I dunno what to think, some people say AI will cause job apocalypse and some say AI will lead to more jobs
LegoRedBrick on
Every time a billionaire speaks an angel loses it’s wings
goddamn2fa on
Maybe a lot of them are over leveraged.
recentgrooves on
His head is 75% overstaffed
PinkySwearNotABot on
looks like he’s been reading the same Reddit posts as us, then
jb4647 on
I think Andreessen is probably right in one narrow but important sense. A lot of modern white collar work really is make-work, status theater, or bureaucracy piled on top of bureaucracy. That does not mean every layoff is justified, and it definitely does not mean workers are the problem, but it does mean AI is being dropped into an economy that was already full of jobs people privately suspect should not exist.
That is basically the core argument of David Graeber’s [Bullshit Jobs: A Theory](https://amzn.to/4tbHd5G). He defines a bullshit job as paid employment so pointless, unnecessary, or even harmful that the person doing it cannot justify its existence, even though they feel obligated to pretend otherwise. He also points out that these jobs are not just a government thing. He talks about how capitalism has produced huge layers of administrative and white collar work that expand even while the people actually making, fixing, moving, and maintaining things get squeezed harder. That feels very relevant here, because AI gives companies an even better excuse to strip away layers of paper-pushing, image management, pseudo-coordination, and internal nonsense.
Where I think Andreessen overreaches is the “75% overstaffed” line. That sounds like venture capitalist chest-thumping more than serious analysis. But the broader point, that a lot of organizations are carrying around inflated headcount tied to pointless internal processes, fake urgency, and jobs created mainly to signal importance, honestly has a lot of truth in it. Graeber’s whole book is basically about that exact pathology.
The ugly part is that AI becomes the perfect cover story. Maybe the company already had too many coordinators, managers, analysts, compliance layers, internal comms people, and other roles that existed mostly because the system kept generating more process for its own sake. Now leadership can say “AI did it” instead of admitting the org chart was bloated and absurd long before ChatGPT showed up.
So yeah, I would not take Andreessen literally, but I do think he is pointing at something real. If anyone wants a book that explains why this claim lands with so many people, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory by David Graeber is worth reading.
Always_Scheming on
Well it’s clear that there is a lot of work to be done. Many problems to be solved, infrastructure to be repaired. Supply chains to be improved.
Maybe if job markets were more focussed on this and less focussed on bullshit jobs then this would not be an issue.
Will we focus on giving jobs to the mass of underemployed and unemployed to solve all the real problems that need solving or will we continue with the top down class warfare?
7 Comments
>But recent studies on the impact of AI complicate Andreessen’s assessment. An [Anthropic study](https://fortune.com/2026/03/06/ai-job-losses-report-anthropic-research-great-recession-for-white-collar-workers/) released earlier this month demonstrated that AI is already theoretically capable of performing the majority of tasks associated with engineering, law, finance, and business. And a study from professional services firm Cognizant [mapped out](https://fortune.com/2026/03/19/ai-jobs-vulnerable-disruption-layoffs-warning-price-tag/) the projected magnitude of AI layoffs this year, finding AI-related job cuts could total more than nine times what they were last year, surpassing 500,000. But that number is still a far cry from the sweeping projections leaders like Anthropic CEO [Dario Amodei](https://fortune.com/2025/05/28/anthropic-ceo-warning-ai-job-loss/) have made about an AI-related white-collar job apocalypse.
Hmmmm
I dunno what to think, some people say AI will cause job apocalypse and some say AI will lead to more jobs
Every time a billionaire speaks an angel loses it’s wings
Maybe a lot of them are over leveraged.
His head is 75% overstaffed
looks like he’s been reading the same Reddit posts as us, then
I think Andreessen is probably right in one narrow but important sense. A lot of modern white collar work really is make-work, status theater, or bureaucracy piled on top of bureaucracy. That does not mean every layoff is justified, and it definitely does not mean workers are the problem, but it does mean AI is being dropped into an economy that was already full of jobs people privately suspect should not exist.
That is basically the core argument of David Graeber’s [Bullshit Jobs: A Theory](https://amzn.to/4tbHd5G). He defines a bullshit job as paid employment so pointless, unnecessary, or even harmful that the person doing it cannot justify its existence, even though they feel obligated to pretend otherwise. He also points out that these jobs are not just a government thing. He talks about how capitalism has produced huge layers of administrative and white collar work that expand even while the people actually making, fixing, moving, and maintaining things get squeezed harder. That feels very relevant here, because AI gives companies an even better excuse to strip away layers of paper-pushing, image management, pseudo-coordination, and internal nonsense.
Where I think Andreessen overreaches is the “75% overstaffed” line. That sounds like venture capitalist chest-thumping more than serious analysis. But the broader point, that a lot of organizations are carrying around inflated headcount tied to pointless internal processes, fake urgency, and jobs created mainly to signal importance, honestly has a lot of truth in it. Graeber’s whole book is basically about that exact pathology.
The ugly part is that AI becomes the perfect cover story. Maybe the company already had too many coordinators, managers, analysts, compliance layers, internal comms people, and other roles that existed mostly because the system kept generating more process for its own sake. Now leadership can say “AI did it” instead of admitting the org chart was bloated and absurd long before ChatGPT showed up.
So yeah, I would not take Andreessen literally, but I do think he is pointing at something real. If anyone wants a book that explains why this claim lands with so many people, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory by David Graeber is worth reading.
Well it’s clear that there is a lot of work to be done. Many problems to be solved, infrastructure to be repaired. Supply chains to be improved.
Maybe if job markets were more focussed on this and less focussed on bullshit jobs then this would not be an issue.
Will we focus on giving jobs to the mass of underemployed and unemployed to solve all the real problems that need solving or will we continue with the top down class warfare?