 |
|
|
|||||
Looking back on the first year of his second term, President Donald Trump boasts that he has resurrected the American economy by imposing big import taxes on foreign products. He made his case in a recent opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal, chiding the paper and critics, including mainstream economists, who predicted that tariffs would backfire, raising prices and threatening growth. “Instead,” he wrote, “they have created an American economic miracle.”But the proof he offers is often off-base or wrong altogether.Here’s a look at the facts around Trump’s assessment of tariffs.CLAIM: “Just over one year ago, we were a ‘DEAD’ country. Now, we are the ‘HOTTEST” country anywhere in the world!’ “THE FACTS: This is a standard statement from Trump. But the U.S. economy was hardly “dead” when Trump returned to office last year. And in Trump’s second term, it’s performed strongly after getting off to a bumpy start.In 2024, the last year of the Biden presidency, American gross domestic product grew 2.8%, adjusted for inflation, faster than any wealthy country in the world except Spain. It also expanded at a healthy rate from 2021 through 2023.The numbers for all of 2025 aren’t out yet. But during the first three quarters of the year, Trump’s tariffs or the threat of them delivered mixed results for the American economy.From January to March, U.S. GDP actually shrank for the first time in three years. The main culprit was easy to identify: a surge in imports, which are subtracted from GDP, as American companies rushed to buy foreign products before Trump could impose tariffs on them.But growth rebounded in the second half of the year. From April through June, the economy expanded at a healthy 3.8% pace. And from July through September, it grew even faster 4.4%. A big part of the surge was a drop in imports, likely reflecting Trump’s tariffs as well as the fact that importers had already stocked up at the start of the year. Strong consumer spending also drove economic growth.Trump also likes point to solid gains in the U.S. stock market. He noted that stocks hit new highs 52 times in 2025. It’s true that the American stock market did well last year. But it underperformed many foreign stock markets. The benchmark S&P 500 index climbed 17% a nice gain but short of a 71% surge in South Korea, 29% in Hong Kong, 26% in Japan, 22% in Germany and 21% in the United Kingdom.CLAIM: “Annual core inflation for the past three months has dropped to just 1.4% far lower than almost anyone, other than me, had predicted.”THE FACTS: The president is using cherry-picked data to vastly exaggerate where inflation stands.His figure for annual inflation in the past three months which excludes the volatile food and energy prices is low, but reflects data distorted by the government shutdown in October and November, which disrupted the government’s data collection and forced the agency that compiles the figures to plug in rough estimates in some categories that artificially lowered overall inflation.Annual core inflation for the final six months of 2025 is higher at 2.6%. That is down from January 2025’s level but about where it was in October 2024. Overall, inflation has leveled off this year, and was 3% in September before the government shutdown, the same as it had been in January 2025.It’s true that inflation hasn’t been as high as many economists worried it would be when Trump started rolling out tariffs last spring, but that is partly because many of the “Liberation Day” tariffs were withdrawn, reduced or riddled with exemptions. When Democrats won some high-profile elections last year by highlighting “affordability” concerns, the administration rolled back existing or planned tariffs on coffee, beef and kitchen cabinets, for example, a backhanded acknowledgment that the duties were raising prices.The impact of tariffs can be more clearly seen in core goods prices, which also exclude food and energy. Before the pandemic, core goods costs typically barely rose or even fell each year, but last December they were 1.4% higher than a year earlier. That was the largest increase, outside the pandemic, since 2011.Alberto Cavallo, an economist at Harvard and the author of a study on the impact of tariffs cited by Trump in his op-ed, has found that Trump’s tariffs have boosted overall inflation by roughly three-quarters of a percentage point. _ CLAIM: “The data shows that the burden, or ‘incidence,’ of the tariffs has fallen overwhelmingly on foreign producers and middlemen, including large corporations that are not from the U.S. According to a recent study by the Harvard Business School, these groups are paying at least 80% of tariff costs.” THE FACTS: The study Trump cited appears to conclude the opposite of what Trump claimed. Authored by Cavallo and two colleagues, it finds that “U.S. consumers were bearing roughly 43% of the tariff-induced border cost after seven months, with the remainder absorbed mostly by U.S. firms.” Cavallo said by email that import prices hadn’t fallen much, “which suggests foreign exporters did not reduce their pre-tariff prices enough to shoulder a large share