在瑞士達沃斯論壇度過的最后一天,，美國總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普剛剛完成了一場全程讀電子提詞器的演講,，宣布美國對企業(yè)敞開懷抱，聲稱“美國第一不代表美國要單打獨斗,?！边@是一場自吹自擂的演說，但既給現(xiàn)場曾支持希拉里·克林頓的人溫柔一擊,，又避免了刺激財力雄厚的聽眾,。（和世界經(jīng)濟論壇創(chuàng)始人克勞斯·施瓦布一樣,，特朗普在達沃斯也接受了媒體拍照，但沒登上頭條,。）

上周四晚,，特朗普與15位企業(yè)高管共進晚餐。一位在場的人士告訴我,，特朗普和商界人士相處時比較放松,，也更愿意傾聽別人的看法。當天《財富》也舉辦了一場晚宴,，出席人數(shù)比特朗普主持的宴會略多,，大家探討了今年達沃斯論壇上政界和企業(yè)界出席者認為更緊迫的話題：人類未來的工作。

討論主要內(nèi)容并不是人工智能支持的機器人會不會讓全人類失業(yè),，因為人們已經(jīng)知道,、也承認人工智能會導致人類失去工作，而且應該想辦法鼓勵勞動者接受必要的技能培訓,。

本次《財富》雜志在達沃斯的晚宴規(guī)格相當高,。我這桌就有世界銀行行長金墉、IBM首席執(zhí)行官羅睿蘭,、軟件公司Salesforce的馬克·貝尼奧夫、聯(lián)合利華首席執(zhí)行官保羅·波爾曼,、帝斯曼集團飛克·謝白曼（帝斯曼公司名原來叫荷蘭國有煤礦公司,，但謝白曼喜歡解釋成“做有意義的事”）。

為新型經(jīng)濟培養(yǎng)人才雖然千頭萬緒,，但勢在必行,。《財富》晚宴上的討論涉及很多方面,，比如未雨綢繆,，多注意培養(yǎng)發(fā)展中國家的孩子，指導學校教授市場上迫切需求的技能（而不是研究詩歌之類藝術）,，關注企業(yè)需要哪些特定技能,，還要投入更多時間和資金確保具有相應技能的勞動力供應。

這些問題都很嚴峻,。但同席高管都很樂觀,，讓我大為震動。上周我多次感覺到出席達沃斯論壇的精英們都是樂觀派,。（是天生的還是后天養(yǎng)成的,？我想我知道答案。）

當然,，他們也有現(xiàn)實主義的一面,。最現(xiàn)實的可能就是金墉了，他曾任常春藤盟校達特茅斯學院校長，還是出色的內(nèi)科醫(yī)生,。他在講話中經(jīng)常提到“參考收入”,，意思是隨著發(fā)展中國家人民收入增加，他們會越發(fā)關心發(fā)達國家的人們收入增加了多少,。對比的結果是發(fā)展中國家的民眾對收入增加并不滿意,。對于關注全球經(jīng)濟和勞動力的人來說，又是一個令人擔憂的挑戰(zhàn),。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者: Pessy

審稿：夏林

Good morning one last time from Davos, where the U.S. president just finished reading a speech wholly from the teleprompter, declared America open for business, and asserted that “America first does not mean America alone.” It was a self-congratulatory speech that, but for one gentle jab at those in the room who supported Hillary Clinton, completely avoided provoking his well-heeled audience. (Trump did take a shot at the news media, as did World Economic Founder Klaus Schwab, but that won’t make headlines.)

Thursday night, as Donald Trump dined with a group of 15 business executives—I’m told by someone who was there the president was relaxed among fellow businesspeople and in listening mode—Fortune also hosted a dinner. We gathered an only-slightly-larger group to discuss one of the more pressing topics among corporate and government types this year in Davos, the future of work.

This wasn’t so much a conversation about whether robots powered by artificial intelligence will eliminate everyone’s jobs as an acknowledgement that technology will obliterate work as we know it and how to encourage the necessary “re-skilling” in response.

As happens in Davos, our’s was a high-powered gathering. At my table alone were Jim Kim, president of the World Bank, and CEOs Ginni Rometty of IBM , Marc Benioff of Salesforce , Paul Polman of Unilever , Andrew Liveris of Dow , and Feike Sijbesma of DSM. (The conglomerate’s name once was Dutch State Mines, but Sijbesma likes to say it stands for “Doing Something Meaningful.”)

Training people for the new economy is complicated and overwhelming. Our dinner conversation ranged from focusing on feeding children in developing countries as a precursor to educating them to teaching specifically employable skills (as opposed to, say, poetry) to the need for corporations who demand specific skills to do more with their time and money to ensure a supply of workers who have them.

It’s a daunting problem. At the same time, I was struck by the optimism of the group—though it occurred to me more than once this week that attendees at the forum are overwhelmingly optimists. (Nature or nurture? I think I know the answer.)

They also are realists, of course, perhaps no one more than Jim Kim, a former university president and groundbreaking physician. He speaks regularly, here for example, about the concept of “reference income,” the notion that as incomes rise in developing countries so does awareness of how much more money people in the developed world make. That leads directly to dissatisfaction, yet another challenge to worry about for those mindful of the global economy and its workforce.