I Read the Same Story Three Times This Week. It Was Set on Three Different Continents.

The Dragon Flower Temple in Shanghai is said to be 1,700 years old, but these days its courtyards are full of people in their second and third decades of life — burning incense, circling the pagoda, tying wishes to long red ribbons. The Wall Street Journal’s Hannah Miao spent a Saturday there this month and found that Longhua, as locals call it, has become known as the place to pray for career success, at precisely the moment careers have stopped cooperating. One visitor, a 26-year-old at a chemicals trading firm, came to pray her way through her probationary period after leaving a job where the hours kept growing and the salary didn’t. Her assessment of the market — and I’m quoting the WSJ quoting her — was that finding a job right now is “picking the best from a pile of crap.”

Story two, same week, 5,000 miles west: British teenagers with offers from elite universities (read as Oxbridge) are declining to attend. One would-be student turned down a place at Oxford to become a law apprentice — that then paid for her law degree whilst also paying her a salary. Another turned down four universities for an apprenticeship at Barclays. A third turned down five unis, including Durham, to train as an NHS data analyst, where she helped build machine-learning models for early cancer detection. In 2025, U.K. companies hired 8% more apprentices while their hiring of college graduates contracted by 8%. Same market, same year, opposite signs.

Story three, another 3,500 miles west: American job boards are so polluted with “ghost jobs”, that is, postings the employer has no real intention of filling, that state legislatures are stepping in to ban the practice. Around 19% of jobs advertised on digital job boards last quarter were ghosts, per online job-platform Greenhouse’s analysis of its own clients’ postings: at least one application in, zero hiring activity out. New York State has passed a bill through both houses requiring employers to disclose when they expect to fill a role, with fines attached. It now sits with Governor Kathy Hochul. Pennsylvania has a similar bill in committee. Texas’s attorney general Ken Paxton has opened an investigation into LinkedIn over fake ads. Lawmakers are now proposing, in statutes, that job ads be required to be real.

Three continents. Three headlines. One story. Now let me explain:

Here’s the frame I’d offer, and the term I’ll be using from now on: we are not in a jobs recession. We are in a coordination recession.

In a jobs recession, the work disappears. In a coordination recession, the work exists, the people exist, and the machinery that’s supposed to match them (degrees, applications, postings, recruiters, the whole information layer of the labor market) stops carrying any reliable signal. Every one of this week’s three stories is a rational response to that failure, and I really do mean rational.

Let’s start in Shanghai. It’s easy to read the temple crowds as morose. But look at it as an economist would. Entry to Longhua is free. The vegetarian noodles there are $2. When the expected value of the official channel (send applications into the void, hear nothing) approaches zero, the marginal cost of appealing to heaven starts to look pretty competitive. A prayer and a job application are converging on the same expected value, and only one of them costs the price of incense.

Nearly a third of Chinese adults under 35 had visited a religious site within a year to pray for good fortune in school, health, or business, per survey data cited in the piece… and this practice is transactional by design. A Purdue sociologist quoted in the article notes that Chinese worshippers will switch temples, or religions, if the first one doesn’t deliver. Pray, measure, reallocate. These young people haven’t abandoned market logic. They’ve redirected it at the only counterparty still taking their meetings. A higher power.

Now let’s turn to Britain. The apprenticeship story reads as “kids rejecting college”, which misses what’s actually happening: sophisticated buyers are re-pricing the degree in real time, with AI as the catalyst. One told the Journal that AI “has really rattled the playing field” in law; another’s phrasing was that apprenticeships are “almost AI proof”, because companies mold you into exactly the employee they need. Look at what these kids actually bought. A degree is a promissory note: borrow heavily now, and trust that employers will still honor the credential in four years… in an industry being rewired by AI in real time. An apprenticeship is a settled debt: the employer has already hired you, is already paying you (law reportedly pays trainees $70,000–80,000 per year), and in this individual’s, case funded the degree anyway. The U.K.’s university entry rate for 18-year-olds climbed from about 25% in 2006 to 36% in 2025 while the graduate earnings premium sits below America’s. That is, more people buying a signal that pays out less. Grant Thornton went from 10% apprentice intake in 2010 to parity with graduates today, and reports no difference in progression. In a market where trust is the scarce asset, a settled job beats a promissory one. Britain’s teenagers have lost faith in the handoff between education and employment, and the +8/−8 numbers say they were early, but not wrong.

And now let’s turn to the U.S. If Shanghai shows what happens when candidates stop trusting the channel, the ghost-jobs story shows why they’re correct not to. Employers post phantom roles to build pipelines “just in case”, to catch a dream candidate, or (as applicants theorize, not unreasonably) to look like they’re growing. Individually, each ghost ad is a small fib. Collectively, they are signal bankruptcy: one in five postings being fake means every applicant must discount every posting, which means more applications sprayed at more listings, which means employers drowning in volume, which means more automated rejection, which means. Now you can see the loop. The human cost has a face in the WSJ’s reporting: a marketing professional in Texas who has applied to more than 3,000 jobs since mid-2025, drained nearly $40,000 in savings, and is now moving in with her father.

Her question for employers is simple: if a posting draws 500 applicants and you hire none of them, “Are you looking for a unicorn? Or is it not a real job?” But unfortunately, it’s usually the latter. And when a free market debases its own signals for long enough, the state legislatures eventually show up to do the trust-repair the market hasn’t bothered to do itself. That’s what a legislature fining fake job ads $2,500 is: the government stepping in as guarantor of last resort for the sentence “we are hiring.”

The skeptic has three good objections, and I’ll pre-empt them by making them myself.

1. First: temple-going in China is really cultural rather than religious, it predates this downturn, and, per the piece itself, includes twelve-year-olds praying for good grades and a bowl of noodles.

