Thank you for the article, Adam . My neighbors have signs out NO DATA CENTERS. I have a sign coming to put out on my lawn. I listened to Rick Wilson’s podcast Against All Enemies he was speaking with Erin Brockovich . She is out being an advocate against these DATA CENTERS. The water would become bad, an air would get worse to breathe. Oligarch’s just want to destroy our country because of these DATA CENTERS.
I continue to wonder WHY the technology experts don't seem to be interested in solving the actual data center issues of high power demands, high water demands, heat islands in building locations, and high noise levels. Perhaps the opinion of data centers would change if they would solve these issues.
Exactly. If the tech billionaires have so much money, why can't they build a LEED-certified data center? Why not recycle the water? Why no solar farm on the roof or wind turbines nearby? Why does it need to be a sprawling mega-building when you get more enclosed volume by building multiple stories on a smaller footprint? Why not find a way to use the waste heat for something useful — maybe possibly partnering with another industry? Citizens understandably have a suspicion their lives will be negatively impacted so that people who already have obscene wealth and black-hole egos will get more, more, more.
I do too. We have to get all of that worked out so that we can have the data centers and not just rip though and destroy everything. They do not want to think about the hard stuff, they just want to do whatever they want as fast as they can. Mind boggling.
Water consumption by data centers is in the millions of gallons. It doesn’t mater what they say about recycling the water, it will be a continuing drain on hydrological resources going forward no mater what.
Second, the cost of building out the electrical grid is being shouldered by residential customers in the form of higher bills and not by the multi billion dollar companies who own and profit from the data centers.
Third municipalities are giving tax breaks to these same companies even though services like police and fire will need to be increased, again shifting the costs to residents in the form of higher property taxes.
Fourth, aside from construction jobs that will be gone when the projects are finished, few new jobs will be created.
Fifth and finally, many of the people paying for all the improvements needed for data centers will be put out of work by AI.
If a company wants to build a data center they should pay for everything up front and only after it’s approved by a referendum of residents in the communities they will be located in.
As it is, the politicians approving these projects will be long gone when the chickens come home to roost and residents will be left holding the bag.
Hard to fathom but Vance did have a good point regarding data centers generating their own energy supply, however, looking at Google a mid size data center consumes 300000- 500000 gals of water per day, a large center 1 to 5 million gals/daily….we live in SE NM…in a perpetual drought as does most of our state yet Oracle is building a data center in a southern county of our state and the ads make it sound like the solution to every imaginable problem…trump is an out of touch con man who could care less about the welfare of those of us in touch with reality….could teach a doctoral level class on bullying and blame laying…and sadly when he gets so vehement about a subject our natural instinct is to wonder/assume that he and his family of grifters will no doubt profit “ bigly”….i am fed up and definitely not in favor of data centers
It isn’t just electricity! It’s the water, it’s the toxicity, it’s the noise and it’s the greed of the high tech companies building making unimaginable profits but laying costs on the low paid taxpayers! C’MON!!!😡
I asked the 4 billion parameter Qwen language model *running on my iphone* what it thought of Trump’s quote. Without the aid of a remote data center, this is what it said:
The statement attributed to Donald Trump regarding Data Centers contains several significant factual inaccuracies, logical flaws, and misleading omissions. While the quote attributed to him may reflect a populist sentiment or a specific point from a speech, the reasoning contained within it does not hold up to rigorous factual scrutiny when examined against economic principles and historical data.
Here is an evaluation based on accuracy, clarity, and factual content:
1. Factual Accuracy: The Economic Premise
The core claim—that the only reason communities oppose Data Centers is to remain poor—is falsified by economic consensus and real-world data.
• Mixed Outcomes: Unlike many traditional manufacturing facilities or oil refineries, which often create net losses or environmental burdens that outweigh local benefits, large-scale Data Centers (hyperscalers like Google, Amazon, Microsoft) generally generate strong positive externalities. They provide high-paying tech jobs (often in the thousands), drive significant tax bases, and boost commercial real estate values.
• "Data-Center Capitalism": In the years following 2009, there has been a documented phenomenon called "data-center capitalism," where jurisdictions actively courted these facilities. Studies from the Brookings Institution and various state economic development agencies highlight that while not every single data center yields massive wealth, most serve as net positive economic drivers compared to other industrial options available to state governments.
• The Counter-Argument Exists: The reason some communities oppose data centers is often due to specific, localized concerns that differ from the traditional "jobs vs. environment" trade-off found in other industries:
• Power Grid Strain: Data Centers are energy-intensive and can strain local grids, leading to lower service reliability if not backed by adequate infrastructure investment.
