欧洲年轻人失业状况没那么严重

    全球政府眼下最大的担忧之一，当属年轻一代正在被抛弃。从西班牙到希腊，再到美国，年轻人失业率都创下了新高，债务危机和经济蹒跚更是让情形雪上加霜。

    今年夏天，在西班牙和希腊，25岁以下的年轻人有半数以上都没有工作。与此同时，欧元区25岁以下失业总人数达到了1,720万人，创下了15年来的峰值。虽然还没有像美国那么糟，但18-24岁年轻人的失业率仍然达到了16.4%。25岁以上人口失业率则为9.1%。上个月，经合组织（OECD）警告称，高失业率可能给这些全球最年轻工作者的经济前景留下永久的创伤。

    这个问题对于宏观层面的经济也有种种影响。比方说，年轻工作者挣扎于就业边缘的时间越久，职业发展就越遥遥无期——它将影响到几年后他们能挣多少钱。全球政府对此非常担心，因为这可能导致公共预算更加紧张，同时推高犯罪率。弗朗西斯•奥朗德最近能在法国总统大选中胜出，部分就得益于他在竞选中呼吁帮助这些失业的年轻人。

    是的，年轻人的日子不好过。但可能并没有数字显示的那样糟糕，《欧洲的希望：为什么欧洲方式是多变时代的最佳方式，以及修复美式民主的十个步骤》（Europe's Promise: Why the European Way is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age and 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy）一书的作者史蒂文•希尔表示。希尔最近在诺贝尔奖得主云集的博客网站Project Syndicate上发表文章称，各国政府和经济学家们关注的数据失真。

    成人失业率的计算方法是：失业人数除以就业和失业（但在找工作）人数的总和。希尔称，问题是它没有将数百万仍在读大学或参加职业培训的年轻人（这些人既没工作，也没找工作）计入劳动力。因此，年轻人失业率人为虚高。希尔写道：“这样计算失业率的结果是，选择继续深造或培训的年轻人越多，年轻人失业率就越高。”

    他建议采用一个更准确的指标：将仍在学校读书或接受职业培训的人统计在内，再来计算失业比率。这有一定道理。就业市场不佳时总是会推动人们返回校园读书，或者寻找新的培训机会。一旦他们毕业，这些人比其他人更愿意回到就业市场。那么，为什么不将这些人计入劳动力，即便他们严格意义上可能并没有在找工作？

    希尔建议的指标和政府公布的失业率之间存在显著差异。以西班牙为例，政府公布的年轻人失业率达到惊人的48.9%，但按希尔的方式计算，这个数字仅为19%。与此类似，希腊公布的年轻人失业率为49.3%，但按希尔的方法计算为13%。至于更广大的欧元区，公布的年轻人失业率为20.8%，也大大高于希尔计算的8.7%。

    在美国，希尔计算的年轻人失业率为8.9%，政府公布的数值几乎是其两倍，达到了16.3%。非洲裔年轻人的差异最大，政府公布的非洲裔年轻人失业率高达25.8%，而希尔计算的数字仅为12.5%。其次是西班牙裔年轻人，分别为19.2%和10.5%。再次是亚洲裔，分别为11.6%和4%。

    有意思的是成人失业率统计所反映的失业状况可能好于实际情况。因为已经放弃找工作的人不被计入失业者人群，可能导致失业人数事实上虚低。随着美国经济复苏乏力，越来越多的人丧失信心，放弃寻找工作，部分导致了失业率下降。

    这是一个“被扭曲的现实”，有些类似于年轻人失业率的计算。是的，不管怎么看，这都是个坏消息。而且，也可以说，希尔的说法有待商榷。对于大多数人而言，“糟糕”和“非常，非常糟糕”之间没多大区别。但对于政策制定，此事重大，政府需要确定用什么样的政策来缓解这些年轻人和失业者面临的问题。失业率和希尔计算的失业比率两者的差别似乎有些模糊，但或许就是这种差别会起到关键作用。

    译者：早稻米

    One of the biggest worries across governments worldwide is that the young are being left behind. From Spain to Greece and America, youth unemployment has reached record highs made worse by multiplying debt crises and lurching economies.

    Over the summer, more than half of under 25-year-olds in Spain and Greece were jobless, while the segment of people out of work in the euro zone as a whole reached a 15-year high at 17.2 million. Though it hasn't been nearly as bad in the U.S., unemployment among 18 to 24-year-olds is nevertheless 16.4%. It's 9.1% for the rest of the population. And last month, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) warned high unemployment could permanently scar the economic futures of the world's youngest workers.

    The problem carries all kinds of implications for the broader economy. For one, the longer these workers languish, the more that delays their careers -- impacting how much they earn years from today. Governments worry about it because it could further strain public budgets and raise crime. In France, Francois Hollande recently won his bid for the presidency partly by campaigning to help out-of-work youths.

    Yes young people have it rough. But not nearly as rough as the numbers suggests, says Steven Hill, author of Europe's Promise: Why the European Way is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age and 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy. In a recent article in Project Syndicate, an economics blog featuring Nobel laureates, he argues that governments and economists have focused on the wrong statistics.

    The adult unemployment rate is calculated by dividing the number of unemployed individuals by all individuals who are employed and unemployed (but are looking for jobs). The problem, Hill says, is that it doesn't count the millions of young people still in college or vocational training programs as part of the labor force because they are neither working nor looking for a job. And as a result, the youth unemployment rate becomes artificially high. "So the perverse result of this way of counting the unemployed is that the more young people who pursue additional education or training, the higher the youth unemployment rate rises," Hill writes.

    He suggests a more accurate measure: The unemployment ratio, which counts those still in school or getting job training. This makes some sense. Bad job markets generally tend to push people back to school or to seek new training. Once they graduate, these groups are more inclined than others to return to the job market. So why shouldn't they be counted as part of the labor force, even though they technically might not be looking for work?

    The differences between ratio and rate are significant. Take Spain, which has a whopping youth unemployment rate of 48.9% but a ratio of 19%, Hill writes. Similarly, Greece's rate is 49.3%, but its ratio is only 13%. For the wider euro zone, the youth unemployment rate is 20.8%, which is far above the 8.7% ratio.

    And in the U.S., the ratio is 8.9%, while the rate is roughly double that at 16.3%, according to Hill's analysis of labor statistics. African Americans show the widest gap, with a 25.8% youth unemployment rate and a 12.5% ratio, followed by Hispanics at 19.2% versus 10.5%, respectively and Asians, 11.6% versus 4%, respectively.

    Interestingly enough, the adult unemployment rate makes the jobless picture appear rosier than it really is. It actually tends to undercount the number of jobless individuals, since those who have given up their job search are not counted among the unemployed. With a tepid U.S. recovery, more and more people get discouraged and give up looking for work, which in turn, partly causes the unemployment rate to fall.

    This is a "distorted reality," similar to the way the youth unemployment rate is calculated. True, however you look at it, it's bad news. And you could argue that Hill is making a moot point. To most people, there may be little difference between bad and really, really bad. But in the world of policymaking, it matters as governments try to come up with what kinds of policies are needed to ease problems facing the young and jobless. And something as perhaps seemingly obscure as the difference between rate and ratio could make a real difference.