首页 / 财富中文网 / 正文

美国Z世代确实面临就业困境,但原因并非是AI

财富中文网 2025-09-24 03:05:42

美国Z世代确实面临就业困境,但原因并非是AI
美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔。图片来源:Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

美国25岁以下群体,尤其是应届毕业生,失业率大幅升高,这已成为2025年最令人忧心的经济问题之一。经济学家、央行官员和劳动力市场分析师近期的洞察表明,这似乎是一个美国独有的挑战,其根源在于“不招聘,不裁员”的经济现状,而非单纯由于人工智能迅猛发展所导致。对许多Z世代求职者而言,就业困境可能带来孤立感并加剧自我怀疑。这种困境近日得到高层的印证:美联储(Federal Reserve)主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔在联邦公开市场委员会(Federal Open Market Committee)会议后的例行新闻发布会上向记者表示,当前“劳动力市场的状况耐人寻味”,并特别指出“高校应届毕业生、年轻人及少数族裔群体正面临就业难题”,与经济学家对劳动力市场降温的担忧不谋而合。他提到低求职成功率与低裁员率并存的现象称:“我们正处在低解雇率、低招聘率的市场环境中”,并指出年轻求职者进入职场的难度远超以往。

虽然德意志银行(Deutsche Bank)将最近几个月称为“AI失控之夏”,且多项重要研究发现AI应用正在冲击部分初级岗位,但鲍威尔持不同看法。他认为AI“可能是因素之一”,但主因是经济整体放缓与招聘紧缩。高盛(Goldman Sachs)和瑞银(UBS)知名经济学家随后就这个主题开展研究,基本证实鲍威尔的判断准确——这并非人工智能导致的问题,至少现阶段如此。

劳动力市场深度冻结

瑞银首席经济学家保罗·多诺万在上周五发布的题为《年轻人还好吗?》的分析报告中指出:美国青年失业率激增与全球趋势形成鲜明对比,尽管当前关于自动化技术的讨论如火如荼,但问题不能归咎于人工智能。他写道:“美国劳动力市场的状况具有特殊性。欧元区青年失业率已创历史新低,英国青年失业率持续稳步下降,日本青年就业参与率接近历史峰值。认为AI唯独影响美国青年就业的观点实在难以令人信服。”

高盛经济学家皮耶尔弗兰切斯科·梅上周四表示:“在低流动率的劳动力市场中,求职周期会延长。”他指出“就业再配置”(即新岗位创造与旧岗位消失的速度)自1990年代末以来持续下降,近期该趋势有所放缓。现有岗位间的流动几乎完全源于“人事变更率”,推动了“大萧条以来流动率的几乎所有变化”。高盛研究发现,截至2025年,人事变更率远低于疫情前水平,这种“普遍性”模式遍及各行业和各州,且“主要冲击年轻就业者”。2019年,在低人事变更率的州,年轻失业者平均需要10周才能找到新工作,如今这个数字已延长至12周。

瑞银的多诺万指出,对于Z世代初级岗位求职者的困境,人们“容易将其归咎于技术”。 “机器、机器人与计算机取代人类的反乌托邦场景始终颇具市场。”他的最终判断与高盛的结论类似,认为美国模式“更符合全面招聘冻结的解释框架,这种冻结效应主要冲击职场新人。”

蓝领岗位是替代选择?

多诺万认为,这也能解释为何低学历群体受影响较小——高中辍学者比应届毕业生更早获得全职就业机会,因此他们很可能在2025年劳动力市场深度冻结前就已经找到了工作。随着大学入学率进入长期下行通道,技工职业正日益受到蓝领创业者的青睐。当同龄人还背负着学生贷款债务时,这些从业者不仅收入可达六位数,更实现了当老板的职业梦想。

实证研究表明,应届高校毕业生在“不裁员,不招聘”的经济周期中受冲击最为严重。以大萧条时期为例:当各行各业陷入招聘冻结时,2007至2011年毕业的大学生尤其遭遇岗位空缺困境。根据斯坦福大学(Stanford )简报,这些毕业生收入始终低于经济平稳期毕业的同龄人,收入差距持续影响达10-15年。

这对Z世代和少数族裔求职者影响深远。专家警告可能产生“创伤效应”——对他们的收入水平、购房能力与财富积累造成长期损害。历史表明:经济下行期开启职业生涯,会导致起薪降低与经济阶层攀升难度加剧。鲍威尔上周三还提到减少劳动力供给的其他因素,如更严格的移民政策,并强调少数族裔在2025年招聘冻结期面临更严峻的就业形势。

鲍威尔表示:“整体求职成功率确实处于低位,若裁员潮开始涌现,招聘活动也不会变得更活跃。”关于AI的问题,鲍威尔持开放态度。他表示AI所产生的影响“存在极大不确定性”。他以近乎推测的口吻指出,“我们或许能看到(AI的)某些影响,但这绝非青年失业现象的主因”。“这里面可能确实有一些关联。以往那些直接招聘应届毕业生的公司或机构,如今或许能更充分地利用AI。这或许是造成现状的原因之一……但具体影响程度难以量化。”(*)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