of the burden.” CLAIM: “We have slashed our monthly trade deficit by an astonishing 77%.”THE FACTS: This claim involves more cherry-picking, reflecting the percentage drop from a very high trade deficit in January 2025, when the president took office, to a super-low deficit in October.The story is more complicated than the president makes it. The trade deficit the gap between what the U.S. sells other countries and what it buys from them has actually risen since he returned to the White House.From January through November in 2025, the U.S. accumulated a trade deficit of nearly $840 billion, up 4% from the same period of 2024. In the first three months of 2025, importers rushed to buy foreign products before Trump could slap tariffs on them. After that, monthly trade deficits came in consistently lower than they were in 2024. But the January-March import surge was so big that the 2025 year-to-date trade deficit still exceeds 2024’s. CLAIM: “I have successfully wielded the tariff tool to secure colossal Investments in America, like no other country has ever seen before. In less than one year, we have secured commitments for more than $18 trillion, a number that is unfathomable to many.”THE FACTS: Trump did, in fact, use the tariff threat to pry investment commitments from America’s major trading partners. The European Union, for instance, pledged $600 billion over four years.But Trump hasn’t said how he came up with $18 trillion. The White House has published a figure of $9.6 trillion, which includes private and public investment commitments from other countries.Researchers at the Peterson Institute for International Economics last month calculated the investment pledges at $5 trillion from the EU, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and the Persian Gulf states of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.And they raised oubts about whether the money will actually materialize, partly because the agreements are vague and sometimes because the countries would strain to afford the commitments.But all the numbers are huge nonetheless. Total private investment in the United States was most recently running at a $5.4 trillion annual pace. In 2024, the last year for which figures are available, total foreign direct investment in the United States amounted to $151 billion. Direct investment includes money sunk into such things as factories and offices but not financial investments like stocks and bonds. Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck. Paul Wiseman and Christopher Rugaber, AP Economics Writers
Category:
E-Commerce
Cellphones are everywhereincluding, until recently, in schools. Since 2023, 29 states, including New York, Vermont, Florida, and Texas, have passed laws that require K-12 public schools to enforce bans or strict limits on students using their cellphones on campus. Another 10 states have passed other measures that require local school districts to take some kind of action on cellphone usage. Approximately 77% of public schools now forbid students from having their phones out during classan increase from the 66% of schools that forbade students from using phones at school in 2015. Schools across the country are finding different ways to enforce no-phone policies. Some schools have students lock their phones in pouches that only open at the end of the day. Others use simple classroom bins or lockers. Some research shows that spending a lot of time looking at phones instead of peoples faces can make it harder for children and teenagers to get the basic human skills they need for developing and maintaining friendships and other relationships. As a scholar of educational leadership, I believe that school is about more than just classesits where young people learn how to get along with others. When phones are put away, students actually start looking at each other and talking again. School hallways and the lunchroom turn into spaces where students learn to resolve conflicts face-to-face and make human connections. Putting phones away in Ohio Ohio is an example of a state that has clamped down on students cellphone usage over the past 18 months. In May 2024, Ohio went from suggesting some cellphone guidelines for different schools to adopt to requiring that all public districts limit students phone use during class. School districts could choose to allow phones at lunch or between classes. Many schools began using lockable pouches, plastic bins, or lockers to keep phones out of sight. They still needed to allow some students to have phones for medical reasons, like monitoring blood sugar on an app. Ohio then adopted an even stricter cellphone use policy in 2025. This new law required all Ohio public school boards to adopt policies by Jan. 1, 2026, that prohibit phone use during the entire school day, including lunch and the time between classes. A needed break In the fall of 2025, I surveyed 13 Ohio public school principals from rural, urban, and suburban districts. Principals reported that the partial phone bans increased students social interactions and reduced peer conflicts: 62% of principals described more verbal, face-to-face socializing during recess, at lunch time, and between classes. 