Too hot, too cold or just right? It was the key question in the fable of Goldilocks. She interloped in the home of three bears and, based on the version, either escaped through a window, vowing not to do so much breaking and entering going forward, or was subject to some sort of gruesome punishment typical of a 19th-century folk tale.
The Gen Z generation entering the workforce (aged roughly 13 to 28 years old) has a much more urgent question on its mind: Just how badly will the artificial intelligence revolution mangle their careers? Predictions range from too cold to too hot, and in the summer of 2025, prominent business and economics leaders have staked out their positions. Jensen Huang, the billionaire founder of the indispensable AI chips manufacturer Nvidia, is at one pole of the argument, while Dario Amodei, CEO of the cutting-edge AI startup Anthropic is at the other. In the middle of this Goldilocks equation is none other than Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
Dario Amodei: Sounding the alarm
Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, has emerged as the most outspoken pessimist. In a series of interviews and public appearances, Amodei warned in an interview with Axios that AI could eliminate up to 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs within the next five years, potentially driving U.S. Unemployment as high as 20%. He pointed to the rapid adoption of advanced AI models—like Anthropic’s own Claude 4—which are already automating tasks once reserved for junior staff in fields such as tech, finance, law, and consulting.
“We, as the producers of this technology, have a duty and an obligation to be honest about what is coming,” Amodei said. “Most of them are unaware that this is about to happen. It sounds crazy, and people just don’t believe it.”
Amodei’s warnings have some backing from data: Big Tech’s hiring of new graduates has dropped 50% since 2019, and a 25% decline in new grad hires was recorded from 2023 to 2024 alone. New grads account for only 7% of big tech hires. A recent World Economic Forum survey shows that 40% employers expect to reduce their workforce in areas where AI can automate tasks between 2025 and 2030.
Amodei has called for urgent government action, including proposals like a “token tax” on AI-generated revenue to support displaced workers .
Jensen Huang: Transformation, not destruction
Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, offers a more optimistic—if nuanced—counterpoint. While acknowledging that AI will change 100% of jobs, Huang insists that fears of mass unemployment are overblown. Instead, he argues that AI will redefine work, automating routine tasks but also creating new roles and opportunities .
“I am certain 100% of everybody’s jobs will be changed. The work that we do in our jobs will be changed. But it’s very likely—my job has already changed,” Huang said in a recent interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria .
Huang believes that the key to thriving in the AI era is embracing AI literacy. He warns that those who fail to adapt risk being left behind, but he also points to the emergence of new career paths in AI training, data labeling, and system integration . For Huang, the “Goldilocks” solution is innovation: as long as society continues to generate new ideas, productivity gains from AI can lift everyone.
Jerome Powell: The cautious centrist
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell occupies a middle ground, acknowledging both the risks and the potential of AI. In testimony before Congress and at international forums, Powell has said that AI’s impact on the economy and labor market is likely to be “significant,” but the timing and scale remain deeply uncertain .
“There’s certainly a possibility that, at least in the beginning, AI will replace a lot of jobs, rather than just augmenting people’s labor,” Powell told lawmakers. “In the long run, AI may raise productivity and lead to greater employment. But it is a transformational technology, with effects that are unknowable.”
Powell has emphasized that the central bank is closely monitoring AI’s effects but stressed that policy responses must come from Congress, not the Fed. He has also cited research suggesting that generative AI could boost global GDP by 7% over a decade—although with the caveat that up to 300 million jobs worldwide could be affected .
Gen Z: Caught in the crossfire
For Gen Z, the stakes could not be higher. As the first generation to enter a workforce transformed by AI, they face a future where entry-level jobs may be scarce, but new opportunities could emerge for those with the right skills.
A major global survey from Gallup found that 63% of Gen Z workers worry that generative AI will eliminate jobs—a level of concern matched only by millennials. This anxiety is fueling a surge in upskilling efforts, with 70% of Gen Zers developing new skills at least once a week to stay competitive . This anxiety is not just theoretical—those with no direct AI experience are even more likely to feel anxious (55%), suggesting that uncertainty and lack of guidance amplify these fears. The same study found that only 10% of Gen Zers without AI experience feel excited about the technology, underscoring a widespread sense of unease .
A recent survey of U.S. Workers revealed that 52% of Gen Z respondents are worried that someone with better AI skills could replace them at work within the next year. This is the highest level of concern among all generations surveyed, outpacing both millennials (45%) and Gen X (33%). The anxiety is driving Gen Z to pursue professional development at higher rates, with 26% planning to enroll in six to 10 courses over the next year to keep their skills relevant .
Nvidia declined to comment. Anthropic referred Coins2Day to a comment from Anthropic co-founder and head of policy Jack Clark: “Starting a conversation about the impact of AI on entry-level jobs is a matter of pragmatism. As producers of this technology, we have an obligation to be transparent and clear-eyed about AI’s potential societal and economic impacts.”
For this story, Coins2Day used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.
