U.S.A.I.D. Might Be Dead, but the Waste Is Alive and Well
Below is a transcript of an episode of 'The Opinions.' We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio app, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.
The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
Nicholas Kristof: I am Nicholas Kristof. I'm a columnist for The New York Times. This year I've been reporting a great deal on the cuts in American aid funding. U.S.A.I.D. has provided humanitarian assistance all over the world, and it's had an enormous impact. By one count, it saved more than three million lives each year, and then this year it was dismantled over a weekend by Elon Musk.
You know, I keep thinking that Elon Musk and Donald Trump promised that they were rooting out waste in U.S.A.I.D., but instead what I see is that they created it.
I am just back from Sierra Leone and Liberia in West Africa, and they are two countries where you see, as you walk through the villages and go to clinics and schools, the impact of U.S.A.I.D. cuts. You see kids dying. You see aid not being available. And in Sierra Leone, I just spent a morning in villages where kids were not getting the medicine they needed. I went to a warehouse behind a fence, and a security guard let me in, and I found millions of doses of medicines that had been donated to Sierra Leone.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump vs. Powell: How investors could come out as big losers in Fed fight
The hottest ringside seat these days may not be by the boxing mat but rather in Washington, D.C., as President Donald Trump slugs it out against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. The potential loser: America's investors and indeed anyone who wants lower interest rates. The core issue: Trump wants lower rates now, but Powell and the Federal Open Market Committee, which determines the central bank's policy on short-term rates, say the future path of inflation remains too uncertain. This Fed posture has sent Trump into a rage, and over the last few months he's stated in no uncertain terms that he wants Powell fired, calling him a 'major loser' and a 'numbskull.' It might all be popcorn-worthy political theater, if trillions of dollars weren't on the line. Trump is seeking to compromise the Fed's independence, and if he's successful, say experts, it could set off a wave of economic consequences, including the opposite of what Trump wants: much higher interest rates. Investors are already placing their bets on the outcome, with yields on long-term Treasury bonds rising in recent weeks, as they expect a rocky road ahead for the U.S. Compare advisors: Bankrate's list of the best financial advisors Trump's agenda faces off against Fed's inflation fighters At the heart of the conflict are Trump's own policies, all of which are set to turbocharge inflation. On the one hand, Trump has stepped on the inflation gas pedal by introducing a series of global tariffs, and the inflationary effects are only beginning to come through in the monthly price data, which moved up to an annual rate of 2.7 percent in June. He's also rammed through Congress a new budget that is expected to increase America's deficit spending by trillions, stepping even harder on the accelerator. On the other hand, Trump is demanding that the Fed cut interest rates, a move that would also stoke inflation, jamming the already-floored gas pedal through the floor. Trump's call for lower rates is not just the modest 'stair step' move that the Fed typically takes over an economic cycle. Instead, the president is advocating for an immediate 3 percent drop in rates in a single go. While investors had expected the Fed to lower interest rates several times this year in response to cooling inflation, it has stood pat thus far. Instead, the Fed has been carefully watching the effects of tariffs, which economists generally expect to create significant inflation. Because companies purchase inventory months before they sell it, and they rushed to lock in prices before tariffs took effect, actual inflation is lagging the beginning of the tariffs by months. But inflation has begun to tick up, albeit slightly, and more is expected in coming months. 'It's confounding to me (and many others) that Trump was elected on economic issues, with the primary economic concern being inflation, and yet he seems to be doing the exact opposite of what's required to reduce the threat of inflation,' says Michael K. Farr, president and CEO, Farr, Miller & Washington, a wealth manager in Washington, D.C. Get started: Match with an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals 'The president's unfounded call for a crisis-like sharp reduction in benchmark interest rates stands in stark contrast to the Fed's dual mandate, to strive for stable prices and maximum employment, at a time when inflation and price levels remain elevated,' says Mark Hamrick, Bankrate's senior economic analyst. In the face of Trump's calls for lower rates, Powell and company have stuck to their mandate — setting monetary policy to keep inflation at a manageable level while maintaining employment. In meeting after