????從小到大，父母一直教導(dǎo)我們：如果你努力學(xué)習(xí)，獲得良好的教育，同時(shí)遵守游戲規(guī)則，你肯定會(huì)過(guò)上好日子。像我這樣的嬰兒潮一代能夠把這個(gè)公式轉(zhuǎn)化為美國(guó)夢(mèng)。

????我們這一代人從高中、職?；虼髮W(xué)畢業(yè)后，正處于上行趨勢(shì)的美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)為我們提供了許多好機(jī)會(huì)，但我們現(xiàn)在無(wú)法給我們的子女和孫輩做出同樣的承諾。這個(gè)國(guó)家所面臨的不再是充滿希望的璀璨未來(lái)，而是日益擴(kuò)大的經(jīng)濟(jì)鴻溝；根據(jù)蓋洛普公司(Gallup)和其他機(jī)構(gòu)的調(diào)查，大多數(shù)美國(guó)人認(rèn)為美國(guó)至少已經(jīng)朝著錯(cuò)誤的方向前行了10年之久，而且預(yù)計(jì)下一代人的生活標(biāo)準(zhǔn)將低于我們這一代。

????這個(gè)令人沮喪的前景是不是已經(jīng)不可避免？全球化經(jīng)濟(jì)、日新月異的技術(shù)和其他力量是否已經(jīng)讓我們無(wú)法控制后代的命運(yùn)？要是我們選擇袖手旁觀，就會(huì)出現(xiàn)上面這樣的后果。扭轉(zhuǎn)航向是可能的，但這需要嬰兒潮一代和下一代領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者攜手努力，尤其是需要協(xié)商出我所說(shuō)的“新社會(huì)契約”，一種適合未來(lái)經(jīng)濟(jì)和勞動(dòng)力特征，并行之有效的社會(huì)契約。

????我在以后的專欄中將詳細(xì)論述這項(xiàng)全面戰(zhàn)略的內(nèi)涵，它要求對(duì)企業(yè)、勞工、政府和教育機(jī)構(gòu)及它們之間的關(guān)系進(jìn)行徹底改革。但要想獲得可行的解決方案，我們首先需要更清楚地了解年輕人（特別是18歲到33歲之間的千禧一代）進(jìn)入今天的勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)時(shí)所面臨的種種問(wèn)題。

????這個(gè)問(wèn)題的實(shí)質(zhì)是，提供給年輕人的就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)嚴(yán)重不足。2007-2009年的“大衰退”理論上結(jié)束之后，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)歷時(shí)近5年，才終于恢復(fù)了流失的工作數(shù)量。但這并沒(méi)有考慮從那時(shí)以來(lái)的勞動(dòng)力增幅。

????要想讓就業(yè)率恢復(fù)至經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退前的水平，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)就需要在這個(gè)十年結(jié)束時(shí)創(chuàng)造1,350萬(wàn)至1,500萬(wàn)個(gè)新崗位，也就是說(shuō)每月至少需要新增20萬(wàn)個(gè)就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)，這個(gè)數(shù)字要比2009年以來(lái)的月平均工作崗位增幅多出5萬(wàn)個(gè)。

????這種情況將對(duì)進(jìn)入就業(yè)市場(chǎng)的年輕人產(chǎn)生什么影響？根據(jù)東北大學(xué)(Northeastern University)勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)分析中心(Center for Labor Market Analysis)提供的數(shù)據(jù)，近40%的應(yīng)屆大學(xué)畢業(yè)生“就業(yè)不足”，也就是說(shuō)，他們從事的是零售、餐飲或其他工資低下的服務(wù)性工作。這類工作不需要大學(xué)學(xué)歷，不能發(fā)揮他們的技能，無(wú)法提供進(jìn)一步學(xué)習(xí)和發(fā)展的機(jī)會(huì)。這類工作支付的薪酬幾乎不夠償還大學(xué)債務(wù)，更不用說(shuō)靠它們來(lái)成家立業(yè)了。證據(jù)顯而易見(jiàn)：以這種方式開(kāi)啟職業(yè)生涯會(huì)對(duì)他們的收入和事業(yè)造成顯著、甚至是永久性的損害。