• Greenfield vs. Brownfield: Unlike an old factory, a data center requires building from the ground up, impacting local land values and ecosystems without offering the same amount of existing infrastructure.
• Noise and Heat: These are often considered significant nuisances in residential communities, distinct from the traditional "pollution" argument of older industries.
2. Factual Accuracy: The Geopolitical Angle
The statement claims, "China could not be happier with this anti Data Center movement. Actually, they can't believe it is happening!"
This assertion contains a factual inaccuracy regarding the nature of US-China tech dynamics.
• Strategic Context: The U.S. does not typically frame its opposition to foreign data centers specifically as an anti-China measure in the context of domestic siting. Opposition is usually driven by state-local interests (power, noise) rather than a coordinated global strategy to "help" China.
• Global Competition: In reality, the U.S.-China tech competition often sees China actively investing in and building data centers within the United States (e.g., Alibaba, Huawei) to access markets and technology. The statement implies China is glad the U.S. has "anti-data center" laws, which ignores the fact that many of these facilities are built in states with aggressive incentives specifically to attract global tech firms, regardless of nationality.
• National Security: The modern discourse is not just about "poverty vs. prosperity"; it involves cybersecurity, sovereignty, and infrastructure control. Framing the issue solely through a lens of Chinese approval oversimplifies a complex geopolitical strategy.
3. Clarity and Structure
The original quote is somewhat colloquial and emotionally charged, which affects its clarity. It relies on a binary "either/or" framework (poor vs. rich) that ignores the nuance of quality of life, environmental impact, and community displacement. It frames "being poor" as the only alternative outcome of opposition, which is a logical fallacy (False Dilemma) given that many communities successfully host data centers while still hosting other industries.
Conclusion
Verdict: Inaccurate and Misleading.
While the sentiment that data centers provide jobs is a valid point often made by proponents, the statement as quoted exaggerates the negative impacts caused by community opposition and ignores the nuanced economic benefits typically associated with these facilities. It reduces a complex issue of local utility, capacity planning, and environmental impact to a simple narrative about poverty and globalization.
Most economic analyses suggest that communities often want data centers because they offer a unique mix of high-wage employment and tax revenue, unlike many other industrial sectors. Therefore, the premise that opposition is driven only by a desire to remain poor is factually incorrect.
We won’t always need data centers to house AI servers.
Thank you for the constant voice of reason that unpeels the details of daily insanity and puts them in perspective. The upcoming mid terms are critical to stop the bleeding. MAGA is a cancer in the American political system that needs to be eradicated.
Another brilliant announcement from our illustrious dufus in chief about data centers. You can be rich with lower taxes, or you can be poor and backward. For Trump It's all about being rich. I bet the Republicans running for office are just cringing over this. Serves them right. They help keeping Trump in office and out of control, they deserve only to be replaced for not doing their jobs. One last thought - maybe instead of building the big ballroom next to the WH we can put in a data center so he can enjoy the noise and problems that small communities experience with these behemoths.
Trump is getting old fast, and he doesn’t like it. And since respect isn’t something Trump can ever muster for anyone else, we are where we are. I think the only thing China and many other places can’t believe is that the US actually elected this bozo. An evil bozo at that. Let data reign. Right. Let his billionaire tech chummies reign. The rest of us can give them our life’s info and work and then shut up and pay up while they collect and watch and get ever richer and more powerful. A basket of greedy slimeballs all.
Beneath the facade he has always been a bully and always will be a bully. I am certain he does not possess the capacity to be anything other than what he is, a weak fearful man hiding behind a army of lawyers he used to sue his "enemies" into submission in the past. That is not a "skill set" that prepares any one for leadership of the most powerful country in the world.
Is Trump getting more tone deaf to the electorate, or does he simply no longer see the point of listening? He talks about a third term and looks for ways around the limit.
The Constitution is clear. This Supreme Court's talent for making pretzels out of it is clearer.
I'm concerned that data centers are great for jobs DURING CONSTRUCTION - after that, they're pretty much autonomous with few jobs in giant warehouses that make a lot of noise, use tremendous amounts of water and electricity. I'm not a fan of AI anyway, so I definitely don't want these monstrosities in my area or that of my grandkids!
His statement - “you can’t fight it, you have to go with it.” Sounds like something a rapist tells a woman. Yes, that's his mindset.
Trump has the character of a sociopath and rapist. Period.
I had the exact thought. I'd place a wager that he actually used that line on a few of his girlfriends over the years.
