Senators Hawley and Warner are introducing a bill to require US companies to provide the government quarterly reporting on jobs lost to AI.

"The American people need to have an accurate understanding of how AI is affecting our workforce, so we can ensure that AI works for the people, not the other way around."

More likely, a first step in taxing companies that use AI to become more efficient.

So now there are at least two external reasons pushing companies to cut workers as soon as possible:

1) To pay for AI, even before it is cost justified or proven. Some because of the huge expenditures (Big tech companies buying "terawatts" of compute). Others because everyone else is doing it and they want to keep Wall Street analysts happy.

2) Now, lay off as many as possible before there is a tax on it.

I think this is a terrible idea. Companies already pay to layoff (unemployment), making a special case for AI is pure populism. We want our companies to innovate and get better. Don't we?

https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-warner-to-introduce-bipartisan-legislation-revealing-number-of-jobs-lost-to-ai/

Good! **** AI! At some point do you just do what's better for human beings rather than corporate efficiency?

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

The companies you think are going to be negatively impacted by this are likely the ones pushing it. Regulations and taxes become barriers to entry for smaller potential competitors so that the giants can focus more on profit than on innovation. Look at the transformation of Apple from an innovator under Jobs to just another highly profitable Wall Street money machine under Cook. I'm more than willing to believe Cook thinks regulations like this are a good idea because it hurts the next guy more than it hurts him. It keeps the little guy little. The U.S. has become like the rest of the world where getting and staying on top is more about currying favor with the government than it is about earning the love and support of the people that actually want and use your products.

This is really a double edged sword.

How do you maintain technological and economic supremacy on the world stage without hitting the cutting edge of efficiency? AI is going to make companies able to do more with less. People will not lose their jobs to AI, they will lose their jobs to people who know how to use AI.

On the flip side, how the hell do you keep a country from falling apart when massive economic growth doesn't create additional jobs, because people can do more due to AI.

The Pratt billionaire just pledge 5 billion dollars towards us manufacturing that is estimated to create 1,000 jobs in the US.
That's $1,000,000 of investment per job. A generation ago a 5 billion dollar investment would have created 10,000 jobs, but now, much fewer.

It's going to be a brave new world, I have no suggestions. Our country is at war with itself as it is.

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

A little column A, a little column B. There are certainly sectors where they're using AI to be more productive… but there are also companies where CEOs are playing the "make shareholders happy" game by claiming they're tech savvy and getting "leaner" despite having brought in zero useful AI.

Hawley is a RINO.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

What is a Republican?

LOYAL AG said:

---

The companies you think are going to be negatively impacted by this are likely the ones pushing it. Regulations and taxes become barriers to entry for smaller potential competitors so that the giants can focus more on profit than on innovation. Look at the transformation of Apple from an innovator under Jobs to just another highly profitable Wall Street money machine under Cook. I'm more than willing to believe Cook thinks regulations like this are a good idea because it hurts the next guy more than it hurts him. It keeps the little guy little. The U.S. has become like the rest of the world where getting and staying on top is more about currying favor with the government than it is about earning the love and support of the people that actually want and use your products.

---

Very similar to when you see Amazon or Walmart lobbying to increase the minimum wage.

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

I expect mine to do this in the not too distant future.

The Government knows whats coming down the pipeline, they want companies to report it so the government can say they are in front of the AI crap storm about to hit the American Worker!! Our Govment subsidies the massive tech companies in order to replace humans, it's a really sick joke played on Humans

highlonesomeaggie said:

---

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

I expect mine to do this in the not too distant future.

---

Me too. And I may just hang it up at that point. Maybe get a job at Home Depot to tide me over a couple of years.

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

Mostly. More like they are reducing headcount and conveniently using AI as the scapegoat this go around.

This is getting rid of Covid bloat. Remember when these companies went crazy hiring in 2021?

Max Stonetrail said:

---

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

Mostly. More like they are reducing headcount and conveniently using AI as the scapegoat this go around.

This is getting rid of Covid bloat. Remember when these companies went crazy hiring in 2021?

---

I know. And yet I kept the same job.

Truthfully, the bonuses were great during that time. And of course the markets were crazy. Hence my pondering a change in career to home improvement.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

What is a Republican?