68% noted that students can stay on one task for more than 20 minutes without seeking a quick digital break. 72% observed a shift from heads-down scrolling to active conversation in common areas such as the cafeteria. 61% reported fewer online social conflicts spilling over into the classroom. A tension for students In late January 2026, I also surveyed and spoke with 18 Ohio high school students about the new phone bans in place at their schools as part of research that has not yet been published. Their responses revealed a complex tension between understanding the need for the phone ban and feeling a significant loss of personal safety and autonomy. A few students said they felt safe knowing a phone in the main office is available for emergencies. Some students said they felt anxious about not being reachable if there is an emergencylike if a relative were in an accident, or if the younger siblings they care for required their help. Finally, 13 out of 18 students argued that they should be learning the self-discipline required to balance technology with focus. Students said that phone bans made them feel as though they were children who could not make responsible decisionsrather than young adults preparing for professional environments. Some students also said that not having their phones made it impossible to fill out college and scholarship applications during the school day, since many application systems require multifactor authentication and require phones to log in. Lessons from Ohio Rules are more likely to be respected when students feel they have a voice in the boundaries that affect their daily lives. I think that school leaders could address students safety and security concerns in different ways, including by establishing a dedicated family emergency hotline that people can call. Principals could designate supervised areas where more senior high school students can briefly use their phones for multifactor authentication. School leaders could also offer a specific time window for students to check messages on their phones, or an easy way for the schools main office to deliver them messages from family. While these insights from Ohio students and principals offer a helpful starting point, they are just one part of a much larger conversation. More research is needed to see how these bans affect different types of schools and communities across multiple states. Because every district is different, what works in one town might cause unexpected challenges in another. By continuing to study these effects and listening to everyone involved, especially the students, researchers like myself can figure out how to keep classrooms focused and students interacting without making students feel less safe or less prepared for the adult world. Corinne Brion is an associate professor in educational administration at the University of Dayton. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
The logic behind electric vehicles benefiting public health has long been solid: More EVs means fewer internal combustion engines on the road, and a reduction in harmful tailpipe emissions. But now researchers have confirmed, to the greatest extent yet, that this is indeed whats actually happening on the ground. Whats more, they found that even relatively small upticks in EV adoption can have a measurably positive impact on a community. Whereas previous work has largely been based on modeling, a study published this month in the journal Lancet Planetary Health used satellites to measure actual emissions. The study, conducted between 2019 and 2023, focused on California, which has among the highest rates of EV use in the country, and nitrogen dioxide, one of the gases released during combustion, including when fossil fuels are burned. Exposure to the pollutant can contribute to heart and lung issues, or even premature death. Across nearly 1,700 ZIP codes, the analysis showed that, for every increase of 200 electric vehicles, nitrogen dioxide emissions decreased by 1.1 percent. A pretty small addition of cars at the ZIP code level led to a decline in air pollution, said Sandrah Eckel, a public health professor at the University of Southern Californias Keck School of Medicine and lead author of the study. Its remarkable. The group had tried to establish this link using Environmental Protection Agency air monitors before, but because there are only about 100 of them in California, the results werent statistically significant. The data also were from 2013 through 2019, when there were fewer electric vehicles on the road. Although the satellite instrument they ultimately used only detected nitrogen dioxide, it did allow researchers to gather data for virtually the entire state, and this time the findings were clear. Its making a real difference in our neighborhoods, said Eckel, who said a methodology like theirs could be used anywhere in the world. The advent of such powerful satellites allows scientists to look at other sources of emissions, such as factories or homes, too. Its a revolutionary approach. Mary Johnson, who researches environmental health at