AI not affecting job market much so far, New York Fed says

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2025-09-04/ai-not-affecting-job-market-much-so-far-new-york-fed-says

by speckx • 11 months ago

119 146 11 months ago

money.usnews.com

https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2025/09/are-bu...

g42gregory2• 11 months ago

Same people who say inflation is under control?

chad_strategic• 11 months ago

The same people who didn't see the financial crisis of 2008.

daveguy2• 11 months ago

They very specifically say inflation is not "under control" which is why they have not lowered interest rates recently. It was almost under control until Trumpty Dumpty started his corrupt monkey wrenching with tariffs.

g42gregory2• 11 months ago

As I recall, they were saying the inflation was under control 2019-2024, during which real inflation was around 40% (not annual but aggregate for 4 years).

muldvarp• 11 months ago

If AI with the current capabilities and within this short timeframe would have already had a big impact on the labor market, we'd be in big trouble.

MarkusQ• 11 months ago

There are two levels here. It isn't affecting the actual job market (what the Fed's talking about), but it's having a huge impact on the narratives surrounding it and the pipelines feeding into it (e.g. resume spamming and slush pipe filtering).

itqwertz• 11 months ago

The AI hype seems to be a smokescreen for mass layoffs from the CoVid era. The increased attention on the H-1B visa’s hiring process and labor market impact reveals a far more underreported and significant contributor to job shortages. Also, a lot of these companies have existed way longer than they should have.

Be happy you’re not employed in tech course content creation or something that is directly replaceable TODAY, like language translation or low-level graphic design.

notahacker• 11 months ago

The AI hype seems to be a smokescreen for mass layoffs from the CoVid era

This. Better to tell markets "we can now downsize our workforce due to incredible efficiencies achieved by our AI initiative" than "we hired too many people, grew slower than expected and now we're making cuts"

underlipton• 11 months ago

A little tinfoil birdie told me that even the Covid era itself (and the resultant mass layoffs during, mass hiring following, and mass layoffs following that) were a smokescreen for (bond?) market instability. I personally tend to think that both were more of a, "Don't let a good crisis go to waste," situation.

Market hiccups? Use a pandemic panic to justify printing a ton of money.

Printed too much money? Distribute it to the "right" people through a hiring frenzy, personnel you totally need in order to build a metaverse or whatever.

Money ran out + overleveraging during the boom + market changes caused by the rapid socioeconomic shifts (e.g., commercial real estate tanking)? You can cover the bottom line for now with a lot of firing and consolidation, say it's AI's fault.

zahlman8• 11 months ago

A little tinfoil birdie told me

I appreciate your willingness to consider possibilities like this, but I think it really is tinfoil in this case.

Market hiccups? Use a pandemic panic to justify printing a ton of money.

This gets cause and effect wrong. Wikipedia reminds:

The World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020, and first referred to it as a pandemic on 11 March 2020.[3][4]

Markets were doing well in Jan 2020 until people started noticing the case numbers and speculating about the WHO's judgement. They were on a bull run before that — up almost 29% in the 2019 calendar year — which was largely a recovery from problems at the end of 2018.

So the market was only hiccuping because of existing panic over the pandemic (including people reasonably pricing in risk that pandemic would be officially declared; the "social distancing" policies and business closures were quite telegraphed).

Printed too much money? Distribute it to the "right" people through a hiring frenzy

This is just naturally what would happen.

Money ran out

It's more that people started devaluing money because of how much was printed, so interest rates were controlled to avoid a hyperinflationary spiral. It could have gone much worse (see: early 70s until early 80s). Powell did an impressive job to engineer the desired "soft landing", but I personally was surprised and displeased that they waited that long to reach for the brakes. (It came across that there was a reluctance to trust early vague inflation signals, despite what should have been a high prior on their correctness given recent policy.)

j454• 11 months ago

One way I had it explained to me (may be different now).. H-1B's are often a way of getting willing candidates who are overqualified to work tons of extra hours for years compared to other options.

the_real_cher• 11 months ago

My anecdata is that all the ones I've worked with have been underqualified, not saying all are, but Indian managers primarily hire Indian staff.

utyop225• 11 months ago

Heres another way to think about it.

