What Are NILFs: Gen Z's Exit And Boomers' Return To The Labor Force
The term "NILF," or Not in Labor Force, has long been used by economists to describe people who are neither working nor actively looking for work. Bill Maher recently reignited attention to the term when he questioned whether Gen Z would be willing to take on new manufacturing jobs if more became available. He pointed out that over 10 percent of American men in their prime working years now fall into this category of lacking a desire to work, compared to just two percent in 1960. His comments reflect a broader concern echoed in Monster's 2024 State of the Graduate Report, which found that many Gen Z graduates feel overqualified for entry-level jobs and are holding out for roles that align with their values and expectations. Together, Maher's remarks and the data highlight a growing tension between the jobs being offered and the jobs new workers are actually willing to accept. Meanwhile, on the other end of the age spectrum, many Boomers still want to work but are often turned away, not because of lack of ability or interest, but due to persistent age discrimination that limits their opportunities.
Why Gen Z Graduates Are Hesitating Before Joining The Labor Force
The 2024 Monster State of the Graduate Report gives a real glimpse into the mindset of new grads. The majority feel optimistic about landing a job after graduation, but a surprising number feel overqualified for the jobs being offered. Is it entitlement, or is it a mismatch between what they've been taught to expect and what most early jobs actually involve?
This generation is entering the job market with high expectations, often emphasizing competitive pay, meaningful work, and rapid growth opportunities. While those goals are understandable, it raises the question of whether they are overlooking the realities most new employees face when starting out. According to Monster, there was a 12 percent increase from 2024 to 2025 in students who said the traditional 9-to-5 feels outdated. But if every structure is considered outdated before it's experienced, is that a sign of progress, or a disconnect from how careers are actually built? Opting out of tradition may sound bold, but it's worth asking what might be lost along the way.
How Mental Health Influences Gen Z's Relationship With The Labor Force
Another key stat that stands out in Monster's report is that 91 percent of Gen Z grads say they want to be able to talk about mental health at work. They want to work where psychological safety is built into the culture, not just listed as a benefit. And they're willing to walk away from jobs that don't reflect that. They are evaluating employers as critically as employers have historically evaluated them. Many of the CHROs I interviewed for a podcast several years ago noted that even then, potential hires were coming in with high expectations. Those CHROs seemed to think that this was just the way of the modern workplace, and didn't complain about it.
Why The Traditional Labor Force Model Isn't Working For Gen Z
The traditional workplace structure isn't just being questioned by Gen Z; it's being left behind. In-office expectations are falling out of favor. Strict 9-to-5s feel arbitrary. Companies that insist on outdated models are watching talent walk away. And sometimes they're watching it happen before they even get to the interview stage.
If anyone got ghosted in the past, it was the applicants. Now it happens the other way around, with candidates walking away from employers. It's because Gen Z doesn't want to waste time on organizations that don't meet their criteria. Salary transparency, growth potential, and flexibility are not just perks to this generation. They're minimum requirements.
The Complexity About Gen Z In Today's Labor Force
When people like Maher express frustration about the NILF trend, there's often an assumption that the labor force is shrinking simply because people don't want to work. But that view may oversimplify a more complex reality. While some are opting out altogether, others are making different choices like returning to school, pursuing gig work, starting businesses, or stepping away for mental health or caregiving needs. Whether these alternatives count as "work" in the traditional sense is up for debate, but they represent real activity outside the usual employment model.
That complexity is especially visible among Gen Z. A recent statistic Maher cited revealed that 57 percent of Gen Z aspire to become social media influencers. The appeal of having flexible hours, creative control, and the chance to monetize personal interests is easy to see. But very few actually earn enough to make a full-time living from it. Most struggle to generate consistent income, and the odds of long-term success are low. That raises a larger question: is the widespread ambition to become an influencer a sign of innovation, or of disconnection from economic reality? The answer may be both.
How Realistic Is It For Gen Z To Say No To Being In The Labor Force
But is it realistic for young people to just say no to work? In previous generations, the idea of opting out of work without a backup plan wasn't on the table. Boomers and Gen X didn't expect their parents to support them into adulthood, and many took whatever job they could get simply to stay afloat. The pressure to contribute financially wasn't optional. While it's commendable that Gen Z wants purpose-driven careers and healthier boundaries, the reality is that bills still need to be paid. Flexibility sounds ideal, but without a steady income, independence and freedom can be hard to sustain. At some point, every generation has to balance idealism with practicality, and the challenge now is figuring out where that line should be drawn.
That tension between idealism and workplace reality often shows up in how employees respond to discussions about performance and productivity. When I write about how leaders can improve productivity to avoid quiet quitting, the strongest pushback often comes from employees. Some feel overworked and underpaid, and argue that any push for greater output is just another way to help executives profit while employees fall further behind. There is a deep undercurrent of resentment in parts of the workforce, and it's not entirely unfounded. Many workers feel burned by promises of loyalty or advancement that never came. But when that frustration turns into a refusal to participate at all, it's hard to see how anyone benefits. The labor force works best when both sides, leadership and employees, see value in contributing. If either side stops trying, the whole system suffers.
