You say this like someone was talking about their own data, not someone else's. The OP is talking about a Google dataset of money spent on Google ads over time, not one the OP created or produced in any way. Do we even call it a "backup" when we're talking about preserving a third-party's data (possibly without their consent, possibly in a way they would consider a violation of their ToS)?
Still, certainly it's true as observable that we cannot trust Google to preserve anything. One reason some people don't realize this is because Google has spent years marketing itself as a trustworthy steward with an interest in doing things for the good of society. Another reason people don't do something about it, about every single Google dataset or media corpus that they might regret disappearing -- is because it's expensive and sometimes challenging to do so, Google sometimes tries to prevent it as a ToS violation, and nobody is funding it (or at least there is certainly not enough funding to preserve all of Google's datasets).
There are ways to address these things, but blaming people noticing it as a problem as idiots is probably not one that will lead to addressing them.
Still, certainly it's true as observable that we cannot trust Google to preserve anything. One reason some people don't realize this is because Google has spent years marketing itself as a trustworthy steward with an interest in doing things for the good of society. Another reason people don't do something about it, about every single Google dataset or media corpus that they might regret disappearing -- is because it's expensive and sometimes challenging to do so, Google sometimes tries to prevent it as a ToS violation, and nobody is funding it (or at least there is certainly not enough funding to preserve all of Google's datasets).
There are ways to address these things, but blaming people noticing it as a problem as idiots is probably not one that will lead to addressing them.