How has humanity organised itself to maximize productivity throughout time? By means of slavery.

What really is h1b at the core? Its a modern form of slavery - it appears to be voluntary in nature (to a degree it is) but the key point is that it creates lock in. That lock in enables a slave-like culture to thrive. And this is what we see.

And btw just install Sundar and Satya as CEOs to voluntarily attract more Indian software engineers and so on...

Lmao its so easy to see whats been going on. These guys arent all that smart, even though they are worshipped.

oytis• 11 months ago

Covid overhiring was quite a while ago, surely it has been long corrected?

zahlman8• 11 months ago

As far as I can tell, it didn't start causing problems until the piper had to be paid (in the form of interest rate hikes), and even then probably a lot of businesses had a fair amount of runway.

utyop225• 11 months ago

There is very clearly tacit collusion by managers of firms in the software production segment of economy.

And why not? It benefits them. I get it. But lets be real about it.

freedomben• 11 months ago

A couple of things. I'm not disputing the findings here, but I do think there are some caveats to be aware of.

Firstly, this doesn't seem to differentiate between fields/industries. It's entirely possible for AI to devastate a particular segment (like graphic design or software dev, etc) while still appearing low-impact on the overall.

Secondly,

"Businesses reported a notable increase in AI use over the past year, yet very few firms reported AI-induced layoffs," New York Fed economists wrote in the blog.

Is this only relying on self-reporting? What company wants to be the lightning rod who comes out and says, "we laid off a bunch of people and replaced with AI"? Maybe for huge public companies that can't fudge it this would be ok, but relying on self-reports comes with an inherent risk of bias

arthurcolle• 11 months ago

Marc Benioff at Salesforce is saying exactly this

And Brian Armstrong at Coinbase

kevsim• 11 months ago

Exactly. If they just lay people off, that's just cost cutting, and potentially seen as a bad sign. If they're saying they're laying people off because they're replacing them with AI, then they're innovative!

ericmcer• 11 months ago

They aren't replacing people directly though, like an AI can't fill a seat that a person used to. The claim seems to be that individuals are more productive now so less people are needed.

Measuring productivity has been attempted by every big tech co. and has never really had amazing results. So to claim they can lay off 1,000 people because of "AI" means they must have measured some % increase in individual productivity and know they can function with less people.

Or it's just a big excuse to cut low performers and compensate for overhiring.

missedthecue• 11 months ago

I don't think AI is actively laying people off by replacing entire roles, but I think it is preventing hires that would have happened. In terms of employment figures, this can have a similar effect.

I'm in a small growing tech company and I can say as a matter of fact that in a world without AI we would have made several hires in the past 18 months. Because of LLMs and agents my team doesn't have the need to bring more people in. It's as simple as that.

physix2• 11 months ago

That's right. As a tech company, we can now do more with the people we have.

InsideOutSanta• 11 months ago

What company wants to be the lightning rod who comes out and says, "we laid off a bunch of people and replaced with AI"?

Isn't that precisely what all publicly traded companies want to say, and are often saying? I feel like I read a new headline of some sociopathic CEO bragging about how many people he managed to lay off thanks to AI every day.

crowbahr• 11 months ago

The overwhelming majority of AI pilot projects at companies fail. They're trying to replace people but overwhelmingly can't.

esafak• 11 months ago

Source: https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2025/09/are-bu...

dang2• 11 months ago

We'll put that link in the top text too. Thanks!

stuckinhell• 11 months ago

https://fortune.com/2025/09/02/salesforce-ceo-billionaire-ma...

