One argument I've heard that people try to use as proponents of these datacenters is that they bring in employment in construction and electrical engineering even if it's temporary. Their argument falls apart very quickly when it's pointed out that because of the specialization many owners of these locations hire specific firms and contractors willing to travel across the nation for the work instead of hiring a local construction company or an on-site engineer. Some locations are managed entirely remotely where one engineer handles multiple sites, and the only people actually there are security, maintenance, and cleaning staff who might also be traveling contractors that move between locations in a circuit. That's like six people for something with a footprint the size of fifty family homes.

Even if it were true, I don't understand how this argument makes sense: So assume the construction were entirely done by local businesses/hires. That gets a short-term employment boost while the facility is being built. And then what? The construction is finished, the employment dries up again, but the data center is still there, with all the downsides.

Offsetting long-term costs with short-term benefits doesn't seem like a good strategy.