首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 商潮 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

美国未受过大学教育的男性处境堪忧

Catherina Gioino
2026-04-21

房租上涨迫使男性搬回父母家居住的比例高于女性。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

图片来源:GETTY IMAGES

男性与父母同住的概率几乎是女性的两倍。一项最新研究指出,这一趋势对未受过大学教育的男性影响尤为明显——与受过大学教育的男性相比,他们更难保住工作。

随着全美房租飙升,越来越多男性选择搬回父母家中,而许多人在搬回老家后便不再工作。事实上,目前六分之一(16%)未受过大学教育的男性与父母同住,而在受过大学教育的男性中,这一比例仅为8%。美国男孩与男性研究所(American Institute for Boys and Men)研究生研究员加布里埃尔·彭罗斯在一篇最新工作论文中,通过梳理长达六十年的美国人口普查数据,明确指出住房成本上涨与男性劳动参与率下降之间存在直接关联。

彭罗斯在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示:“确实存在一些非常现实的经济因素,正在压缩美国未受过大学教育男性的选择空间。我们看到的一些现象,本质上是这一群体对一个将其生活成本挤压到难以负担的体系所做出的理性反应。”

自1960年以来,美国实际房租上涨了150%。同一时期,受自动化、全球化和制造业崩溃的影响,未受过大学教育男性的工资几乎停滞不前。彭罗斯在论文中指出,随着房租上涨,越来越多美国人被迫搬回父母家中居住。男性搬回父母家的比例几乎是女性的两倍。而数据显示,那些回到父母家的未受过大学教育男性,正越来越多地彻底退出劳动力市场。

美国企业研究所(American Enterprise Institute,AEI)高级研究员、机会与社会流动中心主任斯科特·温希普认为,这一问题之所以更令人担忧,是因为如今未受过大学教育的男性所面临的劣势,比起彭罗斯研究的时间起点20世纪60年代更为严峻。

温希普对《财富》杂志表示:“如今,未受过大学教育的男性人数比上一代少得多,因此我们确实应该对这一群体给予高度关注。与前几代人相比,他们的劣势更为明显,这是因为,如今年轻人中拥有学士学位的比例已经上升到约40%,而过去这一比例要低得多。这一点令我深感忧虑。”

房租上涨迫使人们搬回父母家中

当某一地区房租上涨10%时,未受过大学教育的男性搬回父母家的概率会上升1.1个百分点。彭罗斯在论文中采用了山脉、海岸线和湖泊等地理因素作为研究工具,她发现在地形限制建筑开发、压缩住房供给的地区,住房成本上涨与当地工资水平或就业前景完全无关。

她解释称:“在某些地区,住房成本更高,并不是因为人们收入更高从而推高了价格,而是因为湖泊、海岸线等地理因素限制了房屋供给。简单来说,就是因为更难建设,所以房价更高。”

温希普指出:“如果在住房成本高昂的城市中,没有出现更多男性与父母同住的现象,那才令人意外,毕竟顾名思义,这些城市的住房可负担性本就更低。”他长期在美国企业研究所研究男性收入变化趋势。

论文指出,与此同时,外部环境因素在某种程度上也起到了推波助澜的作用。婴儿潮一代父母拥有大量住房资产,比以往任何时候都更有能力接纳成年子女同住。彭罗斯表示:“当成年子女因房价过高被‘挤出’住房市场时,父母为他们提供支持,在经济学上被称为一种‘正常商品’——也就是说,人们越富有,在这方面的支出就越多。父母赚得更多,而子女的收入却在缩水。”

全美房地产经纪人协会(National Association of REALTORS,NAR)会员与消费者调查研究主管布兰迪·斯诺登提供的数据也印证了这一趋势。她在接受《财富》杂志采访、谈及NAR发布的《2026年代际趋势报告》(2026 Generation Trends)时指出:“婴儿潮一代仍是近期购房的主力军。”报告显示,四分之一的婴儿潮一代近期购买了多代同堂住房。“这让他们既可以照顾年迈的父母或亲属,也能接纳搬回家中或从未离开的成年子女。”

在25至45岁的男性中,与父母同住的比例自20世纪60年代以来几乎翻倍,从7%上升至目前的12%。女性的这一比例同样有所上升,但基本维持在7%。至于为何这一现象对男性影响更大,关键在于子女因素。彭罗斯单独分析那些没有子女且未受过大学教育的女性群体后,发现她们的行为模式与男性几乎完全一致。