---

Based on how many people call Massie, Paul, etc types RINO's, a Republican is someone that puts the GOP party over conservative policy.

ts5641 said:

---

Good! **** AI! At some point do you just do what's better for human beings rather than corporate efficiency?

---

You're assuming the government knows what's good for human beings AND that it's capable of delivering that…a huge stretch on both fronts.

This isn't surprising. I said this on another thread but AI has taken all of the air out of the room when it comes to any topics on investments and the economy within business media.

Turn on CNBC. AI is probably 75-80% of what they talk about every day now for weeks. Every show and every segment is dominated by the same questions, the same pros and cons, the same debate. Every visiting executive's first question and sometimes only questions they get are "How are you using AI?"

Every single one of them then say everything they can to assure us they are incorporating it. The most interesting answer I've heard was actually from the Cognizant CEO, surprisingly. They are zigging when others are zagging, supposedly.

- Hiring more younger people and not fewer. Thinks it's a mistake to not do this.
- No material impact from H1B. Hiring more Americans and fewer Indians.
- Approaching AI as a supplement and not a reason to layoff.

Also won't surprise me if he's flat out lying.

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

ts5641 said:

---

Good! **** AI! At some point do you just do what's better for human beings rather than corporate efficiency?

---

Our governmet who is paid for by these same big companies should absolutely protect us because there will be massive numbers of lost jobs. How does an economy work when you have very few jobs?

How do you get elected and not let the country turn into communist takeover due to everyone dropping jobs and the current politicians don't care? The young kids are falling way behind because they can't even find work half the time and even when they do, they can't buy a house or car.

We are in a very dark place and people don't truly see what is coming.

All those folks who were told "learn to code".
Sorry, your sql skills are no longer needed here. Can you sell coffee?

Slippery slope. I like the idea of truly understanding what impact ai has on employment figures so people can make wise decisions on how to best position themselves for employment……..but completely understand how government will abuse the information.

Our government is to big and spends to much money.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

Hawley is a MAGA populist. There is absolutely zero conservatism in him. His views dovetail very nicely with old-school left wingers.

lb3 said:

---

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

---

This would mean that you don't believe any of these companies who have laid off people stating the direct reason being AI. Of course, they could simply be using AI as the excuse to cut labor which I think is valid in some cases.

The flip side of the equation is companies that have paused planned hiring due to AI. We did at my company. I was going to hire 3 people; hired 1 instead because of AI.

YouBet said:

---

lb3 said:

---

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

---

This would mean that you don't believe any of these companies who have laid off people stating the direct reason being AI. Of course, they could simply be using AI as the excuse to cut labor which I think is valid in some cases.

The flip side of the equation is companies that have paused planned hiring due to AI. We did at my company. I was going to hire 3 people; hired 1 instead because of AI.

---

Is 1 person able to do the work of 3?

I think the in vogue executive measuring stick at the moment is GM/SGA. The easiest way to improve that metric is to lower headcount. That is what we are seeing.

YouBet said:

---

lb3 said:

---

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

---

This would mean that you don't believe any of these companies who have laid off people stating the direct reason being AI. Of course, they could simply be using AI as the excuse to cut labor which I think is valid in some cases.

The flip side of the equation is companies that have paused planned hiring due to AI. We did at my company. I was going to hire 3 people; hired 1 instead because of AI.

---

I don't believe companies have made anyone redundant at this stage with the possible exception being online chatbots improving enough that there are noticeably fewer calls to the call centers but that doesn't account for the layoffs we've seen.

We have an AI team at work and most of our projects have focused on making us faster and more responsive. The project I was helping lead got shut down when we couldn't figure out how to incorporate partner data without crossing streams.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

Nope

texagbeliever said:

---

YouBet said:

---

lb3 said:

---

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

---

This would mean that you don't believe any of these companies who have laid off people stating the direct reason being AI. Of course, they could simply be using AI as the excuse to cut labor which I think is valid in some cases.

The flip side of the equation is companies that have paused planned hiring due to AI. We did at my company. I was going to hire 3 people; hired 1 instead because of AI.

---

Is 1 person able to do the work of 3?

