Fears that artificial intelligence is already wiping out white-collar jobs may be running ahead of the evidence, according to a senior economist at Google DeepMind, who says the data so far does not support claims of a widespread employment crisis.

Alex Imas, director of AGI economics at Google DeepMind and a professor at the University of Chicago, said he has yet to see convincing signs that AI is causing broad-based layoffs across professional occupations, even in sectors considered most exposed to automation.

Speaking on the Dwarkesh Podcast, Imas pushed back against growing predictions from some technology leaders that AI will soon eliminate large numbers of office jobs.

“A lot of people are looking at it,” he said, adding that “even looking at software engineering, the most exposed sectors, there’s just not really anything going on.”

This stands in contrast to dire warnings from some leaders at frontier AI companies. Executives such as Dario Amodei have cautioned that AI could eventually remove large portions of entry-level white-collar work, while other industry figures have warned of significant labor market disruption over the next several years.

Imas, however, argued that current labor market data does not show evidence of a large-scale employment shock.

“Right now, we don’t really have any evidence of a white-collar bloodbath,” he said.

The Bigger Risk May Be Corporate Psychology

While dismissing claims of an ongoing jobs apocalypse, Imas highlighted a different risk that could emerge if corporate behavior becomes driven by perceptions rather than economic reality. He described a hypothetical scenario in which companies begin cutting staff simply because investors and competitors expect AI adoption to translate into workforce reductions.

“Let’s say we get into a narrative where if you’re a firm and you’re not laying people off, then you’re seen as not adapting AI enough,” he said.

“That’s super worrying, where the firm might actually be worse off after the layoffs than before the layoffs, but it’s just doing the layoffs to have the perception that, ‘Look, we’re not behind the times. We’re using AI.'”

Such a dynamic could create what economists often describe as a herd effect, where businesses mimic one another’s actions not because the strategy improves productivity, but because they fear appearing less innovative than rivals.

The warning comes as corporate executives face mounting pressure from investors to demonstrate clear AI strategies. In recent months, several technology firms have cited AI as a factor in workforce reductions, fueling speculation that automation-driven restructuring is accelerating.

Rather than eliminating jobs outright, Imas suggested AI’s immediate impact may be to automate portions of existing roles while leaving workers responsible for higher-value activities.

“Let’s say the AI automates nine out of ten tasks. One task is not automated,” he said.

“If that person can now focus in on that task, the job will become more productive.”

This view aligns with a growing body of economic research suggesting that AI’s near-term effect may be augmentation rather than wholesale replacement. Historically, major technological advances have often increased productivity by changing how work is performed rather than eliminating occupations entirely.

That does not mean labor markets will remain unchanged. Certain routine tasks may disappear, new roles may emerge, and skill requirements could shift significantly. But the transition may be more gradual than some forecasts suggest.

A Debate Dividing the AI Industry

A widening divide within the AI sector itself has been going on. On one side are executives who warn that capable AI systems could rapidly replace knowledge workers across industries. On the other hand, there are researchers and economists who argue that there is currently little empirical evidence supporting predictions of mass unemployment.

Notably, a spokesperson for Google DeepMind emphasized that Imas was speaking in a personal capacity and that the scenario he described was hypothetical. The spokesperson added that his broader point was that existing data does not indicate a white-collar employment collapse.

The company also pointed to previous remarks by Demis Hassabis, who has argued that AI could ultimately boost productivity, create new industries, and generate entirely new categories of jobs. The debate is becoming increasingly important as businesses invest billions of dollars into AI systems and governments assess how the technology may reshape labor markets.

For now, according to Imas, the evidence suggests caution against dramatic conclusions.

The technology is advancing rapidly, but the widely predicted wave of AI-driven white-collar job destruction has yet to materialize in the data. The greater immediate risk, he suggests, may be companies acting on the expectation of disruption before the disruption itself has actually arrived.

China’s trade performance in May exceeded expectations, with exports accelerating sharply and imports continuing their robust climb, as surging demand for AI-related technology goods and green energy products helped shield the economy from the disruptive effects of the ongoing U.S.-Iran war.

