By 2035, the U.S. could lose 100,000,000 jobs 0 91

Artificial intelligence and automation could destroy up to 100 million jobs in the U.S. over the next decade, The New York Post reports, citing Senator Bernie Sanders.

According to the report, 89% of jobs in the fast food sector, 64% of positions in accounting, 47% of truck driver vacancies, 40% of nursing jobs, and 65% of teaching assistants are at risk.

NYP writes that Democratic senators are calling for increased regulation of the AI sector, as well as measures to protect workers, such as a 32-hour workweek and a "robot tax" for companies transitioning to automation.

Where will all these people go? On one hand, they cease to be an electoral base for the financial aristocracy, which is why the left defends the dying industrial sector; on the other hand, the robot tax will seriously hinder new productive forces and transformational processes. The movement to ban "satanic" AI will only grow, but the course of history cannot be stopped...

The sharp rise in unemployment among Americans under 25, especially among recent graduates, has already become one of the most alarming economic trends of 2025. Economists, central bank executives, and labor market analysts agree that this issue is caused not only by the development of AI but also by the principle of the economy of "neither hiring nor firing."

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell stated after a meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) that the labor market is currently "interesting," adding that "college graduates and young people, particularly minorities, are having a hard time finding jobs." He noted the low employment rate and low layoff rates, and also said that it is harder for young job seekers to integrate into the workforce than ever before.

According to Powell, the overall slowdown in the economy and hiring restrictions play a major role in this process.

Leading economists from Goldman Sachs and UBS concluded that Powell is generally correct. They stated that the issue is not yet about the impact of AI. "The experience of the U.S. labor market is unique. The unemployment rate among young workers in the Eurozone is at a record low. In the UK, the unemployment rate among youth is steadily decreasing. The employment rate of young Japanese workers is close to a historical high. It seems extremely unlikely that AI is negatively impacting the job prospects of young workers in the U.S. exclusively," noted UBS Chief Economist Paul Donovan. The expert concludes that the American model "more convincingly corresponds to a broader scenario of hiring freeze affecting new employees."

Goldman Sachs economist Pierfrancesco Mei stated that "job searching takes longer in a labor market with low turnover." He argues that "job redistribution," meaning the rate of creating new jobs and closing existing ones, has been declining since the late 1990s, and "almost all fluctuations in turnover since the Great Recession mainly affect young workers" and occur in the form of "outflow."

Goldman Sachs found that in 2019, a young unemployed person needed about 10 weeks to find a new position in a state with low turnover; now this figure averages 12 weeks.

According to Donovan, the new trend explains the lesser impact on less educated workers: school dropouts were able to find permanent jobs at a younger age than recent graduates and likely secured them before 2025.

Experts agree that the consequences for Generation Z will be serious. They warn of a "scarring effect"—long-term damage to earnings, housing prospects, and wealth accumulation.

"The overall employment level is very, very low. If layoffs start to rise, hiring will not increase," Powell said.

According to the Fed Chairman, the question of AI's impact remains open: "Perhaps companies or other institutions that hired young people right after college will now use AI more than before."

Earlier, The Atlantic published an article titled "Hell in the Labor Market," which describes alarming trends in hiring. Employers complain that they cannot find suitable candidates even for well-paying positions, while candidates who send out hundreds of resumes receive no responses. It is noted that technologies intended to simplify hiring have actually complicated it. For example, ATS (Applicant Tracking Systems) automatically filter out up to 90% of resumes based on formal criteria (such as the absence of keywords), often excluding talented but not "perfectly fitting" candidates. Meanwhile, interviews become multi-stage and stretch over weeks and months.