar jobs within the next one to five years. This prediction fuels the anxieties of young adults who view the labor market with increasing apprehension. The three-year span ending this year saw a consistent decline in optimism, with only 31 percent of U.S. survey participants believing AI would make society better this year, down from 39 percent in 2024.
Fears about resource usage, particularly electricity, have also risen sharply, with two of every three respondents expressing worry this year, up from 52 percent in 2024. These concerns are directly linked to the rapid establishment of computing hubs across the country, which demand vast amounts of energy and water for cooling systems. The expansion of these data centers, essential infrastructure for AI capital, externalizes significant environmental and social costs onto local communities.
Who Profits from the AI Race
The global competition for AI dominance, often framed as a national race, primarily serves the interests of transnational corporations seeking to expand their markets and consolidate technological control. While just over half of American respondents, along with majorities in Japan, India, and Vietnam, still perceive the U.S. as the dominant AI superpower, respondents in 11 other countries, including close U.S. allies such as France, Canada, and the United Kingdom, now see China as the leader. This inter-capitalist rivalry drives rapid development, prioritizing profit over social welfare.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, speaking on an earnings call about 8 months ago, articulated the expansion of content generation, stating, “Now, as AI makes it easier to create and remix content, we’re going to add yet another huge corpus of content on top of those.” This continuous generation of content fuels engagement and advertising revenue, further concentrating wealth for tech giants. The polling firm Public First, which conducted the survey, has no connection to Public First Action, a political group backed by the AI company Anthropic.
The State's Role in Protecting Capital
The state, far from being a neutral arbiter, acts to manage the contradictions arising from capital accumulation and to suppress challenges to the existing distribution of power. President Donald Trump, while claiming the U.S. is “leading China by a lot” in AI, issued a “ratepayer protection pledge” about 3 months ago. This pledge asked major technology companies to provide or pay for their own electricity supplies, a symbolic concession aimed at deflecting public anger over resource consumption rather than fundamentally altering the profit-driven expansion of data centers.
Former White House AI czar David Sacks explicitly cautioned against overregulation of the technology, including the idea of creating a clearance process for cutting-edge models. Sacks stated on Fox Business last week that if such measures were implemented, “then I think we could lose this AI race to China.” This position directly prioritizes the competitive advantage of AI capital over any regulatory framework designed to protect workers or the environment.
Local governments have also facilitated the expansion of AI infrastructure, often against community wishes. In one Missouri town, half of the city council was voted out after approving a $6 billion data center, demonstrating the political cost of serving corporate interests. A councilman in Indianapolis reported his home was shot at, and a note reading “NO DATA CENTERS” was left on his front porch, a week after a rezoning plan was approved to accommodate a data center developer’s project. These incidents highlight the direct conflict between community needs and the state's role in enabling capital's expansion.
Community Resistance Emerges
The material impacts of AI development have sparked direct community resistance. The ousting of city council members in Missouri and the direct action in Indianapolis against data centers represent localized struggles against the privatization of collective resources and the externalization of corporate costs. These actions underscore a growing public awareness of who bears the burden of technological advancement driven by profit.