What will it take for America to lead the global AI competition?

美国要如何才能在全球人工智能竞赛中处于领先地位？

Now we all know we’ll need plentiful energy, the best chips, the most innovative AI companies, the best models. But I argue that’s not nearly enough. Because if we’re the best in the world at those things, but we’ve displaced millions of American workers, then we’re going to lose the global AI race.

如今我们都知道，我们需要充足的能源、最先进的芯片、最具创新力的AI公司还有最牛的模型。但我觉得这些远远不够，因为就算我们在这些方面都做到了世界第一，但让几百万美国员工丢了饭碗，那么我们还是会输掉这场全球AI竞赛。

In fact, we will have automated our decline. Because recessions, social unrest, political upheaval, those will weaken our country, our politics and our economy. And ultimately, I believe, I know, they will lead to excessive, burdensome regulation of AI that will slow and stop and hinder AI innovation.

说白了，我们在用自动化“自掘坟墓”。因为经济衰退、社会动荡、政治剧变 – 这些都会拖垮我们的国家、政治和经济。而到最后，我坚信，我也清楚，这将会导致对AI进行过度且繁重的监管，从而拖慢甚至扼杀AI的创新进程。

The reality is the United States can’t lead the world in technological innovation if it’s failing its people at home. We need a technology strategy and a human capital strategy, because the only way to truly win the long-term AI race is to lead in the technology and to have a plan that brings everybody along to an AI economy.

现实就是如果美国连自己国家的人都顾不好，那它就不可能在全球技术创新上取得领先地位。我们既需要技术战略，也需要人才战略，因为真正赢得长期AI竞赛的唯一方法，就是在技术领先的情况下还有一个带领所有人一起进入AI经济时代的计划。

Now I think it’s incredibly exciting to think about what a well-trained individual can do with AI. Think about how much more productive and creative we’ll all be and how many new businesses will be created. And I’m optimistic because history shows every time we create a new technology, it does create new jobs, new industries, new products, new services. Over time, with some time. And I’m confident that that will happen again, this time with AI. With time.

现在，我一想到一个经过良好训练的人能够借助AI做成哪些事情，就感到无比兴奋。想想我们会变得多么高效、多么有创造力，会冒出多少新公司。我如此乐观是因为历史表明，每当我们搞出一项新技术，它确实会创造新的就业机会、新的产业、新的产品以及新的服务。当然，这需要时间，得花一些时间。不过我相信这次AI也一样，历史会重演，只是需要时间。

So what I’m worried about is the near-term disruption to workers as we transition from here to an AI economy. Because, I know this as a former governor and secretary of commerce, America’s workforce and career transition systems weren’t built for this moment. Some people estimate tens of millions of American workers are in AI-vulnerable jobs. All kinds of jobs, people of every age, geography, income, level of education. We are not prepared for this transition. And Americans know it.

所以我担心的是，在我们从当下过渡到AI经济的过程中，打工人将面临的短期冲击。因为作为前州长和商务部长的我深知，美国的劳动力和职业过渡体系并非为这个时代而设计的，有人估算过，有数千万美国打工人正从事着易受AI影响的工作，涵盖了各种类型的工作，包含各个年龄段、地域、收入水平和教育程度的人，我们还没准备好迎接这次转型，这点美国人自己也心里有数。

I was at a bar the other night watching NCAA basketball. Huge University of Michigan fan. And it’s all — Go Blue! It’s all everybody was talking about. It’s all the chatter. “What are you going to do when you lose your job to AI?” “I’m so bummed, I’m paying all this money for tuition for my kids in college. Are they going to have a job when they’re done?”