她表示:“我将没有大学学历且没有子女的女性单独拿出来分析后发现,她们的劳动参与率以及与父母同住的比例,变得与这些男性非常接近。差异主要在于是否有年幼子女。”

未受过大学教育的男性与父母同住后便不再工作

彭罗斯这篇论文中最关键的发现,是男性搬回父母家之后的状态变化。与独立居住者相比,与父母同住的男性进入劳动力市场的可能性要低20个百分点。与此同时,房租每上涨10%,劳动力参与率就会下降0.5个百分点。初步估算显示,未受过大学教育的男性群体总就业下降,约三分之一可以归因于住房成本上升。

温希普在评价这一发现时表示:“这对我来说并不意外。因为通过观察那些二三十岁仍住在父母家的成年人,你会发现他们往往是同龄人中处境最不利的群体。因此,他们在找工作、保住工作方面本就面临更多障碍,也更有可能最终完全退出劳动力市场。”

在30岁出头、未受过大学教育的男性中,有五分之一与父母同住;这一比例在40岁左右仍然较高,约为14%。在既住在父母家、又不工作的男性群体中,有四分之一从未有过任何工作经历,而这一比例在1980年约为五分之一。

彭罗斯指出:“有些人反驳说,也许这些男性只是把父母家当作奋斗的跳板。但事实似乎并非如此。那些住在父母家的男性,实际上已经完全脱离了劳动力市场。”

分区限制和建筑开发限制不仅推高了城市住房成本,也在无意中压低了最无力承担高住房成本的男性群体的劳动参与率。彭罗斯在报告中写道:“限制住房建设的政策,抬高了‘独立生活成本’,在无意中削弱了劳动力参与。”

她表示:“我们在讨论住房政策时,往往只关注‘可负担性’,但其实更关键的是要让人们具备进入劳动力市场的条件。如果纽约等城市的政策能够降低住房成本,应该会提高男性的劳动参与率,尤其是未受过大学教育的男性。”

温希普也认同彭罗斯的观点。他指出,纽约、旧金山等城市生活成本高昂,往往有更多就业机会,但同时也存在房租高企这把“双刃剑”。

温希普表示:“这其实指向了问题的一个真正‘根源’,那就是土地使用规定和分区制度对住房建设的限制。遗憾的是,恰恰是那些经济最活跃、配套资源丰富、更有利于实现阶层上升的城市,反而更容易受到这些分区问题的制约。因此,这个领域绝对值得政策制定者重点关注。”

婚姻:被忽视的关键因素

美国女性在劳动力市场中的人数,有史以来第三次超过男性。而随着女性收入超过男性,她们在家庭中的付出也在增加。温希普呼应了此前的一些研究观点,认为传统婚姻观念的弱化,是这一现象背后的主要原因之一。

温希普表示:“我认为,一个被忽视的关键问题,其实是结婚率的下降。过去,许多年轻男性和工薪阶层男性会结婚,因此他们可以与伴侣共同承担更高的住房成本,而不必搬回父母家。但如今,随着结婚率大幅下降,单身男性显著增多,尤其是在年轻人和工薪阶层中更为明显。在住房成本高企的情况下,他们比过去更难承受这种经济压力。我认为,这一点是这篇论文很多发现背后的重要原因。”

他进一步表示:“如果你是一名年轻男性,面对这种现状,你可能看不到未来承担家庭责任的必要。在这样一个不再由男性担任主要家庭经济支柱的新环境中,他们并不清楚自己的角色定位。这会让他们更倾向于减少工作投入,甚至选择继续和父母同住。我认为,婚姻问题才是真正被忽视的关键。”(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

男性与父母同住的概率几乎是女性的两倍。一项最新研究指出,这一趋势对未受过大学教育的男性影响尤为明显——与受过大学教育的男性相比,他们更难保住工作。

随着全美房租飙升,越来越多男性选择搬回父母家中,而许多人在搬回老家后便不再工作。事实上,目前六分之一(16%)未受过大学教育的男性与父母同住,而在受过大学教育的男性中,这一比例仅为8%。美国男孩与男性研究所(American Institute for Boys and Men)研究生研究员加布里埃尔·彭罗斯在一篇最新工作论文中,通过梳理长达六十年的美国人口普查数据,明确指出住房成本上涨与男性劳动参与率下降之间存在直接关联。

彭罗斯在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示:“确实存在一些非常现实的经济因素,正在压缩美国未受过大学教育男性的选择空间。我们看到的一些现象,本质上是这一群体对一个将其生活成本挤压到难以负担的体系所做出的理性反应。”

