Is college actually worth it anymore? Gen Z isn't sure, study says
A survey of 1,000 full-time Gen Z employees across the US, conducted by ResumeGenius, found that a good number of these young adults wish they'd pursued a different degree — or not attend college at all.
According to the survey, about one in four Gen Zers said they regret attending college or wish they had chosen a higher-paying career path.
Many young adults are starting to question if their college education was worth it.
Seventyfour – stock.adobe.com
'Many Gen Z students feel they were told college was the only path, only to see people with strong degrees underemployed or overlooked,' Tallo CEO Allison Danielsen told Fortune.
Adding, they're 'questioning whether college still delivers real value.'
Tallo, a career consultancy company, surveyed more than 2,000 participants aged 18 to 30 and found that 62% of young adults said they aren't in the career they intended to pursue.
25% of those surveyed said they are actively struggling to find a job in their industry of choice — which is making them wonder if getting a college degree was worth it.
It's not easy for today's college grads looking for work.
shapovalphoto – stock.adobe.com
Not all Gen Zers are unhappy — the ResumeGenius survey found that about a third of workers from this generation were content with their career choice.
49% of those who are actively looking for a job feel their college education has lost value in the job market thanks to AI, according to an Indeed report.
As AI continues to evolve, it's clear that many of the traditional entry-level roles, often seen as stepping stones into the workforce, are rapidly being automated.
'Entry-level jobs tend to involve routine, well-defined tasks — exactly the kind of work current AI systems are best suited to automate,' Professor Daniela Rus, the Director of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT, told Newsweek.
Experts argue that while some of these roles might not disappear entirely, they are evolving into something unrecognizable.
For Gen Z, this transition could wipe out or change the roles they expected to apply for. However, their chances of being employed aren't completely deleted — they just might need to adapt to using this new technology.
Experts claim digital nomads' familiarity with technology, particularly AI, could make them valuable assets in this new era.
'The advantage Gen Z has is that they are digital natives. They are well-positioned to work alongside AI, not in opposition to it,' Rus told Newsweek.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
5 hours ago
- Newsweek
DOGE AI Tool to Target 100K Federal Rules for Elimination: Report
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is reportedly using a newly developed artificial intelligence (AI) tool to accelerate the rollback of federal regulations, with a stated goal of eliminating 50 percent of all federal rules by the first anniversary of President Donald Trump's second inauguration, according to a Saturday report from The Washington Post. Internal documents reviewed by the newspaper, along with interviews with four government officials familiar with the project, reveal an ambitious timeline and a wide-ranging use of the tool across various agencies. Newsweek has reached out to the White House for comment via email on Saturday. Why It Matters DOGE was created by Trump through an executive order to improve efficiency and reduce waste in the federal government. It was led by billionaire Elon Musk who departed the administration in May. The reported plan represents one of the most aggressive attempts by the Trump administration to overhaul the federal regulatory system. By automating the deregulation process, the administration aims to reduce government spending and compliance burdens significantly. However, the use of AI to interpret complex legal language and determine regulatory necessity raises legal and practical concerns, particularly regarding accuracy, oversight, and the future role of civil servants in shaping public policy, according to the Post. What to Know The "DOGE AI Deregulation Decision Tool," developed by engineers brought into government under Elon Musk's DOGE initiative, is programmed to scan about 200,000 existing federal rules and flag those that are either outdated or not legally required. According to a PowerPoint presentation dated July 1 that was obtained by the newspaper, the tool estimates that approximately 100,000 of those rules could be eliminated, primarily through automation with minimal human input. The projection claims this could save trillions in compliance costs and spark increased external investment. At the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), AI has already reviewed over 1,000 regulatory sections in under two weeks. Similarly, it was responsible for "100% of deregulations" at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), according to the PowerPoint presentation. The Post, however, reported it was not able to confirm the use of AI at the agency independently. When asked about the use of AI for deregulation, White House spokesman Harrison Fields emphasized to the newspaper that "all options are being explored" to meet the president's deregulation goals. He clarified that no single plan has been finalized, and the effort is still in early, creative stages with ongoing consultation within the White House. DOGE plans to complete agency-specific deregulation lists by September 1 and finish nationwide rollout by January 20, 2026—labeled in internal documents as "Relaunch America." Agencies are currently receiving training on how to integrate the AI tool into their regulatory review process. The presentation claims the tool could save 93 percent of the labor typically required to