Why Older Generations Are Reconsidering Their Place In The Labor Force
While much of the spotlight is on Gen Z, older generations are also navigating challenges in the labor force. Millennials and Gen X report rising age discrimination, especially in industries that prioritize younger talent. Gen X in particular often finds itself stuck between Boomers who are delaying retirement and younger workers taking priority in hiring. With labor shortages in sectors like manufacturing, reskilling workers over 50 could be a practical solution. Although not yet a widespread trend, some older workers may be ready to step in where younger ones hesitate, especially in roles that value experience and dependability.
Why Opting Out Of The Labor Force Doesn't Mean Opting Out Of Ambition
Every generation redefines what work means. Gen Z isn't rejecting work entirely. They're rejecting systems that feel outdated in a world where nearly everything else has changed. At the same time, older generations with valuable experience are being overlooked. Gen X and Millennials often face age-related barriers that have little to do with ability. If employers are struggling to fill roles, maybe the issue isn't just with Gen Z. Maybe the jobs themselves aren't keeping up. Instead of trying to force a return to what used to work in the labor force, it may be time to think more broadly about how to engage talent across all age groups. The goal shouldn't be to pressure any generation into fitting a model that no longer works for today's realities. It should be to understand what makes people want to work, and build from there.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
4 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
New tax break for auto loans could save some buyers thousands of dollars. But will it boost sales?
Millions of people receive a federal tax deduction for the interest they pay on home loans. Under President Donald Trump's new tax-cut law, many people for the first time also could claim a tax deduction for interest on their vehicle loans. The new tax break will be available even to people who don't itemize deductions. But there are some caveats that could limit its reach. The vehicles must be new, not used. They must be assembled in the U.S. And the loans must be issued no sooner than this year, to list just a few qualifications. Candidate Trump promised an auto loan interest tax break Trump pledged while campaigning last year to make interest on car loans tax-deductible. He said it would make car ownership more affordable and 'stimulate massive domestic auto production.' The idea made it into the big tax-cut bill passed by Congress, which Trump signed into law July 4. The law allows taxpayers to deduct up to $10,000 of interest payments annually on loans for new American-made vehicles from 2025 through 2028. It applies to cars, motorcycles, sport utility vehicles, minivans, vans and pickup trucks weighing less than 14,000 pounds, a threshold referred to as light vehicles. But it only applies to vehicles purchased for personal use, not for fleets or commercial purposes. The tax break can be claimed starting on 2025 income tax returns. But the deduction phases out for individuals with incomes between $100,000 and $150,000 or joint taxpayers with incomes between $200,000 and $250,000. Those earning more cannot claim the tax break. Millions of buyers could benefit, but millions of others will not U.S. automobile dealers sold 15.9 million new light vehicles last year, a little over half of which were assembled in the U.S, according to Cox Automotive. It says around 60% of retail sales are financed with loans. After excluding fleet and commercial vehicles and customers above the income cutoff, an estimated 3.5 million new vehicle loans could be eligible for the tax break this year, if purchasing patterns stay the same, said Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox Automotive. It's the assembly plant, not the automaker's headquarters that matters The tax break applies to vehicles assembled in the U.S., no matter where the company making them is headquartered. All Tesla vehicles sold in the U.S. are assembled in this country. But so are all Acura brands, the luxury model of Japanese automaker Honda. Last year, 78% of Ford vehicles sold in the U.S. were assembled in this country, according to Cox Automotive. But customers wanting the tax break will need to pay attention to specific models. While the Ford Mustang is assembled in Michigan, the Mustang Mach-E is built in Mexico. General Motors assembles all of its Cadillacs in the U.S. But just 44% of its Chevrolets sold last year were assembled in the U.S., and just 14% of Buicks, according to Cox Automotive. That's a lower U.S-assembled rate than Honda (60%), Toyota (52%) and Nissan (48%), which all are headquartered in Japan. Taxpayers could save hundreds of dollars a year The average new vehicle loan is about $44,000 financed over six years. Interest rates vary by customer, so the savings will, too. In general, the tax deduction will decline after the initial year, because interest payments on loans are frontloaded while principal payments grow on the back end. At a 9.3% interest rate, an average new vehicle buyer could save about $2,200 on taxes over four years, Smoke said. The tax savings would be less on a loan at 6.5%, which is the rate figured into calculations by the American Financial Services Association, a consumer credit industry trade group. Some people also could see a reduction in state income taxes Whereas the tax deduction for home loan interest can be claimed only by people itemizing on their tax returns, Congress wrote the deduction for auto loan interest so that it can apply to all taxpayers, including those claiming the standard deduction. On a tax form, the auto loan deduction will come before the calculation of a taxpayer's adjusted gross income. That's an important distinction, because many states use a taxpayer's federal adjusted gross income as the starting point for figuring their state income taxes. If that income figure is lower, it could reduce the state taxes owed. The verdict is out on whether the tax break will boost sales At Bowen Scarff Ford in Kent, Washington, customers started asking about the auto loan tax deduction before Congress had even taken a final vote on the tax-cut bill, said General Manager Paul Ray. So he decided to promote it on the dealer's website. A website ribbon exclaims: 'CAR LOAN TAX DEDUCTION NOW AVAILABLE" while also promoting an electric vehicle tax credit that is ending soon as a result of Trump's tax-cut law. 'I think it's going to help incentivize vehicle purchases through this year," Ray said. Celia Winslow, president and CEO of the American Financial Services Association, concurred: 'For some people deciding — should I buy it, should I not — this could be something that tips the scale.' Others remain skeptical. According to Smoke's math, the average annual tax savings is smaller than a single month's loan payment for a new vehicle. 'I don't think it moves the needle on somebody on the fence of buying a new vehicle or not," Smoke said. "But I think it could influence their decision to finance that vehicle instead of paying cash or instead of leasing a vehicle.'