自1960年以来,美国实际房租上涨了150%。同一时期,受自动化、全球化和制造业崩溃的影响,未受过大学教育男性的工资几乎停滞不前。彭罗斯在论文中指出,随着房租上涨,越来越多美国人被迫搬回父母家中居住。男性搬回父母家的比例几乎是女性的两倍。而数据显示,那些回到父母家的未受过大学教育男性,正越来越多地彻底退出劳动力市场。

美国企业研究所(American Enterprise Institute,AEI)高级研究员、机会与社会流动中心主任斯科特·温希普认为,这一问题之所以更令人担忧,是因为如今未受过大学教育的男性所面临的劣势,比起彭罗斯研究的时间起点20世纪60年代更为严峻。

温希普对《财富》杂志表示:“如今,未受过大学教育的男性人数比上一代少得多,因此我们确实应该对这一群体给予高度关注。与前几代人相比,他们的劣势更为明显,这是因为,如今年轻人中拥有学士学位的比例已经上升到约40%,而过去这一比例要低得多。这一点令我深感忧虑。”

房租上涨迫使人们搬回父母家中

当某一地区房租上涨10%时,未受过大学教育的男性搬回父母家的概率会上升1.1个百分点。彭罗斯在论文中采用了山脉、海岸线和湖泊等地理因素作为研究工具,她发现在地形限制建筑开发、压缩住房供给的地区,住房成本上涨与当地工资水平或就业前景完全无关。

她解释称:“在某些地区,住房成本更高,并不是因为人们收入更高从而推高了价格,而是因为湖泊、海岸线等地理因素限制了房屋供给。简单来说,就是因为更难建设,所以房价更高。”

温希普指出:“如果在住房成本高昂的城市中,没有出现更多男性与父母同住的现象,那才令人意外,毕竟顾名思义,这些城市的住房可负担性本就更低。”他长期在美国企业研究所研究男性收入变化趋势。

论文指出,与此同时,外部环境因素在某种程度上也起到了推波助澜的作用。婴儿潮一代父母拥有大量住房资产,比以往任何时候都更有能力接纳成年子女同住。彭罗斯表示:“当成年子女因房价过高被‘挤出’住房市场时,父母为他们提供支持,在经济学上被称为一种‘正常商品’——也就是说,人们越富有,在这方面的支出就越多。父母赚得更多,而子女的收入却在缩水。”

全美房地产经纪人协会(National Association of REALTORS,NAR)会员与消费者调查研究主管布兰迪·斯诺登提供的数据也印证了这一趋势。她在接受《财富》杂志采访、谈及NAR发布的《2026年代际趋势报告》(2026 Generation Trends)时指出:“婴儿潮一代仍是近期购房的主力军。”报告显示,四分之一的婴儿潮一代近期购买了多代同堂住房。“这让他们既可以照顾年迈的父母或亲属,也能接纳搬回家中或从未离开的成年子女。”

在25至45岁的男性中,与父母同住的比例自20世纪60年代以来几乎翻倍,从7%上升至目前的12%。女性的这一比例同样有所上升,但基本维持在7%。至于为何这一现象对男性影响更大,关键在于子女因素。彭罗斯单独分析那些没有子女且未受过大学教育的女性群体后,发现她们的行为模式与男性几乎完全一致。

她表示:“我将没有大学学历且没有子女的女性单独拿出来分析后发现,她们的劳动参与率以及与父母同住的比例,变得与这些男性非常接近。差异主要在于是否有年幼子女。”

未受过大学教育的男性与父母同住后便不再工作

彭罗斯这篇论文中最关键的发现,是男性搬回父母家之后的状态变化。与独立居住者相比,与父母同住的男性进入劳动力市场的可能性要低20个百分点。与此同时,房租每上涨10%,劳动力参与率就会下降0.5个百分点。初步估算显示,未受过大学教育的男性群体总就业下降,约三分之一可以归因于住房成本上升。

温希普在评价这一发现时表示:“这对我来说并不意外。因为通过观察那些二三十岁仍住在父母家的成年人,你会发现他们往往是同龄人中处境最不利的群体。因此,他们在找工作、保住工作方面本就面临更多障碍,也更有可能最终完全退出劳动力市场。”

在30岁出头、未受过大学教育的男性中,有五分之一与父母同住;这一比例在40岁左右仍然较高,约为14%。在既住在父母家、又不工作的男性群体中,有四分之一从未有过任何工作经历,而这一比例在1980年约为五分之一。

