Many discussions about AI employment are too emotional; opinions are basically divided into two types: one is the total collapse theory, and the other is technological optimism, but neither may be valid.

If we only look at what is happening now, AI is indeed replacing some cognitive labor, such as copywriting, basic development, customer service, and data organization.
But it replaces standardized work, not responsibility; in other words, it replaces tasks, not positions.
An overlooked fact is that many companies haven't laid off everyone because of this, but are instead increasing the output per person.
This means that in the short term, it's more like fewer people doing more, rather than people completely disappearing.
What might truly change is the occupational structure, not an instant collapse of total employment.
But a deeper question is: if everyone can become stronger with AI, will the core of competition shift from ability to credibility and decision-making authority?
In the future, the most scarce resource may not be technical skills, but trusted decision-makers.
So I don't quite agree with the so-called employment doomsday narrative, but I also don't think the current structure is stable.
What is more likely is a slow reconstruction rather than a cliff-like collapse.
The only remaining question is: when everyone can use AI to improve productivity, who will decide the distribution of value?