2. Second: the British shift is significantly about tuition debt and a weak graduate earnings premium, not some clear-eyed verdict on the usefulness of credentials.

3. Third: Greenhouse’s 19% number is the platform’s view of its own clients usage, and some “ghosts” are just roles that got paused or filled internally when budgets wobbled. The WSJ quotes a talent-firm executive making exactly this point.

But notice that none of these objections touch the underlying pattern: they just reallocate the blame. Debt aversion is a judgment about whether the degree’s signal is worth its price. A paused-then-abandoned hiring requisition is still a promise the applicant priced as real and the employer didn’t. And the fact that temple visits are surging now, driven by the young, with career success as the marquee request, is not just explained by tradition alone...

What I’m most willing to be wrong about is the timeline on this. I don’t know whether this “coordination recession” is a five-year adjustment or one of those “new normals” from a labor market where AI lets candidates generate infinite applications and employers generate infinite postings. A machine-versus-machine arms race in which the signal-to-noise ratio degrades exponentially, prompt by prompt. I wrote back at the start of May in The AI Job Panic Is Missing the Point that the interesting question was never “will AI take the jobs” but what happens to the market’s plumbing while everyone argues about that! This week, on three continents, the plumbing spoke back.

You can’t fix the information layer of the global labor markets on your own. But you can refuse to depend on it for work. There are three implications as far as I see it, in ascending order of importance.

1. Stop treating the posting channel as the labor market: If 1/5 of postings are ghosts, the application funnel is (mathematically) the “lowest-trust” channel available to you. Every hire that matters in my own career came through a room, not a listing. This is the collecting rooms argument wearing a macroeconomic coat: the referral, the former colleague, the person who has seen your work is not “networking,” it’s routing around a failed signalling system.

2. Hold verifiable proof, not paper credentials: The British teenagers figured out that an employer’s committed offer beats an institution’s future promise of employment. The line that the scale of an apprentice’s impact at the NHS was greater than anything university would have provided is the tell. The portable version, for those of us past school age: working where you can demonstrate impact beats any claims you can make. A shipped project, a P&L you owned, a client who will pick up the phone: these are the settled currency of a market that has stopped honoring the promissory kind. It’s the legibility principle: you don’t just have to be good, you have to be verifiably good, cheaply, by a complete and total stranger.

3. Build the moat where the signal failure can’t reach: A career moat was always about being hard to replace. In a so-called “coordination recession” it acquires a second function: being hard to misread. The people least exposed to ghost jobs, credential decay, and the all-too-familiar application black holes are the ones who are never anonymous in the market in the first place. They’re the ones for whom demand arrives organically. Like I always say: careers aren’t ladders anymore; they’re portfolios. And a portfolio’s whole job is to keep paying dividends when one asset class (say, the humble job posting) quietly goes to zero.

The incense line at Longhua Temply, the +8/−8 apprentice/University hiring split in Britain, and the ghost-jobs bill on Governor Hochul’s desk are the same data points at three different magnifications. Markets can be rich in jobs and bankrupt in goodwill at the same time, and the second bankruptcy is harder to see because the storefronts stay lit 24 hours a day. So really, the only rational moves in this situation are to pray, apprentice, and legislate. They’re all, in their own forms, the same sentence:

I no longer believe what this market tells me, so I’m going around it.

So here’s my real question for you: which labor-market signal did you stop trusting first — the posting, the degree, the recruiter, or the interview process — and what have you replaced it with? I just might share the best answers (anonymized) in a future post.

If this landed for you, share it with someone who’s sent more than 50 applications into the ATS void this year. And if you want the tactical version (how to audit whether a posting is real before you spend five minutes on the cover letter) that’s the kind of thing that goes out to paid subscribers monthly.

What paid gets you: one playbook a month — a specific problem solved the way I’d solve it for a consulting client, with the worksheet, the numbers, and the scripts. This is the first one. Quarterly, paid subscribers get an open thread to ask me anything.

Founding tier ($400/yr): I decline nearly every 1:1 request I get (unless you’re from Taiwan); there just aren’t enough hours. Founding membership is the exception — two 45-minute sessions a year plus async email access.

Alex Randall Kittredge writes the Substack ARK Strategy and is the founder and Managing Director of APR Strategic Consulting. He has advised 9+ CEOs, integrated workforces, and redesigned organizations across hedge funds, startups, and industrial companies. He is a graduate of Columbia University and the University of Cambridge, and mentors entrepreneurs & startup founders through Oxford Entrepreneurs Network, CamEntrepreneurs, and Plug and Play Tech Center. He is a Director of The Oxbridge Method Ltd, and is the author of the forthcoming book, How Your Side Hustles Will Save You: Creating a Durable Career that Transcends the Corporate Ladder.

Compliance Statement: All views and opinions expressed are solely my own and do not reflect those of any current or former employer, client, or organization with which I am or have been affiliated.

• Miao, Hannah. “This Ancient Temple Is Where China’s Young People Go to Pray for a Good Job.” The Wall Street Journal, 24 Aug. 2026. wsj.com

• Dangoor, Natasha. “British Kids Are Skipping Top Colleges for White-Collar Apprenticeships.” The Wall Street Journal, 24 Aug. 2026. wsj.com

• Weber, Lauren. “’Ghost Job’ Ads Are Getting So Bad That Lawmakers Want to Ban Them.” The Wall Street Journal, 24 Aug. 2026. wsj.com

• Underlying data cited within the above: Greenhouse ghost-posting analysis (Q2 2026); Institute of Student Employers hiring survey (2025); OECD graduate earnings premium data; Chinese General Social Survey (2018); U.S. Labor Department JOLTS (June 2026).