{"id":2242506,"date":"2026-11-06T22:10:23","date_gmt":"2026-11-06T19:10:23","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2026-11-06T22:10:23","modified_gmt":"2026-11-06T19:10:23","slug":"the-new-york-times-doesnt-understand-ais-role-in-suppressing-wages","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=2242506","title":{"rendered":"The New York Times Doesn\u2019t Understand AI\u2019s Role in Suppressing Wages"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>[analyse_image type=&#8221;featured&#8221; src=&#8221;https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/app\/uploads\/2026\/11\/pennies-1200&#215;675.jpg&#8221;]<\/p>\n<article class=\"post-2000836392 post type-post status-publish format-standard has-post-thumbnail hentry category-artificial-intelligence tag-ai\">\n<div class=\"entry-content prose dark:prose-invert lg:prose-xl prose-main dark:prose-main max-w-none\">\n<p>The New York Times published a new article Friday asking whether artificial intelligence tools have caused disruptions in the number of Americans who are employed. Incredibly, the article never mentions the word \u201cwages.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The piece, titled \u201cA.I. Was Supposed to Come for Our Jobs. So Far, Evidence Is Mixed,\u201d was written by Ben Casselman and starts with the question we all have:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">Is artificial intelligence taking our jobs?<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">It\u2019s arguably the single biggest question facing the labor market right now, all the more so after Tuesday\u2019s midterm elections showed widespread public animosity toward A.I. and data centers, in particular.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">The evidence, though, is far from clear.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Casselman notes that Microsoft recently offered voluntary buyouts to about 60,000 employees, but white-collar industries like accounting, legal services, and finance mostly added jobs in October.<\/p>\n<p>The article is mostly fine, even if it\u2019s filled with way more questions than answers. Nobody knows long-term whether AI will put a significant dent in jobs:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Even if A.I. is taking a toll on hiring, it isn\u2019t quite clear what that means. Are companies using A.I. to replace workers? Or merely pressing \u201cpause\u201d on hiring while they figure out where these new tools will be most useful? Or are they spending so much on tokens and A.I. infrastructure that they are looking to cut costs elsewhere?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The U.S. economy added 165,000 jobs in October, much higher than expected, and the unemployment rate fell to 4.1%. By these measures, it seems that Americans are doing okay. There\u2019s no double-digit unemployment as we\u2019ve seen in historically bad times.<\/p>\n<p>But the New York Times article completely misses one of the most important functions of AI in the job market of 2026. Artificial intelligence is being used by bosses to suppress wages. It\u2019s something to dangle over the heads of workers to make sure they don\u2019t ask for higher wages or step out of line. All you need to do is listen to the bosses themselves.<\/p>\n<p>David Kelly, the Chief Global Strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, appeared on CNBC back in September, where he spoke about the rise of AI. It was a surprisingly candid discussion.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThey think this is a scary economy,\u201d Kelly said of workers. \u201cThey think they\u2019re threatened by AI and they don\u2019t have the guts, basically, to ask for a wage increase or to demand a wage increase in this economy.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"not-prose video-container\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"CNBC guest discusses how AI can suppress wage growth (Sept. 4, 2026)\" width=\"500\" height=\"281\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/kSGXnMCGEK4?feature=oembed\" frameborder allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/div>\n<p>CNBC host Leslie Picker agreed with Kelly, noting workers recognize, \u201cthe machine could potentially do your job cheaper. So you better put your head down and keep doing the work.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>And there\u2019s evidence that this fear is changing how workers think about their pay. A study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston in September found that workers who feared losing their jobs to AI were also less likely to believe they had the leverage to negotiate higher wages.<\/p>\n<p>Typically, low unemployment numbers result in rising wages. When most people have jobs, labor is scarce, and companies have to start offering higher salaries to attract workers. And workers are less fearful about getting fired or asking for a raise because they know there\u2019s a very good chance they can get another job.<\/p>\n<p>AI has seemingly upended that traditional cycle. Wages rose just 3.1% over the past year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the latest available annual inflation rate was 3.7% in September. That means workers are actually making less today than they were a year ago when you adjust for inflation.<\/p>\n<p>Kelly said as much on CNBC a couple of months back: \u201cSo it looks, by the numbers, [like] it\u2019s a very tight labor market, but it doesn\u2019t feel that way to workers. And they don\u2019t feel like they\u2019ve got the ability to ask for wage increases. In fact, the wage number today, year-over-year, was the lowest since May of 2021.