前几天晚上我在酒吧看NCAA篮球赛，我是密歇根大学的铁杆粉丝，（和台下互动：加油蓝队！）大家聊的全是：“如果AI让你丢了工作，你打算怎么办？”“我愁死了，我花了这么多钱供孩子上大学，他们毕业以后能找到工作吗？”

Americans are anxious for a reason, and we owe them more than empathy. We owe them a plan, we owe them action. And so far, I’m not hearing a lot of good solutions. There’s the slow AI, stop AI, overregulate AI crowd. It’s a bad idea. It denies Americans the promise of AI, and China will pull ahead. And then there’s the universal basic income crowd. That’s also a bad idea. Every one of you know, a job is more than a paycheck. It’s dignity, it’s purpose, it’s pride. Without purposeful work, a society unravels.

美国人的焦虑是有原因的，我们光同情他们可不够，得给人一个说法，还得拿出实际行动，可到目前为止，我还没听到什么好的解决方案。有人主张暂缓AI、关停AI、往死里监管AI，这些主意都不行，它们会剥夺美国人从AI中获得的希望，而且中国会超越我们；还有一派主张全民基本收入，这也不靠谱，你们每个人都知道，工作不仅仅是一份薪水，它关乎尊严、目标感和自豪感，要是没了有意义的工作，社会就会瓦解。

So what are the elements of an effective transition plan? Unfortunately, as I stand here today, I don’t know the exact details. But here’s what I do know. I know it’s rooted in a new grand bargain between government and business. I know it means tearing down the wall we’ve had for so long between school and jobs, and I know industry, every company needs to help lead the transition. And here is what I know more than anything else. I know if we are determined, we can make it happen.

那么，一个有效的过渡计划包含哪些要素呢？遗憾的是，今天站在这里的我，还真说不准确切的细节，但我知道以下几点：我知道这得建立在政府与企业之间的一项新的“大协议”之上；我知道这意味着要打破长久以来横亘在学校和工作之间筑起的那堵墙；我还知道每个行业、每家公司都需要帮助引领这次过渡；而我最清楚的一点是：只要我们下定决心，就一定能做到。

At a minimum, we need massive changes in both our workforce training system and our career transition support system. In an effective workforce training system, employers define where work is today, what skills are needed, where it’s going. And then schools and government training programs prepare people to get there. That is not what we have today. Today, in our country, we spend hundreds of billions of dollars to incentivize enrollment in college — without regard to whether people get a degree, the skills they need for a job or a job. The truth is, and you all know this, government and schools don’t know the skills employers need today or will need tomorrow. Industry has the most accurate and dynamic view.

最起码，我们需要对劳动力培训体系和职业过渡支持体系进行大规模改革。一个有效的劳动力培训体系应该是这样的：雇主来定义现在的工作需求，需要哪些技能以及未来要往哪个方向走，然后学校和政府培训项目再去培养人以满足这些要求。可我们现在并不是这样的，如今我们的国家花费数千亿美元鼓励人们上大学 — 却根本不管他们能否获得学位、能否获得工作所需的技能，最后能否找到工作。事实是，你们也都知道，政府和学校并不知道雇主现在需要什么技能，也不知道将来需要什么技能。而行业本身才拥有最准确、最具动态的视角。

By the way, I’ve seen this be successful as governor and secretary of commerce. When TSMC decided to expand manufacturing of chips in America, they told us what they needed. They needed skilled electrical engineers and equipment operators. So we got to work. We designed with them, with community college, with certificate initiatives, accelerated certificate programs and apprenticeships tailored to the company’s needs. Today, TSMC is thriving in Arizona, making leading-edge AI chips at scale for the first time in America’s history.

顺便说一句，我在担任州长和商务部长时，就见证过这样的成功。当台积电决定在美国扩大芯片制造时，他们明确告诉了我们需求，他们需要熟练的电气工程师和设备操作员，于是我们开始行动，我们与他们、与社区大学还有证书项目一起设计，推出了针对公司需求的速成证书课程和量身定制的学徒项目。如今，台积电在亚利桑那州蓬勃发展，生产尖端AI芯片的规模之大是美国有史以来的第一次。

Another problem with our current system is it’s a one-and-done system. You graduate high school, you go to college, you’re done with your education. That isn’t going to work in an AI economy. All of us, all of us, will have to learn new skills because our jobs will be constantly changing over the course of a career.