Thank you for the article, Adam . My neighbors have signs out NO DATA CENTERS. I have a sign coming to put out on my lawn. I listened to Rick Wilson’s podcast Against All Enemies he was speaking with Erin Brockovich . She is out being an advocate against these DATA CENTERS. The water would become bad, an air would get worse to breathe. Oligarch’s just want to destroy our country because of these DATA CENTERS.
I continue to wonder WHY the technology experts don't seem to be interested in solving the actual data center issues of high power demands, high water demands, heat islands in building locations, and high noise levels. Perhaps the opinion of data centers would change if they would solve these issues.
Exactly. If the tech billionaires have so much money, why can't they build a LEED-certified data center? Why not recycle the water? Why no solar farm on the roof or wind turbines nearby? Why does it need to be a sprawling mega-building when you get more enclosed volume by building multiple stories on a smaller footprint? Why not find a way to use the waste heat for something useful — maybe possibly partnering with another industry? Citizens understandably have a suspicion their lives will be negatively impacted so that people who already have obscene wealth and black-hole egos will get more, more, more.
These are excellent questions and suggestions!
Agree! In fact, first time I have read of possible solutions! Thanks, Jolie!
They don’t care about those things. They only care about making money and doing whatever the hell they want.
I do too. We have to get all of that worked out so that we can have the data centers and not just rip though and destroy everything. They do not want to think about the hard stuff, they just want to do whatever they want as fast as they can. Mind boggling.
Water consumption by data centers is in the millions of gallons. It doesn’t mater what they say about recycling the water, it will be a continuing drain on hydrological resources going forward no mater what.
Second, the cost of building out the electrical grid is being shouldered by residential customers in the form of higher bills and not by the multi billion dollar companies who own and profit from the data centers.
Third municipalities are giving tax breaks to these same companies even though services like police and fire will need to be increased, again shifting the costs to residents in the form of higher property taxes.
Fourth, aside from construction jobs that will be gone when the projects are finished, few new jobs will be created.
Fifth and finally, many of the people paying for all the improvements needed for data centers will be put out of work by AI.
If a company wants to build a data center they should pay for everything up front and only after it’s approved by a referendum of residents in the communities they will be located in.
As it is, the politicians approving these projects will be long gone when the chickens come home to roost and residents will be left holding the bag.
Trump has always been like this. The difference is these republicans like cruelty on others but not them.
Hard to fathom but Vance did have a good point regarding data centers generating their own energy supply, however, looking at Google a mid size data center consumes 300000- 500000 gals of water per day, a large center 1 to 5 million gals/daily….we live in SE NM…in a perpetual drought as does most of our state yet Oracle is building a data center in a southern county of our state and the ads make it sound like the solution to every imaginable problem…trump is an out of touch con man who could care less about the welfare of those of us in touch with reality….could teach a doctoral level class on bullying and blame laying…and sadly when he gets so vehement about a subject our natural instinct is to wonder/assume that he and his family of grifters will no doubt profit “ bigly”….i am fed up and definitely not in favor of data centers
It isn’t just electricity! It’s the water, it’s the toxicity, it’s the noise and it’s the greed of the high tech companies building making unimaginable profits but laying costs on the low paid taxpayers! C’MON!!!😡
I asked the 4 billion parameter Qwen language model *running on my iphone* what it thought of Trump’s quote. Without the aid of a remote data center, this is what it said:
The statement attributed to Donald Trump regarding Data Centers contains several significant factual inaccuracies, logical flaws, and misleading omissions. While the quote attributed to him may reflect a populist sentiment or a specific point from a speech, the reasoning contained within it does not hold up to rigorous factual scrutiny when examined against economic principles and historical data.
Here is an evaluation based on accuracy, clarity, and factual content:
1. Factual Accuracy: The Economic Premise
The core claim—that the only reason communities oppose Data Centers is to remain poor—is falsified by economic consensus and real-world data.
• Mixed Outcomes: Unlike many traditional manufacturing facilities or oil refineries, which often create net losses or environmental burdens that outweigh local benefits, large-scale Data Centers (hyperscalers like Google, Amazon, Microsoft) generally generate strong positive externalities. They provide high-paying tech jobs (often in the thousands), drive significant tax bases, and boost commercial real estate values.
• "Data-Center Capitalism": In the years following 2009, there has been a documented phenomenon called "data-center capitalism," where jurisdictions actively courted these facilities. Studies from the Brookings Institution and various state economic development agencies highlight that while not every single data center yields massive wealth, most serve as net positive economic drivers compared to other industrial options available to state governments.
• The Counter-Argument Exists: The reason some communities oppose data centers is often due to specific, localized concerns that differ from the traditional "jobs vs. environment" trade-off found in other industries:
• Power Grid Strain: Data Centers are energy-intensive and can strain local grids, leading to lower service reliability if not backed by adequate infrastructure investment.