gut federal rules, reducing what would usually take 3.6 million work hours to just 36. Despite these goals, some federal employees expressed concern about accuracy. One HUD employee told the Post that the AI misinterpreted statutes and flagged legal language as non-compliant when it was accurate. HUD confirmed to the newspaper that while the agency is exploring AI to streamline efficiency, the system is not intended to replace expert judgment. The push to eliminate regulations is not new for Trump. In January, he issued an executive order mandating the repeal of 10 rules for every new one added. Departments like Transportation and Labor have already reported dozens of regulatory cuts. However, experts question whether such repeals will withstand scrutiny under the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the legal process for rescinding rules. Previous attempts to bypass procedural safeguards—such as Trump's reversal of showerhead regulations—have faced legal scrutiny. DOGE's lawyers have reportedly vetted the tool, but concerns remain about whether its recommendations will be upheld in court or trusted by the private sector. While DOGE initially tried to play a leading role in the deregulation campaign, internal resistance from federal employees has slowed momentum. Agencies questioned DOGE's subject matter expertise and hesitated to outsource rulemaking authority to a third-party system. Moreover, the administration's efforts to downsize the federal workforce have hampered its ability to implement the deregulation strategy. An American flag waves at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 10 in Washington, D.C. An American flag waves at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 10 in Washington, People Are Saying Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, told The Washington Post about Trump's unilateral efforts to cut regulations: "There's been some flashy sideshow efforts to avoid the legal strictures, but in general, they don't stick." White House spokesman Harrison Fields wrote in an email obtained by The Washington Post: "The DOGE experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness." What Happens Next? Over the next several months, agencies will use the DOGE AI tool to select rules for repeal, respond to public comments, and finalize deregulation plans. Whether the courts, the public, and the agencies themselves accept that transformation remains uncertain.
USA Today
11 hours ago
- USA Today
Do you need $1 million to be financially 'comfortable'? Answers here.
You don't need a million dollars to be financially comfortable. A little over $800,000 will do. That's the takeaway from the new Modern Wealth Survey by Charles Schwab. It may be mostly a matter of semantics, but American consumers see a big difference between the financial goals of comfort and wealth: A nearly $1.5 million difference, to be exact. Whatever else 'wealthy' might mean in 2025, numerous surveys attest, it definitely means having a net worth over $1 million. In the latest annual Schwab survey, released in July, consumers set the wealth bar at $2.3 million. But how much money does it take to be merely 'comfortable'? In four past surveys, consumers equated financial comfort to a net worth between $624,000 and $1 million. (The $1 million figure came in 2023, a year of rampant inflation.) This year's number: $839,000. What's the difference between 'comfort' and 'wealth'? What, then, is the difference between comfort and wealth? The Schwab survey didn't define the terms. Respondents were left to decide on their own. To Rob Williams, managing director of financial planning at Schwab, the distinction boils down to needs, wants and wishes. To many American consumers, Williams said, financial comfort means having enough net worth to meet their needs and wants. 'I can pay my mortgage. I have a home. I can pay my medical bills. I don't have to go paycheck to paycheck. I have enough to retire,' Williams said. 'That's what financial comfort means to me.' To be wealthy, he said, means you have enough money to satisfy your needs and wants, and also your wishes. 'Wishes are those things that are aspirational,' he said: Having enough money to retire when you want, or to vacation where and when you please. 'I think of wealth as, 'I have a lot more choices in how I use my time,'' Williams said. Here's how Americans define 'wealthy' Schwab asked survey respondents to define what wealthy means to them. Here, in descending order, are the most-cited factors: Is financial 'comfort' more dream than reality? Only 11% of consumers said they believe they are wealthy now: evidence, perhaps, that wealth is largely aspirational. Another 24% said they think they are on track to be wealthy. Gen Z and millennials were especially optimistic about wealth. More than two-fifths of both groups reported being either wealthy or on track to become so. Financial comfort, too, seems to be more of a dream than a reality. In the Schwab survey, only 20% of respondents reported feeling comfortable now. Another 28% said they're on track to achieve that status. Here, again, Gen Z and millennial Americans voiced more optimism, with more than half of each group saying they are financially comfortable, or getting there. The Schwab survey, conducted in April and May, reached a representative sample of 2,200 adults. Most American households are not particularly wealthy A net worth of $839,000, the cutoff for financial comfort in the Schwab survey, actually falls below the average net worth for American families in 2022, which was roughly $1.1 million, according to the federal Survey of Consumer Finances. But the super-wealthy skew that average. The median household net worth – think of it as the middle figure in a long list of numbers – is only $192,700. Lili Vasileff, a certified financial planner in Greenwich, Connecticut, defines financial comfort as essentially never having to worry about money. 