AI 服務暫時不可用，以下為來源正文，待恢復後補全翻譯。
Corporate investment in AI is framed almost entirely as an efficiency story. Fewer people, lower costs, higher margins. What that framing skips is the system it operates inside: the same workers being replaced are the consumers whose spending sustains the revenue that justifies the investment in the first place. The Corporate Logic Is Sound — Until It Isn't The case for AI-driven workforce reduction is straightforward from a single-firm perspective. If a task that required ten employees can be handled by two employees with AI tools, the labour cost falls. Margins improve. Shareholders are satisfied. The problem is that this logic is being applied simultaneously across industries, not sequentially. When enough firms reduce headcount at the same scale at the same time, the aggregate effect stops being a microeconomic efficiency gain and starts being a macroeconomic demand event. This is not a novel observation in economics — it is a modern restatement of the composition fallacy: what is rational for one actor can be destructive when every actor does it at once. Phase 1 and Phase 2 Are Not the Same Problem The two-phase structure of AI-driven displacement matters for anyone thinking about when and how to intervene. Phase 1 is the direct substitution wave: roles that are automatable are automated, and headcount falls. This is the layer most commentary focuses on. It is real, it is already happening across customer service, back-office processing, content moderation, and entry-level data work, and it is expected to accelerate as model capability improves. Phase 2 is less discussed and harder to time. When enough displaced workers reduce spending — because they have less income, or because they are rationally saving in the face of uncertainty — businesses across the economy face softening revenue. A retail chain, a restaurant group, a domestic travel operator: none of them may be directly threatened by AI, but all of them are exposed to a contraction in consumer spending. Their response, under margin pressure, is the same as the AI-adopting firms in Phase 1: reduce headcount to preserve the business. These are what might be called survival layoffs — not AI-driven, but AI-triggered downstream. The causal loop below maps how Phase 1 and Phase 2 connect into a self-reinforcing cycle.