美国25岁以下群体,尤其是应届毕业生,失业率大幅升高,这已成为2025年最令人忧心的经济问题之一。经济学家、央行官员和劳动力市场分析师近期的洞察表明,这似乎是一个美国独有的挑战,其根源在于“不招聘,不裁员”的经济现状,而非单纯由于人工智能迅猛发展所导致。对许多Z世代求职者而言,就业困境可能带来孤立感并加剧自我怀疑。这种困境近日得到高层的印证:美联储(Federal Reserve)主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔在联邦公开市场委员会(Federal Open Market Committee)会议后的例行新闻发布会上向记者表示,当前“劳动力市场的状况耐人寻味”,并特别指出“高校应届毕业生、年轻人及少数族裔群体正面临就业难题”,与经济学家对劳动力市场降温的担忧不谋而合。他提到低求职成功率与低裁员率并存的现象称:“我们正处在低解雇率、低招聘率的市场环境中”,并指出年轻求职者进入职场的难度远超以往。

虽然德意志银行(Deutsche Bank)将最近几个月称为“AI失控之夏”,且多项重要研究发现AI应用正在冲击部分初级岗位,但鲍威尔持不同看法。他认为AI“可能是因素之一”,但主因是经济整体放缓与招聘紧缩。高盛(Goldman Sachs)和瑞银(UBS)知名经济学家随后就这个主题开展研究,基本证实鲍威尔的判断准确——这并非人工智能导致的问题,至少现阶段如此。

劳动力市场深度冻结

瑞银首席经济学家保罗·多诺万在上周五发布的题为《年轻人还好吗?》的分析报告中指出:美国青年失业率激增与全球趋势形成鲜明对比,尽管当前关于自动化技术的讨论如火如荼,但问题不能归咎于人工智能。他写道:“美国劳动力市场的状况具有特殊性。欧元区青年失业率已创历史新低,英国青年失业率持续稳步下降,日本青年就业参与率接近历史峰值。认为AI唯独影响美国青年就业的观点实在难以令人信服。”

高盛经济学家皮耶尔弗兰切斯科·梅上周四表示:“在低流动率的劳动力市场中,求职周期会延长。”他指出“就业再配置”(即新岗位创造与旧岗位消失的速度)自1990年代末以来持续下降,近期该趋势有所放缓。现有岗位间的流动几乎完全源于“人事变更率”,推动了“大萧条以来流动率的几乎所有变化”。高盛研究发现,截至2025年,人事变更率远低于疫情前水平,这种“普遍性”模式遍及各行业和各州,且“主要冲击年轻就业者”。2019年,在低人事变更率的州,年轻失业者平均需要10周才能找到新工作,如今这个数字已延长至12周。

瑞银的多诺万指出,对于Z世代初级岗位求职者的困境,人们“容易将其归咎于技术”。 “机器、机器人与计算机取代人类的反乌托邦场景始终颇具市场。”他的最终判断与高盛的结论类似,认为美国模式“更符合全面招聘冻结的解释框架,这种冻结效应主要冲击职场新人。”

蓝领岗位是替代选择?

多诺万认为,这也能解释为何低学历群体受影响较小——高中辍学者比应届毕业生更早获得全职就业机会,因此他们很可能在2025年劳动力市场深度冻结前就已经找到了工作。随着大学入学率进入长期下行通道,技工职业正日益受到蓝领创业者的青睐。当同龄人还背负着学生贷款债务时,这些从业者不仅收入可达六位数,更实现了当老板的职业梦想。

实证研究表明,应届高校毕业生在“不裁员,不招聘”的经济周期中受冲击最为严重。以大萧条时期为例:当各行各业陷入招聘冻结时,2007至2011年毕业的大学生尤其遭遇岗位空缺困境。根据斯坦福大学(Stanford )简报,这些毕业生收入始终低于经济平稳期毕业的同龄人,收入差距持续影响达10-15年。

这对Z世代和少数族裔求职者影响深远。专家警告可能产生“创伤效应”——对他们的收入水平、购房能力与财富积累造成长期损害。历史表明:经济下行期开启职业生涯,会导致起薪降低与经济阶层攀升难度加剧。鲍威尔上周三还提到减少劳动力供给的其他因素,如更严格的移民政策,并强调少数族裔在2025年招聘冻结期面临更严峻的就业形势。

鲍威尔表示:“整体求职成功率确实处于低位,若裁员潮开始涌现,招聘活动也不会变得更活跃。”关于AI的问题,鲍威尔持开放态度。他表示AI所产生的影响“存在极大不确定性”。他以近乎推测的口吻指出,“我们或许能看到(AI的)某些影响,但这绝非青年失业现象的主因”。“这里面可能确实有一些关联。以往那些直接招聘应届毕业生的公司或机构,如今或许能更充分地利用AI。这或许是造成现状的原因之一……但具体影响程度难以量化。”(*)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