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Again, the New York Times article is mostly fine in providing a snapshot of the confusion people are currently experiencing. There\u2019s been no massive upheaval where AI is replacing every worker. But the newspaper fails to recognize another potential upheaval: AI could be weakening workers\u2019 bargaining power long before its effects show up in the unemployment rate. Wages are already lower in inflation-adjusted terms, and the fear of being replaced by AI could make it even harder for workers to fight for higher pay.<\/p>\n<p>The AI discussion is mostly centered around the most dramatic possibilities: Will it destroy humanity or create an environment where everyone is unemployed?<\/p>\n<div class=\"my-5\">\n<div class=\"not-prose text-gizmodo-dark-blue\">\n<div class=\"w-10\/12 sm:w-8\/12\">\n<div class=\"typo-sofia-h5\">         The AI Brief       <\/div>\n<div class=\"my-2.5 typo-space-body-3\">         A daily briefing on the AI news you need to know to start your day. Written by humans. Envied by bots.       <\/div>\n<div class=\"inline-flex items-center gap-2.5 border border-gizmodo-dark-blue group-hover:bg-gizmodo-dark-blue group-hover:text-beige px-3 py-2 rounded typo-space-h6\">         Subscribe Now                <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-hidden=\"true\" width=\"187\" height=\"166\" class=\"absolute right-4 bottom-4 sm:right-8 sm:bottom-0 sm:top-0 sm:py-4 w-20 sm:w-auto sm:h-full max-w-[25%]\" src=\"https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/app\/themes\/gizmodo\/public\/images\/newsletters\/the-ai-brief.svg\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>There\u2019s a much more mundane world of possibility that doesn\u2019t seem to break through in mainstream media: Maybe the middle class just gets hollowed out, and we spend a decade with a lower quality of life because AI is effective at suppressing wages. Maybe it results in some downsizing, but that doesn\u2019t show up significantly in the unemployment numbers in relative terms because a massive generation like the baby boomers is retiring.<\/p>\n<p>Maybe AI doesn\u2019t change the world dramatically. Maybe everything is just a little worse for the average American as the ruling class all becomes trillionaires. Maybe. We don\u2019t have a crystal ball. But there\u2019s no doubt that some folks on the financial networks can see what\u2019s happening.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<div class=\"entry-content prose dark:prose-invert lg:prose-xl prose-main dark:prose-main max-w-none\">\n<p>The New York Times published a new article Friday asking whether artificial intelligence tools have caused disruptions in the number of Americans who are employed. Incredibly, the article never mentions the word \u201cwages.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The piece, titled \u201cA.I. Was Supposed to Come for Our Jobs. So Far, Evidence Is Mixed,\u201d was written by Ben Casselman and starts with the question we all have:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">Is artificial intelligence taking our jobs?<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">It\u2019s arguably the single biggest question facing the labor market right now, all the more so after Tuesday\u2019s midterm elections showed widespread public animosity toward A.I. and data centers, in particular.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-12m5bll evys1bk0\">The evidence, though, is far from clear.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Casselman notes that Microsoft recently offered voluntary buyouts to about 60,000 employees, but white-collar industries like accounting, legal services, and finance mostly added jobs in October.<\/p>\n<p>The article is mostly fine, even if it\u2019s filled with way more questions than answers. Nobody knows long-term whether AI will put a significant dent in jobs:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Even if A.I. is taking a toll on hiring, it isn\u2019t quite clear what that means. Are companies using A.I. to replace workers? Or merely pressing \u201cpause\u201d on hiring while they figure out where these new tools will be most useful? Or are they spending so much on tokens and A.I. infrastructure that they are looking to cut costs elsewhere?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The U.S. economy added 165,000 jobs in October, much higher than expected, and the unemployment rate fell to 4.1%. By these measures, it seems that Americans are doing okay. There\u2019s no double-digit unemployment as we\u2019ve seen in historically bad times.<\/p>\n<p>But the New York Times article completely misses one of the most important functions of AI in the job market of 2026. Artificial intelligence is being used by bosses to suppress wages. It\u2019s something to dangle over the heads of workers to make sure they don\u2019t ask for higher wages or step out of line. All you need to do is listen to the bosses themselves.<\/p>\n<p>David Kelly, the Chief Global Strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, appeared on CNBC back in September, where he spoke about the rise of AI. It was a surprisingly candid discussion.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThey think this is a scary economy,\u201d Kelly said of workers. \u201cThey think they\u2019re threatened by AI and they don\u2019t have the guts, basically, to ask for a wage increase or to demand a wage increase in this economy.