彭罗斯指出:“有些人反驳说,也许这些男性只是把父母家当作奋斗的跳板。但事实似乎并非如此。那些住在父母家的男性,实际上已经完全脱离了劳动力市场。”

分区限制和建筑开发限制不仅推高了城市住房成本,也在无意中压低了最无力承担高住房成本的男性群体的劳动参与率。彭罗斯在报告中写道:“限制住房建设的政策,抬高了‘独立生活成本’,在无意中削弱了劳动力参与。”

她表示:“我们在讨论住房政策时,往往只关注‘可负担性’,但其实更关键的是要让人们具备进入劳动力市场的条件。如果纽约等城市的政策能够降低住房成本,应该会提高男性的劳动参与率,尤其是未受过大学教育的男性。”

温希普也认同彭罗斯的观点。他指出,纽约、旧金山等城市生活成本高昂,往往有更多就业机会,但同时也存在房租高企这把“双刃剑”。

温希普表示:“这其实指向了问题的一个真正‘根源’,那就是土地使用规定和分区制度对住房建设的限制。遗憾的是,恰恰是那些经济最活跃、配套资源丰富、更有利于实现阶层上升的城市,反而更容易受到这些分区问题的制约。因此,这个领域绝对值得政策制定者重点关注。”

婚姻:被忽视的关键因素

美国女性在劳动力市场中的人数,有史以来第三次超过男性。而随着女性收入超过男性,她们在家庭中的付出也在增加。温希普呼应了此前的一些研究观点,认为传统婚姻观念的弱化,是这一现象背后的主要原因之一。

温希普表示:“我认为,一个被忽视的关键问题,其实是结婚率的下降。过去,许多年轻男性和工薪阶层男性会结婚,因此他们可以与伴侣共同承担更高的住房成本,而不必搬回父母家。但如今,随着结婚率大幅下降,单身男性显著增多,尤其是在年轻人和工薪阶层中更为明显。在住房成本高企的情况下,他们比过去更难承受这种经济压力。我认为,这一点是这篇论文很多发现背后的重要原因。”

他进一步表示:“如果你是一名年轻男性,面对这种现状,你可能看不到未来承担家庭责任的必要。在这样一个不再由男性担任主要家庭经济支柱的新环境中,他们并不清楚自己的角色定位。这会让他们更倾向于减少工作投入,甚至选择继续和父母同住。我认为,婚姻问题才是真正被忽视的关键。”(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

Men are nearly twice as likely as women to be living with their parents, and a new study says it’s particularly harmful for non-college educated men, who are less likely to hold jobs compared to their college-educated counterparts.

As rents have surged across the country, more and more men are moving home, and once there, many stop working. In fact, one in six non-college men (16%) now live with their parents, compared to 8% of college-educated men. A new working paper from Gabrielle Penrose, a graduate student fellow at the American Institute for Boys and Men, follows six decades of U.S. Census data and draws a direct line between rising housing costs and the decline of male labor force participation.

“There are very real economic forces that are limiting the options for non-college-educated men in the United States,” Penrose told Fortune. “Some of what we’re seeing is simply rational responses to a system that’s pricing them out.”

Since 1960, real rents in the United States have risen 150%. Over that same period, wages for men without college degrees have barely moved, thanks to automation, globalization, and the collapse of manufacturing. Penrose’s paper details that when rents rise, more Americans are forced back into the parental home. Men move home at nearly twice the rate of women. And non-college-educated men who end up there, the data shows, are increasingly dropping out of the workforce altogether.

For Scott Winship, a senior fellow and the director of the Center on Opportunity and Social Mobility at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the issue is doubly concerning because non-college-educated men may face more disadvantages today than what they would have experienced in the ’60s when Penrose first started looking.

“Today, there are many fewer non-college men than there were a generation ago, and so we should absolutely be concerned about non-college-educated men today,” Winship told Fortune. “They are a more disadvantaged group than they were in previous generations, just because the share of young adults with a bachelor’s degree is up to 40% or so now, versus in the past, when it was much lower. And so that makes me worry.”

Higher rents are forcing people back home

A 10% increase in local rents raises the likelihood that a non-college-educated man moves in with his parents by 1.1 percentage points. Penrose used geographic constraints like mountains, coastlines, and lakes as a research instrument in her paper and found that in areas where terrain limits construction and squeezes housing supply, costs are higher for reasons entirely unrelated to local wages or job prospects.