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff says his company has cut 4,000 customer service jobs as AI steps in: ‘I need less heads’

seems not true ?

toomuchtodo2• 11 months ago

Salesforce's weak quarterly revenue forecast signals lagging AI monetization - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/sustainable-finance-r... - September 3rd, 2025

Salesforce forecast third-quarter revenue below Wall Street estimates on Wednesday, signaling lagging monetization for its highly-touted artificial intelligence agent platform as clients dial back spending due to macroeconomic uncertainty.
The cloud software provider also announced a $20 billion increase to its existing share buyback program, but that was unable to allay investors' concerns, sending Salesforce's shares down over 5% in extended trading.

throwaway29812• 11 months ago

I seem to recall a vague statement about AI doing half of his company's work, which was never really defined either.

josho• 11 months ago

4k jobs across the economy is far less than random variation in the stats.

Salesforce reduced their headcount in 2023 by 8-10%. Another reduction by 5% attributed solely to AI could be a half truth and the reality could simply be Salesforce driving an efficiency agenda.

Personally, I believe it will take a few more years for systems to be built. Once those systems are in place, then headcount reductions are going to come fast and wide. Or putting it simply think of it as exponential growth. Currently AI job displacements are small, but it's growing, and will continue accelerating in its growth.

runako• 11 months ago

Salesforce revenue growth has decelerated from ~24% in FY 2021 to just over 8% for the trailing 12 months.

A company that was tuned to double revenue in 3 years transforming in one expecting to double in 9 years is definitely carrying too many people. It made sense for them to reduce headcount to align with their much slower growth curve.

Side note: Benioff also said earlier this year that they were done hiring programmers because AI. I'll let their careers page put the lie to that.

11101010001100• 11 months ago

Benioff is making the same bet uber did with self driving cars, maybe this time it will be different?

visarga• 11 months ago

Companies can choose to reduce costs by firing people, or to improve outcomes using both humans and AI. When they fire people they are saying they have no idea what to do with them. But people have AI too, we are no worse than AI.

sroerick• 11 months ago

Salesforce has a DX problem, putting the AI conversation aside, they probably should have developers so they know how to address this.

fkyoureadthedoc• 11 months ago

shame, because what he really needed was fewer heads

rsynnott• 11 months ago

Salesforce just gave weak guidance. "Company that doesn't expect to do so well lays people off" is a pretty standard story, and one might be forgiven for thinking that "Company that expects magic robots to do everything lays people off" is, in this case, more marketing than anything else.

I wouldn't necessarily pay that much attention to what the CEO _says_.

disillusionist• 11 months ago

i can only speak to my personal experiences and not the entire "Job Market" but i have seen qualified, competent team members let go during "positive transformations" and expectations that their workload will be covered by others while corporate crows about how using AI will be such a force multiplier for those who remain.

Guid_NewGuid• 11 months ago

Best as I can tell, and I'm just some guy, is there is a real problem with the job market, not just in the US. AI is mainly interesting for the media to report on and hype for CEOs and the kind of MBA airheads no one with any self respect should pay attention to. It's a fairly cool search, synthesis and retrieval tool with real value but it's not as impactful as 'thoughtleaders' want us to believe.

In the US as elsewhere it's a combination of factors, COVID overhiring and inflation, interest rates going up, market concentration and, US specific, the since Trump-reversed Trump-imposed tax changes. While this reversal probably helps the job market some in the immediate term the indicators of the fundamentals are flashing red everywhere and outside of the US it all just continues to be part of the same Omnirecession since 2008.

atleastoptimal• 11 months ago

There seems to be wishful thinking on HN where people seem very biased in general against any article that claims AI is taking jobs, and supportive by default of any article that claims it isn't. For some reason many people just refuse to accept that AI could even just be one of many reasons leading to job loss.

spongebobstoes• 11 months ago

can you share some of the evidence showing that AI has caused job loss? I haven't seen any

cyanydeez• 11 months ago

especially when theres reports that suggest only 5% of businesses have leveraged AI for value.