I think the in vogue executive measuring stick at the moment is GM/SGA. The easiest way to improve that metric is to lower headcount. That is what we are seeing.

---

I don't know. I early retired not too long after I hired the 1 person. When I left, the CTO was incorporating Claude code much more into our processes which would preclude the need for junior folks...in theory. I don't know if he's been successful in that and how throughput looks.

They subsequently didn't replace my position either, but I was a founding exec of the company and told owner that instead of replacing my title they should downgrade the position. I do know they miss me because I've had multiple co-workers reach out to me begging me to come back. I was the "glue leader" and now they don't have that.

I stand by ready to charge outrageous hourly rates for consulting, if they so choose.

torrid said:

---

Do y'all think companies are just using AI as an excuse to reduce headcount?

---

Yes.

AI isn't replacing any jobs at this point in a way that causes panic. It will in the future, just not now. But corporations are using this excuse to hide their bad business decisions so they don't look bad.

ts5641 said:

---

Good! **** AI! At some point do you just do what's better for human beings rather than corporate efficiency?

---

Just think if they had done what you propose to stop the industrial, agricultural and computer revolutions. Do you think society would be better having a lot more farmers and subsistence living standards?

Many people had your views back when those technologies were being implemented and history proved them wrong.

Time to get an H1B visa to China. They stole all our tech, sent it to China and now will be our daddy in the AI race.

lb3 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

lb3 said:

---

As great as generative AI can be, I've not seen any real jobs replaced by it yet. Maybe some accountants are losing small business clients who decide to manage their own books perhaps.

But from what I've seen, most big companies are still trying to figure out the data security issues with AI and haven't really advanced past the test project stage. Anecdotal examples of sales people or managers using AI to draft emails isn't taking any jobs yet.

---

This would mean that you don't believe any of these companies who have laid off people stating the direct reason being AI. Of course, they could simply be using AI as the excuse to cut labor which I think is valid in some cases.

The flip side of the equation is companies that have paused planned hiring due to AI. We did at my company. I was going to hire 3 people; hired 1 instead because of AI.

---

I don't believe companies have made anyone redundant at this stage with the possible exception being online chatbots improving enough that there are noticeably fewer calls to the call centers but that doesn't account for the layoffs we've seen.

We have an AI team at work and most of our projects have focused on making us faster and more responsive. The project I was helping lead got shut down when we couldn't figure out how to incorporate partner data without crossing streams.

---

My personal opinion is that a lot of these layoffs are happing in the anticipation that AI will make these jobs redundant even though it hasn't yet. Companies are trying to justify the massive capital expenditures it's going to take ramp up AI and so cutting headcount is in line with that intended strategy. I think someone else actually already stated this opinion but it's also mine.

In addition, there has been an entire script flipping by corporate America since Covid. Pre-Covid corporate America was focused on growth at all costs (revenue). Post-Covid companies flipped back to the bottom line (profitability). The easiest way to cut costs is shedding headcount.

Companies (especially big tech) were also hoarding talent during covid because it was an employee market and companies were panicking about keeping people. That has ended now and these companies no longer feel they need to hoard talent. During covid, my Big Corp company (different from startup I already mentioned) was losing people to Google and MS for absolutely absurd compensation that we could not remotely match. They were poaching anyone they could get their hands on that was remotely qualified. Some of those people have since been laid off and are now stuck in employment purgatory.

TexAgs91 said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

Nope

---

Yep, especially of late

• He has indicated support for extending subsidies to prevent rate hikes for consumers.
• He has stated he will not vote for budget legislation that cuts Medicaid benefits, a key part of the ACA's expansion.

At my company all of the overhead staff are hoping and praying to find a way to lower headcount on project related work (construction.) Unfortunately, they have not found a way to eliminate a welder yet.


... the elephant in the room is that you can eliminate a lot of overhead staff in accounting, hr, etc ... which really hasnt been mentioned.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Hawley is a RINO.

---

Nope

---

Yep, especially of late

• He has indicated support for extending subsidies to prevent rate hikes for consumers.
• He has stated he will not vote for budget legislation that cuts Medicaid benefits, a key part of the ACA's expansion.

---

He won't be the only one on subsidies. Republican Party will cave on that for sure. Remains to be seen on Medicaid.