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"not-prose video-container\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"CNBC guest discusses how AI can suppress wage growth (Sept. 4, 2026)\" width=\"500\" height=\"281\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/kSGXnMCGEK4?feature=oembed\" frameborder allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/div>\n<p>CNBC host Leslie Picker agreed with Kelly, noting workers recognize, \u201cthe machine could potentially do your job cheaper. So you better put your head down and keep doing the work.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>And there\u2019s evidence that this fear is changing how workers think about their pay. A study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston in September found that workers who feared losing their jobs to AI were also less likely to believe they had the leverage to negotiate higher wages.<\/p>\n<p>Typically, low unemployment numbers result in rising wages. When most people have jobs, labor is scarce, and companies have to start offering higher salaries to attract workers. And workers are less fearful about getting fired or asking for a raise because they know there\u2019s a very good chance they can get another job.<\/p>\n<p>AI has seemingly upended that traditional cycle. Wages rose just 3.1% over the past year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the latest available annual inflation rate was 3.7% in September. That means workers are actually making less today than they were a year ago when you adjust for inflation.<\/p>\n<p>Kelly said as much on CNBC a couple of months back: \u201cSo it looks, by the numbers, [like] it\u2019s a very tight labor market, but it doesn\u2019t feel that way to workers. And they don\u2019t feel like they\u2019ve got the ability to ask for wage increases. In fact, the wage number today, year-over-year, was the lowest since May of 2021.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Again, the New York Times article is mostly fine in providing a snapshot of the confusion people are currently experiencing. There\u2019s been no massive upheaval where AI is replacing every worker. But the newspaper fails to recognize another potential upheaval: AI could be weakening workers\u2019 bargaining power long before its effects show up in the unemployment rate. Wages are already lower in inflation-adjusted terms, and the fear of being replaced by AI could make it even harder for workers to fight for higher pay.<\/p>\n<p>The AI discussion is mostly centered around the most dramatic possibilities: Will it destroy humanity or create an environment where everyone is unemployed?<\/p>\n<div class=\"my-5\">\n<div class=\"not-prose text-gizmodo-dark-blue\">\n<div class=\"w-10\/12 sm:w-8\/12\">\n<div class=\"typo-sofia-h5\">         The AI Brief       <\/div>\n<div class=\"my-2.5 typo-space-body-3\">         A daily briefing on the AI news you need to know to start your day. Written by humans. Envied by bots.       <\/div>\n<div class=\"inline-flex items-center gap-2.5 border border-gizmodo-dark-blue group-hover:bg-gizmodo-dark-blue group-hover:text-beige px-3 py-2 rounded typo-space-h6\">         Subscribe Now                <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-hidden=\"true\" width=\"187\" height=\"166\" class=\"absolute right-4 bottom-4 sm:right-8 sm:bottom-0 sm:top-0 sm:py-4 w-20 sm:w-auto sm:h-full max-w-[25%]\" src=\"https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/app\/themes\/gizmodo\/public\/images\/newsletters\/the-ai-brief.svg\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>There\u2019s a much more mundane world of possibility that doesn\u2019t seem to break through in mainstream media: Maybe the middle class just gets hollowed out, and we spend a decade with a lower quality of life because AI is effective at suppressing wages. Maybe it results in some downsizing, but that doesn\u2019t show up significantly in the unemployment numbers in relative terms because a massive generation like the baby boomers is retiring.<\/p>\n<p>Maybe AI doesn\u2019t change the world dramatically. Maybe everything is just a little worse for the average American as the ruling class all becomes trillionaires. Maybe. We don\u2019t have a crystal ball. But there\u2019s no doubt that some folks on the financial networks can see what\u2019s happening.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>[analyse_source url=&#8221;https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/the-new-york-times-doesnt-understand-ais-role-in-suppressing-wages-2000836392&#8243;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>[analyse_image type=&#8221;featured&#8221; src=&#8221;https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/app\/uploads\/2026\/11\/pennies-1200&#215;675.jpg&#8221;] The New York Times published a new article Friday asking whether artificial intelligence tools have caused disruptions in the number of Americans who are employed. Incredibly, the article never mentions the word \u201cwages.\u201d The piece, titled \u201cA.I. Was Supposed to Come for Our Jobs. So Far, Evidence Is Mixed,\u201d was written by [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2242506","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2242506","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2242506"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2242506\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2242506"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2242506"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2242506"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}