Indianapolis Star
6 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Republicans stooped to Democrats' level using Trump's tax bill to buy votes
Now that President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act has been signed into law, we can get into analyzing what is actually in the legislation. There are a few things that are clear to me as a conservative who hoped Republicans would push sound fiscal policies. Primarily, this is a flawed conservative policy. While it is a good thing that the 2017 Trump tax cuts were extended, there remain a ton of problems with the bill. Many of the tax break provisions have less to do with economics and more to do with pandering to the American people. Congressional Republicans seemingly made little attempt to justify their poor fiscal ideas, choosing instead to pass Trump's agenda by any means necessary. More: Data centers are inevitable, but why should Indiana pay for their energy demand? | Opinion However, the law goes further, creating new tax exemptions for Social Security, tips and overtime pay. These policies, in addition to the poor policy of an increased cap on state and local taxes, are little more than bribes to the American people. Opinion: Trump's tax bill will crush the rural voters who chose him I'm all for new tax cuts, provided we are reducing spending at the same time. But there is no economic rationale for exempting any of these forms of income from taxation. These incomes are not unique in their impact on the economy and should not be treated as such. The only reason for not taxing tips or overtime in favor of other forms of income is that MAGA lawmakers think they can buy votes. It's a tactic often employed by congressional Democrats, who promise either student loan forgiveness or taxing the ultrawealthy in order to buy middle-class and youth votes. Conservatives should not be proud of our leaders for stooping so low. Not only are these cuts not coherent in theory, they aren't even fiscally sound conservative policies. The issue with this law is that it overlooks the increasingly massive deficit that will be incurred to fund it, as well as the aforementioned new tax breaks. While it attempts to bridge this gap with good policies, such as work requirements for Medicaid and food stamp benefits, it isn't enough. Even after accounting for the economic growth the tax cuts are anticipated to generate, the bill is estimated to add $3.8 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Tax cuts paid for through deficit spending aren't really tax cuts. The cuts still need to be paid for, and both options for doing so would be an additional burden on the American people. The first option is through borrowing money, which not only further increases the national debt but also increases the revenue required later to repay that debt. Second, this is achieved through printing more money, which is inflationary and places further costs on Americans. There is no magic third way that allows the government to cut taxes and keep spending without, at some point, hurting Americans. The only way to truly create tax cuts is by commensurately cutting spending at the same time. However, responsible budgets are not the goal of the current GOP. The main goal is to deliver on Trump's populist attempts to bribe voters, even if, ultimately, this will hurt those voters.
Business Upturn
8 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Ex-CIA Insider Points to Overlooked U.S. Resource as Possible Gamechanger in Trump's Economic Agenda
Washington, D.C., July 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — A presentation from former CIA advisor and White House insider Jim Rickards is raising new questions about the role long-ignored federal resources could play in supporting President Trump's agenda. Could this be a big part of Trump's upcoming economic proposal—widely referred to as the 'Big Beautiful Bill?' The case Rickards lays out is simple: the U.S. may already own the resources it needs to support major development—without borrowing, printing, or taxing. The Mineral Wealth America Forgot In the presentation, Rickards draws attention to a vast inventory of minerals buried beneath U.S. federal land—lithium, uranium, copper, and rare earths. '$516 billion is here in the Salton Sea area of California… $3.1 trillion is held in Nome, Alaska. And $7.35 trillion is here, in Midland, Texas…' Rickards writes. According to him, these assets have remained untouched 'because politicians haven't been able to raid it… which has allowed it to grow… for decades'. 'We're Going to Open Them Up' President Trump recently signaled an impending shift in resource policy: 'There are certain areas where we have great, raw earth… and we're not allowed to use it because of the environment. I'm going to open them up'. Rickards sees this as a potential inflection point. 'Trump is re-opening our mineral-rich Federal Lands. And fast-tracking companies that could recover trillions of dollars' worth of resources, right here in America' . This shift may quietly complement larger efforts to reinvigorate American manufacturing, supply chains, and self-reliance. Long-Stalled Projects May Be Back in Play According to Rickards, some of the most promising sites have been gridlocked for decades: 'Resolution Copper Mine… 29 years. Pebble Mine… since 1990. Thacker Pass Lithium Mine… since 1978' . 'We know exactly where these minerals are. We know they're worth trillions of dollars. And now—for the first time in half a century—we can go get them' . Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same. Ahmedabad Plane Crash
