Leaked internal documents suggest Amazon is preparing to automate up to 75% of its operations using AI-driven robots—a move that could erase over half a million jobs, according to The New York Times.
The company’s automation team reportedly expects that, by 2027, Amazon will avoid hiring more than 160,000 U.S. workers it would otherwise need. The strategy, aimed at saving roughly 30 cents per item picked, packed, and delivered, could grow even more severe by 2033—when automation may make 600,000 additional hires unnecessary, despite Amazon’s plans to double its sales volume.
Documents also reveal a deliberate effort to soften the company’s image by avoiding terms like “automation” and “AI,” opting instead for phrases such as “advanced technology.”
Amazon has dismissed these leaks as misleading.
“The materials appear to reflect the perspective of just one team and don’t represent our overall hiring strategy across our various operations business lines — now or moving forward,” said Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel.
The company told NewsNation that the reports present an “incomplete” picture of its goals. Defending the company’s record, Nantel added that Amazon has created more U.S. jobs over the past decade than any other company, noting plans to hire 250,000 seasonal workers for the holidays.
Still, critics remain uneasy. The revelations follow years of backlash over Amazon’s aggressive push toward automation. In June, the company proudly announced it had deployed its one-millionth robot, and CEO Andy Jassy reportedly expressed excitement about a smaller “total corporate workforce” driven by AI “efficiency gains.”
For many observers, this marks another step toward an AI-driven job collapse that experts have warned about for years. As automation spreads from warehouses to creative and administrative fields, fears grow that human labor could soon become obsolete—fueling discussions about universal basic income (UBI) as a potential lifeline.
UBI, a concept dating back to the Industrial Revolution, involves guaranteed payments to citizens to offset living costs. Modern trials—from the U.S. in the 1960s to recent experiments in Finland and Canada—have tested its viability. Yet the idea remains controversial. Critics warn that government-controlled payments could come with strings attached, potentially allowing authorities to decide “when or if you’ve forfeited your ‘right’ to an allotment.” In a chilling scenario, such power could extend to restricting individuals from “buying or selling,” echoing warnings from the Book of Revelation.
Amazon’s move may only be the beginning. Experts predict that other corporations will soon follow, accelerating a shift that could redefine not only the global workforce but society itself.
With AI dominance on the horizon, the question remains: will the cost of this progress be human livelihood itself?