• Greenfield vs. Brownfield: Unlike an old factory, a data center requires building from the ground up, impacting local land values and ecosystems without offering the same amount of existing infrastructure.
• Noise and Heat: These are often considered significant nuisances in residential communities, distinct from the traditional "pollution" argument of older industries.
2. Factual Accuracy: The Geopolitical Angle
The statement claims, "China could not be happier with this anti Data Center movement. Actually, they can't believe it is happening!"
This assertion contains a factual inaccuracy regarding the nature of US-China tech dynamics.
• Strategic Context: The U.S. does not typically frame its opposition to foreign data centers specifically as an anti-China measure in the context of domestic siting. Opposition is usually driven by state-local interests (power, noise) rather than a coordinated global strategy to "help" China.
• Global Competition: In reality, the U.S.-China tech competition often sees China actively investing in and building data centers within the United States (e.g., Alibaba, Huawei) to access markets and technology. The statement implies China is glad the U.S. has "anti-data center" laws, which ignores the fact that many of these facilities are built in states with aggressive incentives specifically to attract global tech firms, regardless of nationality.
• National Security: The modern discourse is not just about "poverty vs. prosperity"; it involves cybersecurity, sovereignty, and infrastructure control. Framing the issue solely through a lens of Chinese approval oversimplifies a complex geopolitical strategy.
3. Clarity and Structure
The original quote is somewhat colloquial and emotionally charged, which affects its clarity. It relies on a binary "either/or" framework (poor vs. rich) that ignores the nuance of quality of life, environmental impact, and community displacement. It frames "being poor" as the only alternative outcome of opposition, which is a logical fallacy (False Dilemma) given that many communities successfully host data centers while still hosting other industries.
Conclusion
Verdict: Inaccurate and Misleading.
While the sentiment that data centers provide jobs is a valid point often made by proponents, the statement as quoted exaggerates the negative impacts caused by community opposition and ignores the nuanced economic benefits typically associated with these facilities. It reduces a complex issue of local utility, capacity planning, and environmental impact to a simple narrative about poverty and globalization.
Most economic analyses suggest that communities often want data centers because they offer a unique mix of high-wage employment and tax revenue, unlike many other industrial sectors. Therefore, the premise that opposition is driven only by a desire to remain poor is factually incorrect.
We won’t always need data centers to house AI servers.
More critical thinking in one line of your “phone” reply than ever enters the space under the fluffy phony hair on orange face.
Thank you for the constant voice of reason that unpeels the details of daily insanity and puts them in perspective. The upcoming mid terms are critical to stop the bleeding. MAGA is a cancer in the American political system that needs to be eradicated.
Another brilliant announcement from our illustrious dufus in chief about data centers. You can be rich with lower taxes, or you can be poor and backward. For Trump It's all about being rich. I bet the Republicans running for office are just cringing over this. Serves them right. They help keeping Trump in office and out of control, they deserve only to be replaced for not doing their jobs. One last thought - maybe instead of building the big ballroom next to the WH we can put in a data center so he can enjoy the noise and problems that small communities experience with these behemoths.
Trump is getting old fast, and he doesn’t like it. And since respect isn’t something Trump can ever muster for anyone else, we are where we are. I think the only thing China and many other places can’t believe is that the US actually elected this bozo. An evil bozo at that. Let data reign. Right. Let his billionaire tech chummies reign. The rest of us can give them our life’s info and work and then shut up and pay up while they collect and watch and get ever richer and more powerful. A basket of greedy slimeballs all.
Beneath the facade he has always been a bully and always will be a bully. I am certain he does not possess the capacity to be anything other than what he is, a weak fearful man hiding behind a army of lawyers he used to sue his "enemies" into submission in the past. That is not a "skill set" that prepares any one for leadership of the most powerful country in the world.
Keep the heat on this, Adam!! Imperative issue…
(even though we have no shortage of imperative issues…)
“Fall in line”…and there you have it, all you need to know about Trump’s vision for America.
Is Trump getting more tone deaf to the electorate, or does he simply no longer see the point of listening? He talks about a third term and looks for ways around the limit.
The Constitution is clear. This Supreme Court's talent for making pretzels out of it is clearer.
I'm concerned that data centers are great for jobs DURING CONSTRUCTION - after that, they're pretty much autonomous with few jobs in giant warehouses that make a lot of noise, use tremendous amounts of water and electricity. I'm not a fan of AI anyway, so I definitely don't want these monstrosities in my area or that of my grandkids!