'Comfortable, to me, means that I can meet my bills every day of the week, that I don't live paycheck to paycheck, that I have savings set aside as an emergency fund, and that I have made good progress toward achieving my financial goals,' she said. Being wealthy, she said, is about financial freedom and loftier goals. 'Wealthy, to me, means that I have savings that I don't need to dip into, and I can create a legacy for my children, that I have the ability to have a little more ego in terms of the quality of things that I want,' she said. 'You may feel like you're really comfortable at $800,000,' Vasileff said. But a lot depends on how much of the money is liquid, how much is investable, and how much is earmarked for spending, among other factors. The role of financial wellness Robert Brokamp, a senior adviser at The Motley Fool, defines financial comfort in much the same way the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau defines financial well-being. It's a four-part definition: 'I think anyone who meets those criteria, they're comfortable,' Brokamp said. Brokamp also has a theory to explain the $2.3 million figure that Schwab survey-takers defined as 'wealthy' in 2025. It has to do with the faded luster of the American millionaire. 'If you're a millionaire, you're more than comfortable,' Brokamp said. 'But there's still this idea that being a millionaire ain't what it used to be.' Brokamp thinks that impulse may explain why the annual Schwab surveys consistently define 'wealthy' as a figure closer to $2 million: $2.2 million in 2022 and 2023, and $2.5 million in 2024. 'If you've got $2 million, you're a multimillionaire,' he said. 'And if you're a multimillionaire, you've got to be wealthy.'
Newsweek
12 hours ago
- Newsweek
Social Security COLA for 2026 and Beyond: What Seniors Want
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. American seniors are frustrated with how Social Security adjusts for inflation, and they want change. A new report from The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) shows a clear demand among retirees to improve the way the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is calculated. According to the group's latest survey of 1,92 individuals over the age of 62, 34 percent of respondents identified updating the COLA formula as their top policy priority for enhancing Social Security benefits. And when presented with specific policy options to raise future COLAs, seniors overwhelmingly supported a shift to a more targeted inflation measure. Currently, the Social Security Administration (SSA) calculates COLA based on the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). This index tracks inflation using the spending habits of younger, urban workers, not retirees. Since 1975, COLAs have been applied annually based on CPI-W data gathered during the third quarter of the year (July through September), with the goal of ensuring benefits rise in line with everyday costs, such as housing, food, and medical care. This year, benefits rose by 2.5 percent. The TSCL, based on current CPI-W readings, expects the 2026 COLA to increase slightly to 2.6 percent. However, regardless of the boost, for many retirees, that formula no longer works. According to the TSCL survey, 68 percent of seniors support replacing the current CPI-W model with the CPI-E, or Consumer Price Index for the Elderly. Developed by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CPI-E is an index that tracks the spending habits of Americans aged 62 and older, focusing on the types of goods and services seniors typically use, such as health care, housing, and prescription drugs. "CPI-E is designed to better reflect the spending habits of people aged 62 and older," Colin Ruggiero, co-founder at told Newsweek. "It gives more weight to health care and housing costs which are two of the fastest-growing expenses for seniors. Switching to CPI-E would make COLAs more relevant and responsive to the real financial pressures seniors face." Chris Motola, a financial analyst at told Newsweek: "The main advantage of CPI-E would be to more heavily weight health care and housing costs in COLA calculations, both of which tend to disproportionately eat into seniors' budgets." Another popular idea is making up for what's already been lost. The TSCL survey found that 57 percent of respondents support a one-time "catch-up" COLA payment to compensate for years when benefits failed to keep pace with actual living costs. Composite image created by Newsweek. Composite image created by Newsweek. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva "A catch-up COLA would be a recognition that past adjustments haven't kept pace with reality," Ruggiero said. "While it's feasible, it would require congressional approval and carry a hefty budgetary cost. Politically, it could gain traction as a way to restore fairness, especially if framed as a correction rather than a new ongoing expense." Still, the limits of these proposals are clear. While COLA reforms could help stabilize seniors' purchasing power, experts caution that they won't fix everything. "Adjusting the COLA is a great start, but it's not the cure-all," said Ruggiero. "We also need broader reforms to strengthen the entire retirement system, including benefit adequacy, solvency, and support for low-income seniors." Motola agreed: "It would go a long way, but again, a major problem is that Social Security isn't really meant to carry the burden alone. We've made it very difficult for people to save money for retirement, and the loss of pensions has placed enormous stress on the system."