The dramatic rise in unemployment among Americans under 25—especially recent graduates—has become one of the most troubling economic headlines of 2025. Recent insights from economists, central bankers, and labor market analysts signal that this appears to be a uniquely American challenge, underpinned by a “no hire, no fire” economy rather than solely by the rapid ascent of artificial intelligence. For many Gen Z workers, the struggle to land a job can feel isolating and fuel self-doubt. But that frustration recently got some high-level validation: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell echoed economists’ concerns about the cooling labor market, telling reporters at his regular press conference following the Federal Open Market Committee that it’s an “interesting labor market” right now, adding that “kids coming out of college and younger people, minorities, are having a hard time finding jobs.” Noting a low job finding rate, along with a low redundancy rate, he said, “you’ve got a low firing, low hiring environment.” and noting that it’s harder than ever for young jobseekers to break in.

While recent months have been dubbed by Deutsche Bank “the summer AI turned ugly,” and some major studies find AI adoption disrupting some entry-level roles, Powell was less sure. AI “may be part of the story,” but he insisted the main drivers are a broadly slowed economy and hiring restraint. Top economists at Goldman Sachs and UBS tackled the subject soon after and found Powell to be mostly on the money. This isn’t an AI story, at least not yet.

A deep freeze setting in

According to a Friday analysis by UBS chief economist Paul Donovan, titled “the kids are alright?” the spike in U.S. youth unemployment stands in stark contrast to global trends and cannot be blamed on artificial intelligence despite the current fascination with automation in public debate. “The U.S. labor market experience is peculiar,” he wrote. “Young Euro area workers have a record low unemployment rate. In the UK, the young persons’ unemployment rate has fallen steadily. Employment participation by young Japanese workers is near all-time highs. It seems highly implausible that AI uniquely hurts the employment prospects of younger US workers.”

Goldman Sachs economist Pierfrancesco Mei wrote on Thursday that “finding a job takes longer in a low-turnover labor market.” He argued that “job reallocation,” or the pace at which new jobs are created and existing ones destroyed, has been on the decline since the late 1990s, albeit more slowly as of late. Almost all job changes between existing jobs is taking place as “churn,” driving “almost all the variation in turnover since the Great Recession.” Goldman found that as of 2025, churn was well below its pre-pandemic levels, a “broad-based” pattern across industries and states, and this “mostly fall[s] on younger workers.” In 2019, it took a young unemployed worker about 10 weeks to find a new job in a low-churn state, now that’s 12 weeks on average.

UBS’ Donovan writes that “it might be tempting to blame technology” for the plight of the Gen Z would-be entry-level worker. “Machines, robots, or computers replacing humans is an ever-popular dystopian scenario.” Donovan concludes, similarly to Goldman that the U.S. pattern “more convincingly fits a broader hiring freeze narrative, affecting new entrants to the workforce.”

A blue-collar alternative?

According to Donovan, this also has the benefit of explaining the smaller impact on less educated workers, with high school dropouts able to find full-time employment at a younger age than recent grads, and so they likely found work before the 2025 deep freeze set in. With college enrollment also in a long-term secular decline, trade employment is becoming increasingly popular with blue-collar entrepreneurs, some of whom find themselves earning six figures and calling themselves boss while their peers become saddled with student-loan debt.

Over the long run, recent college graduates are empirically hit the hardest during “no fire, no hire” periods. During the Great Recession, when entire industries froze hiring, college graduates between 2007 and 2011 were uniquely hit by a lack of open positions. Those graduates earned less than their counterparts who graduated during non-recessionary periods — effects that persisted for 10-15 years, according to a Stanford briefing.

The implications for Gen Z and minority jobseekers are severe. Experts warn of “scarring effects”—long-lasting damage to earnings, homeownership prospects, and wealth accumulation. History shows that starting a career during a downturn can result in lower wages and a steeper climb up the economic ladder. On Wednesday, Powell spoke of other factors reducing the labor supply, such as harsher immigration measures; he also mentioned that minorities are having a harder time finding employment during the 2025 freeze.

“The overall job finding rate is very, very low,” Powell said. “If layoffs begin to rise, there won’t be a lot of hiring going on.” The AI question remains open, in the Fed chair’s words. Saying “there’s great uncertainty” around how big an impact AI is having, he offered a perspective, almost a guess, that “you are seeing some effects [from AI], but it’s not the main, not the main thing driving” the youth unemployment picture. Still, “there may be something there. It may be that companies or other institutions that have been hiring younger people right out of college are able to use AI that more than they had in the past. That may be part of the story … Hard to say how big it is.”

*