The "AI revolution" seems as a cover story for covid related job cuts and likely includes losses stemming from over investing in AI supplements.

But regardless, real business data is nigh impossible to penetrate because private business is now a first class citizens and the rest of us are at it's mercies.

ivewonyoung• 11 months ago

The best indication I've seen so far is the the study and discussion in the linked article in this HN post[1].

I agree with you in a general sense though.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45121342

tkiolp4• 11 months ago

At least in western Europe it doesn’t look like ai is taking over anything. Maybe in the US it is different

FirmwareBurner• 11 months ago

EU doesn't have the fixed number cap that H1Bs have in the US, so they can hire unlimited people from abroad to suppress wages, no need for AI.

causal• 11 months ago

You're absolutely right about the HN bias, but we're also a crowd with a lot of experience in some of the jobs supposedly being replaced and with the tools supposedly replacing us, and it's a little hard to buy.

The data about new grads not being hired isn't lying, but if AI is to blame we should be seeing a flood of data and stories on how roles X, Y and Z were obliterated by AI. But I have yet to see a single solid example, so I find it hard to believe it's a massive shift.

If anything, I would expect AI to be replacing older, expensive workers with young, tech-savvy workers who can put the AI to use. But that is clearly not the case.

physix2• 11 months ago

Well, this one isn't that rosy

The New York Fed blog noted that the modest impact on jobs so far may not hold in the future. "Looking ahead, firms anticipate more significant layoffs and scaled-back hiring as they continue to integrate AI into their operations," New York Fed researchers wrote.

deadbabe• 11 months ago

AI hasn’t don’t anything. It hasn’t eliminated jobs. It hasn’t increased revenues. It’s just another shiny toy for people to play with and buy some mental laziness. It’s a nothing technology, empty calories.

utyop225• 11 months ago

It has done something - caused a tremendous amount of expenditures with negative returns for claimholders of firms pursuing AI (so far) :)

j454• 11 months ago

Maybe not that they can see?

Technology of any kind evolves all societies.

oceanplexian• 11 months ago

Expecting the Fed to know anything about AI would be like asking your pet dog to express his opinions on astrophysics.

Molitor59012• 11 months ago

I've seen it affecting in a few ways: Less customer service employees at call centers, replaced by lengthy, egregiously pedantic AI systems. Some fast food places are replacing employees with an AI drive through. I've also seen AI health coaching services that removes the dietitian/nutritionist/health coach from the equation. Not quite AI, but getting there, are the self checkouts slowly replacing front line cashiers, etc.

So I think it is affecting the job market, but not in the white collar, higher paying jobs that people tend to notice.

echelon3• 11 months ago

I work in the media space. AI is absolutely ripping through film, TV, and advertising.

Several medium sized studios I've talked with are bidding $50k for projects (eg. Netflix, HBO, Proctor & Gamble are typical clients) they used to bid $400k on, and they're winning more contracts. They don't need to shoot in person in Venice for pharma ads or animate elaborate TV show intros anymore.

This is having a huge impact to the fundamentals of how they do business. They haven't laid anyone off yet, but they're talking about the ramifications if this gets cheaper.

bob1029• 11 months ago

Have these studios actually shipped any of their projects to their customers yet? Do we have feedback from a quality perspective?

It's quite easy to promise dirt cheap services and get paperwork signed.

IMSAI80802• 11 months ago

What component of the production process is the AI being used for? Is AI video now good enough for green screen backgrounds or something like that?

alehlopeh• 11 months ago

What are they doing with AI instead of eg. shooting in person in Venice?

MontyCarloHall2• 11 months ago

Several medium sized studios […] don't need to animate elaborate TV show intros anymore.