Overall exports rose 19.4% year-on-year in U.S. dollar terms, accelerating from 14.1% growth in April and beating economists’ consensus forecast of 15%, according to customs data released Tuesday. Imports expanded 27.4%, picking up from 25.3% the previous month and surpassing the expected 25% rise. The strong import momentum narrowed the trade surplus to $105.4 billion for the month.

In the first five months of the year, imports have grown faster than exports (24.5% vs 15.5%), a shift that has narrowed the cumulative trade surplus compared to last year. However, economists at Bank of America Global Research cautioned that this is “hardly a sign of rebalancing,” noting that the import surge is narrowly concentrated in categories such as semiconductor chips and gold, driven largely by higher input costs and stockpiling rather than broad-based domestic demand recovery.

AI and Green Tech as Key Buffers

The standout performer was high-tech and AI-related exports. Shipments of integrated circuits soared 110% in value, partly due to rising unit prices, while overall high-tech goods exports jumped 50%. Green energy products, electric vehicles, batteries, and solar panels also posted strong gains, benefiting from global stockpiling ahead of potential further energy price spikes caused by the Iran conflict.

“The war is boosting demand for green exports, such as electric vehicles, batteries, solar products, and AI-related technology goods. We expect the outperformance in high-tech product export growth to persist,” Sheana Yue, senior economist at Oxford Economics, noted.

This resilience comes despite the effective blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which has disrupted global energy flows and raised input costs. Chinese exporters have capitalized on overseas buyers rushing to secure supplies before prices climb further. However, analysts warn that this tailwind may prove temporary. Once stockpiling momentum fades, sluggish domestic consumption is unlikely to fill the gap.

“We expect the AI boom to support production and trade, as higher prices for tech and semiconductor goods boost headline growth. Domestic demand could show continued weakness,” Xiangrong Yu, chief China economist at Citi, said.

Yu anticipates retail sales growth, a key gauge of consumption, could fall to zero in May, down from the already weak 0.2% in April, as the impact of earlier trade-in subsidies fades.

Shipments to the United States surged 35.4% in May, the strongest growth since March 2021, extending a rebound after prolonged declines last year under pressure from Trump-era tariffs. This performance reflects front-loading by U.S. buyers and a narrowing tariff disadvantage for Chinese goods compared to Southeast Asian competitors.

“China’s tariff disadvantage vis-à-vis Southeast Asia nations has also narrowed, providing a tailwind for exports. Any additional tariffs imposed on Chinese goods under Trump’s Section 301 review will likely be smaller than those facing rival exporters, giving Chinese manufacturers a further competitive edge,” Tianchen Xu, senior economist at the Economist Intelligence Unit, pointed out.

Domestic Weakness and Policy Implications

The strong external performance stands in contrast to softening domestic activity. China’s economy has shown clear signs of faltering after a solid first quarter. Growth slowed across the board in April, with industrial production and retail sales posting their weakest gains in years. The official manufacturing PMI slipped to 50 in May — the threshold separating expansion from contraction.

Bank of America economists noted that the export boom has reduced Beijing’s urgency for aggressive policy stimulus, even as domestic demand remains weak and domestic substitution efforts continue. This dynamic complicates rebalancing efforts away from investment and exports toward consumption-led growth.

The Iran war has compounded these challenges. As the world’s third-largest oil importer, India and China are among the most exposed major economies. Higher energy costs, disrupted fertilizer supplies, and potential El Niño-related drought risks are weighing on India’s agricultural sector and broader growth prospects, with similar ripple effects felt in China.

For now, China’s trade engine continues to fire on high-tech and green cylinders, providing a crucial buffer against external shocks and weak internal demand. The surge in AI-related and green exports is seen as a sign of the success of Beijing’s industrial policy push toward self-sufficiency and strategic sectors.

However, some analysts believe the reliance on front-loading, stockpiling, and elevated global prices makes this growth fragile. This is because a resolution to the Middle East conflict that normalizes energy flows could quickly shift the balance from shortage fears to surplus concerns, potentially pressuring Chinese exporters.

Meanwhile, persistent domestic weakness, evident in slowing retail sales and manufacturing momentum, is said to reveal the need for more targeted stimulus to support consumption.