我们现有体系的另一个问题是：教育成了“一锤子买卖”，你高中毕业，上大学，毕业后你的学业就结束了，这在AI经济时代是行不通的。我们所有人，每个人，都必须学习新技能，因为在我们整个职业生涯中，工作内容是会不断变化的。

Let’s be honest, most people learn most of the skills that they use in their job every day on the job. Yeah? So why don’t we have more effective, affordable, flexible options at scale so people can earn while they learn continuously over the course of a career?

说实话，大多数人每天在工作中用到的技能，都是在工作中学到的，对吧？那么为什么我们没有更多有效、经济且灵活的还能成规模落地的路子，让大家能在整个职业生涯中边学习边工作，从而实现收入与学习的同步提升呢？

A good friend of mine’s husband recently lost his job in IT. Super smart guy in his late 30s. So he spent a long time trying to figure out a job that excited him, that he thought was an AI-resilient career path. He finally found a job in the HVAC industry. He was psyched for it. He spent a lot of time looking for a training program in his area. He found one that he could get into. It took a year, over a year actually, cost money, and he wouldn’t be paid for a year. Who can go a year without a salary?

我的一位好朋友的丈夫最近在IT行业丢了工作，他是一个三十五六岁非常聪明的男生，他花了很长一段时间尝试找到一条自己感兴趣还不容易被AI替代的职业道路，最后他在暖通空调行业找到了一份工作，他非常兴奋，所以他又花了很多时间在附近寻找培训，还真找到了一个还报上了名，但培训要花一年（实际超过一年多了），还要花钱，可这一年他都没有收入。谁能一年没有薪水啊？

Now look, I know, I’ve seen it, there is a lot of really excellent innovation out there around employer-led worker training, apprenticeships, co-ops and college. But here’s the reality. All of those efforts are a tiny portion of America’s post-high school system. They ought to be the system. They ought to be the norm and not the exception. And there should be no stigma for going that path.

听着，我知道也亲眼见过，现在确实有很多非常优秀的创新做法，比如雇主主导的员工培训、学徒制、校企合作还有跟大学挂钩的项目。但现实却是，所有这些努力只占美国高中后的教育体系的极小部分，可它们应该成为体系本身，应该成为常态而不是例外，而且走这条路的也不应该被人瞧不起。

OK, now, the reality is it’s going to take more than just new workforce training system if we’re going to get through this economic transition, because we also have to provide support for people as AI changes their jobs. And unfortunately, today in the US, our primary career transition support system is unemployment insurance. It was created 100 years ago in a different time where people had a single job in a single industry for decades. It does nothing to support people getting new training, starting a new business, entering a new field. And actually, I know this from being governor, it doesn’t provide nearly enough income support for middle-class wage earners, let alone high-income earners.

好了，说真的如果我们要挺过这次经济转型，仅仅靠新的劳动力培训体系是不够的，因为当AI改变他们的工作时，我们还得给他们提供支持。不幸的是，如今在美国，我们主要的职业过渡支持体系是失业保险，这个体系创建于100年前，在那个时代人们会在一个行业从事一份工作几十年，它对人们学新东西、创业、进入新领域这些一点帮助都没有。而且说实话，我当过州长我知道，它连支撑中产阶级工薪阶层的收入都远远不够，更不用说高收入人群了。

So in addition to unemployment benefits, why don’t we offer temporary wage support to get workers back into the workforce quickly by topping up their salary, if they take a pay cut to enter a new field?

所以，除了失业救济金之外，我们为什么不提供临时工资补贴，如果有人降薪进入一个新领域，通过补足工资差额，让员工能快速重返职场呢？

By the way, one of the reasons I’m excited about AI is I think it’ll make starting a business easier than ever. So why don’t we look at a program of self-employment assistance to support workers while they start a new business?