What projects are these studios doing for HBO? Its shows generally have high enough production value that AI slop in intros would be a no-no (unless this has dramatically changed under Zaslav's leadership).

imtringued• 11 months ago

I believe you, but what I don't understand is why aren't these companies producing custom models tailored to their in-house needs? You'd think that Hollywood would have the most advanced image and video generation models, after all the studios have high quality training data and more importantly, they have the IP rights to that data.

Meanwhile back in reality it's Google that is massively ahead of literally everyone.

beepbooptheory2• 11 months ago

What is AI providing in the drive through situation? It just feels to me like much of this is "AI" in the business buzz sense, not generative LLMs or whatever doing any kind of work. Like, we have all been struggling with call center "AI" for a long time before this, I personally have not experienced an LLM chatbot call, but plenty of things asking me "is this information correct?"

Like how would some of this even work in reality? Can you go through those drive throughs and ask it to recite a sonnet about chicken nuggets? Clearly no, but then it begs the question of what the idea, the purported advance, even is here with much of this. Like we have had relatively advanced speech recognition for a while, I don't see the added utility or need of being able to go through the drive through and saying: "the number of hotdogs I want is a prime number that is more than 2 but less than 5."

It just feels so clearly silly if you stop and think about it for two seconds. So many hammers, not enough nails... We are just banging at walls at this point.

lukevp• 11 months ago

“I’d like 2 cheeseburgers, and 4 fries. No mayo or mustard. Actually make one of them a double, and one with bacon. Oh how much if I make the first a combo?”

You think this conversation could be handled with the tech of 4 years ago? Siri can’t even turn off the lights and tell me a joke in the same request. Humans do not deliver all information in order (eg. The all the instructions refer to the burgers not the fries, but you only know that because you understand the essential nature of fries and what they typically include). That’s what AI in the drive thru is for.

Molitor59012• 10 months ago

I stopped at chicken restaurant in Georgia, and the drive through speaker was clearly AI. It sounded like a computer. It got the order wrong when it repeated, and stopped responding. So with some.. trepidation I said "Hello?" and after a few seconds an actual human (with noise in the background) responded, took my order, and all was right.

If they can apply AI to customer service phone queue hell, why not to most customer service transactions - my thinking goes - what will be next? Hospital? 000? Tax office?

zahlman8• 11 months ago

Less customer service employees at call centers, replaced by lengthy, egregiously pedantic AI systems.

Is this actually worse than being on hold forever to talk to someone following a script?

Some fast food places are replacing employees with an AI drive through.

What, as in it transcribes your order with Whisper and tries to upsell you through ChatGPT? One more reason I'm glad not to have a car-centric lifestyle, I guess. The kiosks inside the store might be vibe-coded now but at least I get a traditional UI that lets me specify things directly (even if the kitchen staff will ignore most requested customizations).

themafia2• 11 months ago

Is this actually worse than being on hold forever to talk to someone following a script?

Yes. It means that common or sudden issues with the provider are not understood internally and huge amounts of customer time becomes wasted on a system with an out of date understanding of the service.

as in it transcribes your order with Whisper and tries to upsell you through ChatGPT

Essentially. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfz2EtWWPcQ

One more reason I'm glad not to have a car-centric lifestyle

I'm always amazed at this logic. It makes me wonder if you either have an incredible amount of free time or you don't rely on any service provided to you with a vehicle, or are you just not considering them when pondering this way openly?

at least I get a traditional UI

That has almost no accessibility for the disabled or has accessible functionality that's terribly tacked on as an afterthought.

zerr• 11 months ago

It's a horrible tendence. The first thing I ask to such AI customer service chats is to let me speak with a real human.

copperx• 11 months ago

I hate AI CS with a passion. It has neither the information or the authority to be effective.

StopDisinfo9102• 11 months ago

It's funny because I had my first encounter with one last week and my first reaction when I realised it was a robot was "let me talk to a human".