Harvard Universitys T.H. Chan School of Public Health and was not involved in the study, said shes not aware of a similar study of this size, or one that uses satellite data so extensively. Their analysis seems sound, she said, noting that the authors controlled for variables such as the COVID-19 pandemic and shifts toward working from home. The results, Johnson added, totally make sense and align with other research in this area. When London implemented congestion pricing in 2003, for example, it reduced traffic and emissions and increased life expectancy. That is the direction this latest research could go too. They didnt take the next step and look at health data, she said, which I think would be interesting.Daniel Horton, who leads Northwestern Universitys climate change research group, also sees value in this latest work. The results help to confirm the sort of predictions that numerical air quality modelers have been making for the past decade, he said, adding that it could also lay the foundation for similar research. This proof of concept paper is a great start and augurs good things to come.Eckel hopes that, eventually, advances in satellite technology will allow for more widespread detection of other types of emissions too, such as fine particulate matter. That could even help account for some of the potential downsides of EVs, which are heavier and could therefore kick up more tire or brake dust than their gasoline counterparts. On the whole, though, she believes the picture overwhelmingly illustrates how driving an electric car is better not just for the planet but for people. Research like this, she says, underscores the importance of continued EV adoption, the sales of which have slumped recently, and the need to do so equitably. Although lower-income neighborhoods have historically borne the brunt of pollution from highways and traffic, they cant always afford the relatively high cost of EVs. Eckel hopes that research like this can help guide policymakers. There are concerns that some of the communities that really stand to benefit the most from reductions in air pollution are also some of the communities that are really at risk of being left behind in the transition, she said. Previous research has shown that EVs could alleviate harms such as asthma in children, and detailed data like this latest study can help highlight both where more work needs to be done and whats working. Its really exciting that we were able to show that there were these measurable improvements in the air that were all breathing, she said. Another arguably hopeful finding was that the median increase in electric vehicle usage during the study was 272 per ZIP code. That, Eckel says, means there is plenty of opportunity to make our air even cleaner. Correction: This story originally misidentified the pollutant studied. It is nitrogen dioxide. This article originally appeared in Grist. Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org
Category:
E-Commerce
The European Union on Friday accused TikTok of breaching the bloc’s digital rules with “addictive design” features that lead to compulsive use by children, in preliminary charges that strike at the heart of the popular video sharing app’s operating model.EU regulators said their two-year investigation found that TikTok hasn’t done enough to assess how features such as autoplay and infinite scroll could harm the physical and mental health of users, including minors and “vulnerable adults.”The European Commission said it believes TikTok should change the “basic design” of its service. The commission is the EU’s executive arm and enforcer of the 27-nation bloc’s Digital Services Act, a sweeping rulebook that requires social media companies to clean up their platforms and protect users, under threat of hefty fines.TikTok denied the accusations.“The Commission’s preliminary findings present a categorically false and entirely meritless depiction of our platform, and we will take whatever steps are necessary to challenge these findings through every means available to us,” the company said in a statement.TikTok’s features including infinite scrolling, autoplay, push notifications, and highly personalized recommender systems “lead to the compulsive use of the app, especially for our kids, and this poses major risks to their mental health and wellbeing,” Commission spokesman Thomas Regnier said at a press briefing in Brussels.“The measures that TikTok has in place are simply not enough,” he said.The company now has a chance to defend itself and reply to the commission’s findings. Regnier said “if they don’t do this properly,” Brussels could issue a so-called non-compliance decision and possible fine worth up to 6% of the company’s total annual revenue. There was no deadline specified for the commission to make a final decision.The preliminary findings are the latest example of pressure that TikTok and other social media platforms are facing over youth addiction.Australia has banned social media for under-16s while governments in Spain, France, Britain,Denmark,Malaysia and Egypt want to introduce similar measures. In the U.S., TikTok last month settled a landmark social media addiction lawsuit while two other companies named in the suit Meta’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube still face claims that their platforms deliberately addict and harm children.TikTok has 170 million users in the European Union and “most of these are children,” Regnier said. He added that 7% of children aged 12 to 15 spend four to five hours daily on TikTok, and it’s “by far” the platform most used after midnight by children aged 13 to 18, citing unspecified data.