This is the first issue in the 25 years I’ve known you where I vehemently disagree with you.
For every good union construction job they create, how many thousands will they cost in terms of replacement of workers by “AI”. Not for nothing was every pro-AI commencement speaker booed this year.
Then we come to environmental degradation. In Pima County where I live, the one they are trying to get built against near unanimous opposition (the Tucson City Council voted 6-0 to deny annexation of the land that would have let the data center use city water), only to have the county board allow it to be buiit anyway and they’re still want to drill for water which will severely impact our depleted water supply as badly. The fight is far from over.
Or you could check out the Boxtown neighborhood in Memphis where they’ve built a data center on guess which side of the tracks and caused serious health issues with chemical fumes.
And then there are serious possibilities of an economic bubble bursting.
And they want all this WITHOUT GOVERNMENT REGULATION!
DCs require environmental regulation, like all development. And productivity growth always eliminates old jobs. New ones are created eventually. Of course the disruptions in employment damage families, but that is in the DNA of capitalism. It is also susceptible to remedies. The Western water problem is much bigger than DCs.
I have little use for AI, but AI and DCs are the tail, not the dog.
Why did they want NO government regulation? The Senate voted 99-0 against a bill that would have given them that. Amazing.
I think past experience is not much of a guide here. This is not the Internet that Al Gore didn't actually say he invented but did cheerlead for. We can't party like it's 1992.
The dog is Unregulated Capitalism. When its growth is unrestrained, it provides both costs and benefits. Our responsibility is to push the balance in favor of net benefits by using the public sector. I don't think that is done by resisting economic growth, especially when liberals cater to anti-tax sentiment.
You've persuaded me that DCs are good for Loudoun County. But are they good for everybody else? Elon Musk's data center--run by smoky jet engines in a poor black residential neighborhood--certainly is not. It's all a matter of externalities, I suppose.
I wanted to add that social spending can create tax revenue. My parents moved to Montgomery County in 1960 because it had an excellent school system. So did many other parents. They all paid taxes, and were happy to do so because good public schools are a damn sight cheaper than good private schools. With everybody well-educated (or at least aspiring to good education for their kids), the tax base kept growing and growing.
A certain kind of goo-goo Republican used to realize this. (Indeed, Montgomery County was represented by goo-goo Republicans well in to the 1980's.)
DC development can be socially disastrous, like any economic development. The burden is to construct an effective regulatory state under which economic growth becomes a positive.
Even considering the downsides, there is still a benefit side to factor in. An argument that is one-sided, as most are, is just not serious.
As a public-goods-socialist, I agree on the likely benign impact of a bigger public sector. From that standpoint, anti-tax and small-government messages are toxic politics.
Hi Max,
Have you seen Jodi Dean's piece on AI is Capital? A different perspective on the implications of AI effects on the working class.
Have not. Whatever I see of AI, I don't like. Thiough I do find Google AI useful.
This is the first issue in the 25 years I’ve known you where I vehemently disagree with you.
For every good union construction job they create, how many thousands will they cost in terms of replacement of workers by “AI”. Not for nothing was every pro-AI commencement speaker booed this year.
Then we come to environmental degradation. In Pima County where I live, the one they are trying to get built against near unanimous opposition (the Tucson City Council voted 6-0 to deny annexation of the land that would have let the data center use city water), only to have the county board allow it to be buiit anyway and they’re still want to drill for water which will severely impact our depleted water supply as badly. The fight is far from over.
Or you could check out the Boxtown neighborhood in Memphis where they’ve built a data center on guess which side of the tracks and caused serious health issues with chemical fumes.
And then there are serious possibilities of an economic bubble bursting.
And they want all this WITHOUT GOVERNMENT REGULATION!
Think about this some more, Max.
And all this FOR WHAT? ChatGPT? No thanks!
DCs require environmental regulation, like all development. And productivity growth always eliminates old jobs. New ones are created eventually. Of course the disruptions in employment damage families, but that is in the DNA of capitalism. It is also susceptible to remedies. The Western water problem is much bigger than DCs.
I have little use for AI, but AI and DCs are the tail, not the dog.
What's the dog, Max?
Why did they want NO government regulation? The Senate voted 99-0 against a bill that would have given them that. Amazing.
I think past experience is not much of a guide here. This is not the Internet that Al Gore didn't actually say he invented but did cheerlead for. We can't party like it's 1992.
The dog is Unregulated Capitalism. When its growth is unrestrained, it provides both costs and benefits. Our responsibility is to push the balance in favor of net benefits by using the public sector. I don't think that is done by resisting economic growth, especially when liberals cater to anti-tax sentiment.
The data centers will never get built, this is all a huge bubble the size of the dot.com or housing bubble: https://overcast.fm/+ABPDRtlzGd0
You've persuaded me that DCs are good for Loudoun County. But are they good for everybody else? Elon Musk's data center--run by smoky jet engines in a poor black residential neighborhood--certainly is not. It's all a matter of externalities, I suppose.
I wanted to add that social spending can create tax revenue. My parents moved to Montgomery County in 1960 because it had an excellent school system. So did many other parents. They all paid taxes, and were happy to do so because good public schools are a damn sight cheaper than good private schools. With everybody well-educated (or at least aspiring to good education for their kids), the tax base kept growing and growing.
A certain kind of goo-goo Republican used to realize this. (Indeed, Montgomery County was represented by goo-goo Republicans well in to the 1980's.)
DC development can be socially disastrous, like any economic development. The burden is to construct an effective regulatory state under which economic growth becomes a positive.
Even considering the downsides, there is still a benefit side to factor in. An argument that is one-sided, as most are, is just not serious.
As a public-goods-socialist, I agree on the likely benign impact of a bigger public sector. From that standpoint, anti-tax and small-government messages are toxic politics.