I am mostly ok talking to a bot for FAQ still queries but I just don't want to interact with a machine when things are going wrong. I want someone with actual empathy even if they refuse to use it.

r_lee3• 11 months ago

Let me translate this to Senior Vice President of GenAGI innovation speak:

"omg our AI-interaction KPIs went up so much!!! Customers love to chat with the AIs, they send messages back and forth really rapidly like 10 times in the first 30 seconds!!" (to get to the humans...)

time to lay off everyone!

And then everybody clapped and cheered

immibis4• 11 months ago

I once called a hotel. A suspiciously regular voice answered. I asked if it was a machine. It said yes, it's [AI marketing bullshit here]. I asked if it had a room. It said no, because it's [AI BS] and doesn't need a physical presence such as a room. I hung up and called another hotel.

r_lee3• 11 months ago

That was a major success, according to the KPI the customer inquiry was resolved in under 60 seconds all with AGI!

sequin• 11 months ago

This could have been an amazing short sci-fi story.

wombatpm3• 11 months ago

Walgreens is really pushing the AI phone system these days. It lies and says it can handle most requests, which I make and it tries to pawn me off on the website. The website which I had already been to, which recommended I speak with a pharmacist. I swear by the time it’s passed my call through it sounds like exasperated when it says “Just so you know, the pharmacy is open. . . .”

cruffle_duffle• 11 months ago

You have to say “speak to the pharmacist” and it reminds you it can help so you say it again and it goes through.

KylerAce• 11 months ago

I just say "speak to a pharmacist", wait until it starts to say something about how it can help and then again "speak to a pharmacist". I only get a controlled medication though so maybe it can be used for others

overfeed• 11 months ago

Not quite AI, but getting there, are the self checkouts slowly replacing front line cashiers, etc.

There's some AI involved at some retailers - I bought 2 identical items and the second wouldn't scan at the self checkout, so I grabbed the first item and scanned it again, and the camera-watching, object-detection system threw a fit (and played back the video of me). I had to call a human to complete my purchase. My suspicion is it is smart enough to detect that I moved an "unscanned" item from my basket item into the bagging area, but not smart enough to figure out I wasn't trying to cheat.

bojan• 11 months ago

That sounds dystopic and I'm not sure it'd even be legal where I live.

Here they simply have a + button so you can set the amount of the item. No need to scan all of them.

rancar2• 11 months ago

I’m in Portugal at the moment and went to their version of Target using Sensei [1] technology. I was with my little one who was grabbing things off the shelves while I put them back, and I was using a stroller not a store cart. The system worked flawlessly including consumed cafe purchases (coffee, pastry, and bread) along with per kg fruits and vegetables. One of the odd benefits is that I felt a bit safer with my little one roaming freely as I knew he was being carefully watched.

[1] https://www.sensei.tech/

StopDisinfo9102• 11 months ago

These systems are often far more stupid than you think. A lot of them just block themselves if they think your hands went somewhere they shouldn't be and defer to a human then.

danaris• 11 months ago

Wegmans recently introduced carts with built-in scanners and scales to allow you to scan as you shop—I really like them overall, and use them every time I go there (which is only once every few months; it's 45 minutes away), even though I often need to get a second, regular cart to offload some of my bags to partway through shopping.

The one problem I've had with them is that they have a tendency to get confused if you try to scan more than one of the same thing in a row, and occasionally I'll have to go through quite a bit of trouble to make sure that I do pay for the 3rd item, and not just the first two...

utyop225• 11 months ago

Do you shop in Sainsburys in the UK by any chance?

This has happened to me too.

cryptonector• 11 months ago

replaced by lengthy, egregiously pedantic AI systems.

Don't forget hallucinating too.

DragonStrength2• 11 months ago

Amazon's hallucinating a fake 1-800 number for me to call is both peak Amazon and peak AI bubble.

DragonStrength2• 11 months ago

Yes, but when Marc Benioff says he laid off thousands of customer service agents, the reporting is "Salesforce cuts tech workers using AI." The narrative in media is a total mess right now, and there are many in VC and AI-related companies ready to help muddy the waters further for their own benefit. Obviously, many small companies follow the media narrative.