“These statistics are extremely alarming,” he said.The commission said that TikTok fuels the urge to keep scrolling because it constantly rewards users with new content, leading to reduced self control.It said TikTok ignores signs that someone is compulsively using the app, such as the amount of time that minors spend on it at night, and how often the app is opened.The company has failed to put in place “reasonable, proportionate and effective” measures to offset the risks, it said.The commission said TikTok’s existing time management controls are easy to dismiss and “introduce limited friction,” while parental tools need “additional time and skills” from parents.Changes that the commission wants TikTok to make include disabling features like infinite scroll; putting in more effective breaks for screen time, including at night; and changing its “highly personalized” recommender system, which feeds users an endless stream of video shorts based on their preferences.TikTok says it has numerous tools, such as custom screen time limits and sleep reminders, that let users make “intentional decisions” about how they spend their time on the app. The company also noted it has teen accounts that let parents impose time limits on use, and prompt teen users to switch off in the evenings. Associated Press journalist Sam McNeil contributed to this report. Kelvin Chan, AP Business Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
Just because youre an ultra-talented global celebrity doesnt mean youre a shoo-in for an amazing gig. In fact, even stars have to apply to jobs, just like the rest of us. Just ask Charlie Puth, wholl be singing The Star-Spangled Banner at Super Bowl LX Sunday night. It shows how humility fuels success for even someone at the top of their gamein this case, a dream opportunity for one of pops biggest stars on entertainments biggest stage. In a recent Rolling Stone interview, the We Dont Talk Anymore singer spoke frankly last month about how he applied and auditioned to sing the national anthem, and how hes elated for the gig. He shared that performing the national anthem at the Super Bowl was a dream goal and seemed like he didnt expect any preferential treatment: I applied. I auditioned for it, but I made up my own audition because Ive always wanted to do it. He adds, because I love it musically, he told the magazine: Its the best song. Musically, its so special.” “I actually have always wanted to do this, and I recorded a little demo, just me singing with the Rhodes and sent it to Roc Nation. Ive been told Jay-Z loved it, and it got Goodell and they all said that I could do it,” the 34-year-old said. The New Jersey native is a prime example of how even high-achievers and applicants at the height of their industry audition or apply for jobs. Its that blend of humility and experience that can lead people to great things: Humility can be a very impressive personality trait, and the kind of authenticity that shows in Puths Rolling Stone answers is the kind that tells a hiring manager youre grateful for the opportunity, and communicates real passion. Theres even research to back up that humility is a trait that can make you a more desirable candidate for a job. Puth kept that humility when talking about iconic Super Bowl performances from the past: “Im going to be inspired by what Whitney did, but I cant ever touch what she did, he told Rolling Stone. I just wanna show people that I can do it. I feel like people dont really think of me as, like, a stand-alone vocalist at times. To channel your inner Charlie Puth humility, try these strategies: Balance it with confidence: Thats especially the case for leaders. Have trust in your talents, but also be adaptable, empathetic, and open to learning from other people in your field. Model it for others: Sometimes deciding to be a model of supportive collaboration, trustful integrity, and taking responsibility can bring out your inner humility, which others can in turn learn from and be inspired by. Talk less about yourself: An easy way to unlock inner humility, this also helps you not compare yourself too much to others. Another element of a professional business persona is not to respond negatively to those who arent happy with your achievements. Puth responded with grace on X back in December after a snide social media post from a doubter. Striking a diplomatic tone, he wrote: Ill never claim to be as good of a singer as Whitney Houston ever was. But I assure you were putting a really special arrangement togetherin D major. Itll be one of my best vocal performances.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] next »