顺便说一句，我对AI之所以感到兴奋的原因之一是：我认为它会让创业变得前所未有地容易，所以我们为什么不考虑做一个自主创业扶持项目，在员工创业期间为他们提供支持呢？

So let’s say we do all this. Let’s say we are determined, creative, and we do all this. What might it look like? Imagine a 45-year-old woman. She’s been an accountant for 15 years, closing the books. She’s got two kids, a pile of bills and a mortgage. Pretty typical. Last week she was told she’s losing her job because it’s being automated. Today, in our system, if she’s lucky, she’d get a retraining brochure and two weeks’ severance. There’s over a million accountants in America. In a better system, her company would be incentivized to allow her to start retraining months before she’s laid off. Maybe she gets a short-term credential to learn a higher-value skill. It puts her in a position to get redeployed at that company if the company is committed to redeployment. And if she needs it, maybe she could collect temporary wage insurance to top up her income to make up the difference between her old job and her new job salary.

所以假设我们做到了这一切。假设我们下定决心、拿出创造力把这些都落到了实处，那会是什么样子呢？想象一位45岁的女士，她做了15年的会计，一直负责结账工作，她有两个孩子，一堆账单和一笔房贷，非常典型的普通家庭。她在上周被告知自己的工作正在被自动化取代，所以她即将被优化。按照我们现在的体系中，如果她幸运的话，会得到一份再就业培训手册和两周的遣散费，但美国有超过一百万的会计呢。而在一个更好的体系中，她的公司会受到激励，允许她在被解雇前几个月就开始参加再就业培训，让她能够考取一个短期证书，掌握含金量更高的技能，只要公司有意进行内部人员调动的话，她就具备了在公司内部转岗留任的条件。如果她需要，也许她还可以领取临时工资保险，来弥补旧工作与新工作之间的收入差距。

So how are we going to do this? How do we get there? Incentives, innovation and urgency. First, the government needs to fund schools and training programs on their outcomes.How about that?They shouldn’t just get the money because people show up and enroll. They need to be funded based upon whether people get good skills and actually get a job. Incentives need to change for businesses as well. Right now, the incentives are such that a company lays a lot of people off today, and their stock price surges tomorrow. It is too easy to hit the “easy button” of layoffs. Companies need different incentives. Quite frankly, we need a new system where it’s more expensive to abandon workers than to retrain them.

那我们要怎么做呢？怎么实现到那一步？靠激励、创新还有紧迫感。首先，政府需要根据学校和培训项目的成果来拨款，这主意怎么样？我认为不能因为有人来报名就给钱，给钱应该基于这个人是否学到了本事并真正找到了工作。而且企业的激励机制也需要改变，目前的机制是这样的：一家公司今天大规模裁员的话，它的股价第二天就会猛涨，所以按“裁员”这个省事按钮太轻松了。公司需要不同的激励措施，说白了，我们需要一个新的体系，在这个体系下，放弃员工的成本要比再培训他们的成本更高。

We all respond to incentives. How about we pilot tax credits or other economic incentives that reward companies for worker redeployment, for entry-level hiring, for reinvesting AI productivity gains into new jobs? We have spent decades, if not longer, perfecting the incentives for investing in machines. We need to do the same so companies invest in people.

我们都吃激励这一套，那何不试点税收抵免或其他经济激励措施，来奖励那些愿意重新安置员工、招初级正式员工以及把AI带来的生产率再投到新的就业岗位的公司呢？我们花了数十年甚至更久来完善投资于机器设备的机制，现在我们需要采取同样的措施，促使企业投资于人力方面。

And here’s the reality. It’s in all of our interests to have a smooth transition to an AI economy. It isn’t business versus workers. Nobody benefits with the recession, excessive AI regulations, social unrest and political violence and divisiveness. By the way, it’s in everyone’s benefit to reach this exciting potential of AI innovation. It’s not corporate charity to do this. Last time I checked, agents didn’t walk into the store and buy things. Humans do that. And they need money in their pocket to do it.