????這個(gè)現(xiàn)狀迥異于我們這代人的經(jīng)歷。二戰(zhàn)后的30年里，工資與生產(chǎn)率同步增長(zhǎng)——這是舊“社會(huì)契約”的本質(zhì)。但在上世紀(jì)80年代之后的30年里，工人的收益基本上趨于平緩：雖然美國(guó)工人的生產(chǎn)率飆漲了80%，但家庭收入僅增長(zhǎng)了大約10%，每小時(shí)平均工資的增速更是低得可憐，僅僅只有6%左右。

????本世紀(jì)頭十年（有時(shí)也被稱為“失去的十年”）的形勢(shì)繼續(xù)惡化。高中或大學(xué)畢業(yè)生的實(shí)際工資（剔除生活費(fèi)用上漲因素后的工資水平）要么下降，要么沒(méi)有增長(zhǎng)。只有那些擁有高學(xué)歷，位居職業(yè)階梯頂層的人群的工資出現(xiàn)了溫和增長(zhǎng)?！罢碱I(lǐng)”運(yùn)動(dòng)的確看清了事實(shí)：收入增幅基本上落入了收入最高的1%或更小比例人口的口袋。美國(guó)目前的收入不平等程度正處于20世紀(jì)20年代以來(lái)的最高水平。

????We've all heard the message from our parents: If you work hard, get a good education, and play by the rules, you will do well in life. Baby boomers like me were able to turn that formula into the American Dream.

????But while we were able to graduate from high school, vocational school programs, or college into an economy that was growing and providing us with great opportunities, we cannot make the same promise to our children and grandchildren today. Instead of hope, the nation faces a widening economic divide; according to Gallup and other surveys, a majority of Americans agree that the U.S. has been going in the wrong direction for at least a decade, and they expect the next generation will have a lower standard of living than ours.

????Is this gloomy outlook inevitable? Have the global economy, ever-advancing technology, and other forces left us with no control over the destiny of future generations? Only if we choose to do nothing. Reversing course is possible, but it will take a cross-generational effort by baby boomers and next-generation leaders to negotiate what I call a New Social Contract that fits and works with the features of the future economy and workforce.

????In future columns, I'll lay out the pieces of that comprehensive strategy, which calls for major overhauls of business, labor, government, and educational institutions as well as the relationships among them. But before we can get to possible solutions, we need to more clearly understand the problems young people -- especially millennials between 18 and 33 years of age -- face in entering the labor market today.

????The essence of the problem is that young people face a severe shortage of good jobs. It has taken almost five years after the supposed end of the Great Recession of 2007-2009 to finally get back the number of jobs lost. But that does not take into account the growth in the labor force since then.

????To get back to the same employment levels as before the recession, between 13.5 and 15 million new jobs would need to be created by the end of this decade. That's a minimum of 200,000 jobs per month, which is 50,000 more jobs a month than the average since 2009.

????How does this affect young people entering the job market? Nearly 40% of recent college graduates are "underemployed," i.e., working in low-wage retail, restaurant, or other service jobs that don't require a college degree, don't put their skills to work, or provide opportunities for further learning and development, according to Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market Analysis. Such jobs pay wages that are hardly sufficient to meet their college debt payments, much less start a career or a family. And the evidence is clear: Starting off this way results in significant, even permanent damage to their incomes and careers.

????This current reality clashes with our own recent past. For three decades following World War II, wages rose in tandem with increases in productivity -- that was the essence of the old "Social Contract." But in the 30 years since 1980, earnings have essentially flatlined: While the productivity of American workers grew by a healthy 80%, family income grew by only about 10%, and average hourly wages inched up by about 6%.

????The first decade of this century -- sometimes called "the lost decade" -- has been even worse. Real wages (wages adjusted for increases in the cost of living) either declined or did not increase for high school or college graduates. Only those at the top of the occupational ladder with advanced degrees experienced modest wage growth. The "Occupy" movement had its facts right: Most of the income growth went to the top 1% or less of the population. America is now suffering from the highest level of income inequality of any time since the 1920s.