I don't know if you've met many artists, but they pretty much were all bankrupt before AI came along.

The only part that annoys me about that complaint is that it's not "stealing." I think it's very reasonable for artists to ask for compensation if their works are used in the creation of a commercial product, but it never has and never will be theft. Equating copyright infringement with theft is entertainment industry anti-piracy propaganda, and Hollywood really doesn't need you to be their unpaid spokesperson.

If you're an independent artist who wants to be compensated when your art is used in AI training, then do yourself the favor of understanding what you actually need to ask for. Specifically, legislation to clarify that incorporation of copyrighted materials into an AI training data set is a protected use under copyright law and requires compensation, and/or that AI image models should be established as derivative works of the images in their training. That's the legislative change they should be pushing for rather than inaccurately claiming "theft" and "stealing art."

Stealing art is when you have a painting and I don't, and then I take it, and now I have a painting and you don't. It has nothing to do with AI. Artists who oppose AI would be better advocates for themselves if they offered their criticism in accurate terminology.