Manuel_D• 11 months ago

A lot of the applications listed don't need humans and probably don't even need "AI" either. At least not beyond speech to text.

When my Xbox 360 hit the red ring of death, I called in to Microsoft support and went through the flow to replace it with just pre-recorded responses and speech to text. This was in 2007.

DanielHB• 11 months ago

Self checkout in supermarkets apparently is quite a rocky thing, some chains see profits go down after implementing them. The potential for catastrophic mistakes in LLMs is very high, like ordering 3000 big macs.

Sure in the case of 3000 big macs it would be caught by the buyer or the cooks, but ordering 6 instead of 3 will not. This will cause complaints, complaints need more people to handle, etc.

r_lee3• 11 months ago

Honestly those problems will get sorted

But I wonder what the effect will be like otherwise, is it gonna be a turnoff knowing you're talking to a robot?

Like what if your cafe barista's were replaced by robots?

Maybe I wouldn't mind so much at first but I'd probably just switch to some place where there were baristas, because why wouldn't I just get a canned coffee from a supermarket if "cheap" was all I cared about

to11mtm• 11 months ago

There was a fun video floating around a few days ago where someone tried ordering 18,000 cups of water... It certainly got them a human being lol

oarla• 11 months ago

There was a discussion last week about AI taking away entry level jobs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45052423

Maybe it hasn’t come for jobs that are not entry level yet.

dang2• 11 months ago

Thanks! Macroexpanded:

Evidence that AI is destroying jobs for young people - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45121342 - Sept 2025 (313 comments)

AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45052423 - Aug 2025 (629 comments)

johnnyanmac2• 11 months ago

Maybe it hasn’t come for jobs that are not entry level yet.

You don't layoff what you don't hire, so ou can argue it "hasn't affected the job market" if hiring freezes are just that. Not growing, but not really declining either.

sheepscreek• 11 months ago

AI may not affect tech jobs in NYC and other marquee locations and big city hubs in the near future. We could see a trend of smaller office locations get shuttered, and more people asked to relocate to major hubs/HQs. So I can understand the picture in NYC.

But if they’re talking about New York state as a whole, then I’d question their data/or inference. Companies in the area haven’t hired much in the last couple of years. Now we’ve got more layoff pressure on top of the non-existent hiring. The other day, Mark Benioff (Salesforce CEO) very clearly said on TV that his main problem is that he “need(s) fewer heads”.

Edit: Lightly updated my outlook to sound less decisive because I don’t really know anymore. So much is up in the air. Policy decisions at the government level could alter how it all plays out.

johnnyanmac2• 11 months ago

"Indeed, for those already employed, our results indicate AI is more likely to result in retraining than job loss, similar to our findings from last year

I guess that angle it doesn't contradict this other posting earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45121342

Can't be laid off if you were never hired.

The New York Fed blog noted that the modest impact on jobs so far may not hold in the future. "Looking ahead, firms anticipate more significant layoffs and scaled-back hiring as they continue to integrate AI into their operations," New York Fed researchers wrote.

Oh okay, so the title should be "AI not affecting the [financial] Job Market... yet"

emsign• 11 months ago

pssst… don't tell anybody but I think it's because it doesn't work as good as the hype says it does.

insane_dreamer• 11 months ago

title is misleading

the NY Fed actually said "very few firms reported AI-induced layoffs"

this is quite different than "not affecting job market"

We don't expect mass layoffs from AI (yet), but we do see companies not hiring, especially entry level workers, because of the promises of AI (real or imagined)

evolve2k• 11 months ago

Doesn’t seem to square with this article which (at time of writing) is a few posts down from this one.

The Evidence That AI Is Destroying Jobs For Young People Just Got Stronger

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45121342

AI not affecting job market much so far, New York Fed says

Related Stories