“In some areas, housing costs are higher not because people are earning more and driving up prices, but because there are limits to supply, because of geography: lakes, coastlines,” she said. “Housing is just more expensive there simply because it’s harder to build there.”

“It would be surprising if cities with higher housing costs didn’t have more men living at home just because, almost by definition, they’re less affordable,” said Winship, who has studied men’s earnings over time at the AEI.

Simultaneously, the environment is almost enabling it, her paper says. Baby boomer parents, sitting on significant housing wealth, are better positioned than ever to absorb adult children. “Providing for your adult children when they’re priced out of the housing market is kind of a ‘normal good,’ as economists call it, something people spend more on as they get richer,” Penrose said. “Parents are earning more and their sons are earning less.”

The data backs it up, according to Brandi Snowden, the National Association of REALTORS’ Director of Member and Consumer Survey Research. “Baby Boomers continued to make up the largest share of recent home buyers,” she told Fortune while referring to NAR’s 2026 Generation Trends report that showed a quarter of Boomers purchased multi-generational home recently. “This allowed them to care for aging parents or relatives, and accommodate adult children that may be moving back into their house, or who have never left. “

The share of men between 25 and 45 living with their parents has nearly doubled since the 1960s, from 7% to 12% today. Women’s rate has also risen, but remains flat at 7%. And the reason the effect falls harder on men than women comes down largely to children. When Penrose isolates women without college degrees who don’t have children at home, their patterns begin to mirror men’s almost exactly.

“When I look at women without a college degree who do not have children, their labor force participation and their rates of living with parents start to look much more like these men,” she said. “The difference is young children.”

Non-college men at home aren’t working

The most consequential finding in Penrose’s paper is what happens after men move in. Men living with their parents are 20 percentage points less likely to be in the labor force than those living independently. That same 10% rent increase is associated with a 0.5 percentage point decline in labor force participation. Initial estimates suggest housing costs could explain roughly a third of the total employment decline among non-college men.

“That’s not too surprising to me, just because if you’re looking at adults in their 20s or even 30s who are living at home, you’re looking at sort of the most disadvantaged guys in their cohort,” said Winship of Penrose’s findings. “So it makes sense that they’ve got other barriers to finding work, to keeping work—and that they’d be more likely to permanently drop out of the workforce.”

One in five non-college men in their early 30s live with their parents, and the rate remains elevated into their 40s, with roughly 14% at age 40. Among non-working men at home, a quarter have never held a job at all, up from one in five in 1980.

“Some of the pushback I was getting is people saying, ‘Maybe men are using it as a launchpad,'” Penrose said. “That doesn’t seem to be the case. These men who are living with their parents are completely detached from the labor market.”

Zoning restrictions and limits on construction don’t just make cities expensive, they inadvertently suppress workforce participation among the men least equipped to absorb the cost. “Policies that restrict housing construction inadvertently weaken labor force participation by raising the price of independence,” Penrose wrote in the report.

“When we think about housing policy, maybe we’re just thinking about affordability, but it’s also about getting people in the position where they’re able to access the labor market,” she said. “Policies that would make housing cheaper in cities like New York should increase participation for men, particularly men without college degrees.”

Winship agreed with Penrose’s point, saying high cost of living cities like New York and San Francisco are often where people can find more job opportunities—but it comes with the double-edged sword of higher rents.

“It points to a real villain in the story, which is just these land use regulations and zoning that constrain how much housing can be built,” Winship said. “Unfortunately, it’s often the cities that are most economically dynamic and have a lot of amenities, that are actually better at promoting upward mobility, that have these problems with zoning. So that’s definitely an area where policymakers should take a look.”

The hidden factor of marriage

Women, for the third time ever in history, now outnumber men in the workforce. And as women earn more than their male counterparts, they perform more labor at home. Winship echoed previous reports of a growing distancing from traditional values of marriage as a major reason for this phenomenon.

“I think, sort of the sleeper issue, is the decline in marriage. In the past, a lot of these younger men and working class men would have been married, and therefore they could have tolerated higher housing costs without having to move back home,” Winship said. “But because marriage has declined so much, you have a lot of single men, especially among young adults, and more so among working class adults. And when housing is expensive, they’re much more likely to find that financially burdensome than in the past. I think that is kind of underlying a lot of the findings of the paper.”

“If you’re a young man looking at the situation, you don’t see in the future that you’re going to need to be responsible for a family,” he concluded. “And they don’t really know what their role is in this new world where they’re not going to be the primary breadwinner. And so that pushes towards working less and potentially living at home with their parents. I think marriage really is the sleeper issue here.”

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开