现实就是这样，平稳过渡到AI经济对我们所有人都有好处，这不是企业跟员工之间的对抗。经济衰退、过度监管AI、社会动荡、政治暴力和分裂对谁都没有好处。再说了，实现AI创新这一激动人心的潜力对每个人都是有利的，做这件事并不是企业的慈善行为，我上次查过，进店里买东西的可不是智能体，买东西的是人，而人的口袋里有钱才能买。

So it turns out America has seen a similar movie to this before, when we didn’t plan for an economic transition, and by the way, it didn’t end well. It happened when American companies moved their manufacturing overseas, mostly to Asia, chasing cheaper labor, and millions of Americans lost their jobs. And a lot of communities were crushed. How do I know this? Because I lived through it.

其实美国以前就上演过类似的戏码，当时我们没有为经济转型做好规划，所以嘛，结局并不好，那时候美国为了追更便宜的劳动力，把制造业转移到海外（主要是亚洲），结果数百万美国人因此失去了工作，很多社区也遭殃了。我是怎么知道的呢？因为我亲身经历过。

In the early ’80s, when the Bulova watch factory closed, my dad lost the only career he’d ever known after devoting almost 30 years of his life to the job. One job, one company, one identity. Gone. Here’s the thing, he was 56. He still needed a job. He still needed to work. My dad was a smart guy. He understood the economics of outsourcing to China, and he knew it would help some American businesses grow faster and add new jobs. But he and all of his buddies still needed a bridge to another chapter of work. And there wasn’t one. I mean, after a lot of pain and bitterness on his part, my family got through it. But the truth of it is, my country paid a huge price for that poorly planned transition. In fact, I argue, 30 years later, we’re still paying a price for that poorly planned transition in the form of increasingly divisive, dysfunctional, violent politics. Now –Think about this. At that time, it was a few million Americans who lost their jobs. Some say two million, some say three million.

在80年代初，当宝路华手表厂关闭的时候，我父亲失去了他唯一熟悉的事业，他把自己近30年的人生奉献给了它，一份工作、一家公司、一种身份，全没了。问题是，他当时56岁，还得工作，还得挣钱。我父亲是个聪明人，他理解外包给中国的经济账，也知道这有助于美国企业更快速地发展并增加新的就业机会，但他跟他那些哥们儿仍然需要一座通往新工作的桥梁，可当时根本没有这样的桥，我的意思是，他是经历了许多痛苦和怨恨之后才让我们家挺了过来。但实话说，我们国家为那次糟糕的转型付出了沉重的代价。实际上，我认为30年后的今天，我们仍在为那次失败的转型付出代价，其表现形式就是越来越分裂、越来越失控以及越来越暴力的政治。你现在想想看，那时失业的也就几百万美国人，有人说两百万，有人说三百万。

Let’s resolve right here, right now to do it differently this time. Here’s good news. History also shows that when the stakes are high enough, America reinvents. After World War II, record public investment and research seeded new industries. COVID accelerated growth in clean energy, in health care. AI is a 100-year technology and needs a 100-year response so that all Americans can reap the benefits of an AI economy.

让我们就在这儿下定决心，这一次就做点不一样的。好消息是：历史也表明，当赌注足够大时，美国会自我革新：二战后，创纪录的公共投资和研究催生出了很多新的产业；新冠疫情也加速了清洁能源和医疗保健的发展。AI是一项百年技术，需要一个百年大计，以便所有美国人都能享受到AI经济带来的好处。

Why am I optimistic? Because if we’re a country that can design the best chips in the world, create the best models in the world and spend trillions of dollars to build out our AI infrastructure, then we’re up to this challenge. Because here’s the reality. And you know this. Our future isn’t predetermined. It’s ours to create. It’s why you’re all here. So let’s get to work.

为什么我这么乐观？因为如果我们这个国家能够设计出世界上最好的芯片，创造出最好的模型，再砸几万亿美元建设我们的AI基础设施，那么我们就必能应对这个挑战。因为现实就是这样，你也知道，我们的未来并非命中注定，它是靠我们去创造的，这也是你们都在这里的原因。那么，让我们开始行动吧。

Thank you.

谢谢。