Commencement is supposed to be filled with hope, but for the class of 2010, these are grim times. Over the past year, the unemployment rate for college graduates under age 25 has averaged 9.1 percent. For the roughly half of high school graduates under 25 and not in college, the average is 22.8 percent.

Worse, a deep labor recession, like this one, may be more than a temporary hardship. It could signal a long-term decline in living standards — downward mobility.

Where you start out in your career has a big impact on where you end up. When jobs are scarce, more college grads start out in lower-level jobs with lower starting salaries. Academic research suggests that for many of these graduates, that correlates to overall lower levels of career attainment and lower lifetime earnings.

Tough times for college grads mean even tougher times for high school graduates, because fewer jobs mean more competition from college-educated workers. In the past year, 59.5 percent of young high school grads on average had a job, compared with 70.2 percent in 2007.

The pat answer is that college students should consider graduate school as a way to delay a job search until things turn around, and that more high school students should go to college to improve their prospects.

For many undergraduates, especially those with large student debts, graduate school would be prohibitively expensive. And while more than half of this year’s high school grads are expected to be enrolled in college in the fall, most will have to work to help pay the bills. For them, college is not a retreat from a bad job market; a bad market is an obstacle to a college degree.

Washington has not been helping enough. The 2009 stimulus package — thanks to President Obama, Congressional Democrats and a few Republican senators — has supported some 2.5 million jobs, helping to avert a much deeper recession. The economy is still missing more than 10 million jobs, and unless more is done to spur employment, the impact on many new graduates and other workers will be harsh.

In his budget this year, Mr. Obama called for $266 billion in spending for jobs and stimulus. So far, Congress has passed only a $15 billion tax credit for hiring in 2010 and a few short-term extensions of unemployment benefits. On Thursday, Democratic Congressional leaders called for $80 billion to extend federal benefits and subsidies for the unemployed through 2010 and to provide more aid to states. More emergency spending is crucial to support consumer demand and, by extension, hiring. The Democratic proposal also calls for relatively modest sums for summer youth jobs, small-business lending and state infrastructure bonds.

The measures should be passed quickly. But recent debates suggests that the Republicans — in their role as nouveau deficit hawks — are likely to oppose more job-related spending unless it is paid for. The deficit needs to be addressed when the economy recovers. Right now, tax increases or spending cuts would only reduce economic activity, weakening the boost the measures are supposed to provide.

The White House and Democratic lawmakers need to make that case forcefully. Lawmakers owe it to their constituents — and explaining the need for more job spending should not be that hard. Far too many Americans know how bad the situation is out there.

In the longer term, Congress will also need to do more to foster jobs and industries of the future, like green technology. Several taxes could be enacted to help finance longer-term efforts, including the bank tax proposed by President Obama. Congress and the administration should also consider a financial transactions tax, both to curb speculation and to raise revenue to rebuild the economy that was damaged, in large part, by the banks’ recklessness.

Without a bigger vision, more money and political courage, the future for those just entering the job market and those already there looks bleak for years to come.