meeting, Powell has stressed that the Fed will remain 'data dependent' — that is, it will let the expected path of inflation dictate whether the central bank lowers interest rates. So Trump is asking for two things — highly inflationary fiscal and trade policy, as well as inflationary monetary policy — and he can't have both as long as the Fed remains independent. Why does Trump so desperately want lower interest rates? Lower rates allow the government to more cheaply refinance existing debt and issue new debt, the latter of which is coming fast and furious with the new Trump budget. The government's financing is stretched to the limit already, and it's paying more than $1.1 trillion annually in interest expenses as it is. The Department of Treasury would like to issue short-term bills at lower cost rather than issue higher-rate debt. A captive Fed could lead to higher inflation Investors are rightly worried that if the Fed loses control of the reins on interest rates, inflation — propelled by Trump's increased deficit spending and global tariffs — could increase markedly. 'The resulting loss of confidence in the Federal Reserve's independence and objectivity will likely result in a weaker dollar, plus higher borrowing costs for consumers, corporations and the government,' says Dave Waters, investment manager at Alluvial Capital. 'It may also result in more persistent inflation and deeper recessions as investors lose faith in the ability of the Federal Reserve to respond to changing economic conditions.' If short-term rates are lowered and stoke even more inflation, investors may expect longer-term inflation to pick up as well, and demand a higher yield on long-term Treasurys for the higher risk of inflation. But even investors in normally safe short-term Treasurys could be stung if interest rates are below the current rate of inflation, meaning they lose purchasing power on savings. Some well-known investors have already begun placing bets against longer-term Treasurys, expecting their prices to fall and their yields to climb, perhaps precipitously. Billionaire Stan Druckenmiller, for example, has stated that he's holding a wager against Treasurys, and in recent times, the position comprised 25 percent of his portfolio's total net assets. Looking for an advisor?: Find a financial advisor near you or online That bearishness has been reflected in 10-year and 30-year Treasurys, where yields have risen in recent weeks. The 30-year yield has eclipsed the 5 percent threshold, which it has touched a few times in the last five years but otherwise not regularly since the mid-2000s. Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year, now around 4.5 percent, has been establishing a base since March. The 10-year yield, which forms the price basis for mortgage rates, is not helping the flailing housing market. Given the potential upheaval in financial markets if Trump manages to oust the Fed chair, a range of prominent individuals have publicly called on Trump to stop the attacks. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon has called on the Fed to remain independent, noting the effects of a controlled Fed: 'Playing around with the Fed can often have adverse consequences.' He warned that it could create 'the absolute opposite of what [they] may be hoping for.' The heads of other big banks echoed that sentiment, including Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, Bank of America chief Brian Moynihan and Citigroup CEO Jane Fraser. Some Senate Republicans on the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee also expressed support for an independent Federal Reserve, including North Carolina's Thom Tillis. 'If anybody thinks it would be a good idea for the Fed to become another agency in the government subject to the president, they're making a huge mistake,' said Tillis. How investors can protect themselves from a possible Fed shake-up Investors are rightly concerned about what could happen to interest rates and inflation if the Fed's monetary policy is subject to politicians' concerns. But how can investors protect themselves against what may devolve into a dire scenario? First, investors should not panic. While the situation may worsen, it's been the investor class that has pulled some of Trump's questionable policies, such as massive global tariffs, back from the absolute worst of their excesses. Cold comfort, but it does suggest there's some limit to the pain. Investors who too quickly discard their long-term investment plan may ultimately discover that they would have been better served to have stuck with it, especially during tough times. Investors should also avoid fixating on the short-term distractions and instead focus on the long game. The day-to-day outrage may derail you from your long-term objectives. 'Long-term investors need to focus on the long term,' says Farr. 'The short-term noise begets volatility and emotion. In the fish market, you ignore the yelling and pay attention to the price of fish!' Investors looking to take a more active investing role might consider trends that benefit from Trump's policies. 'Investors can attempt to take advantage of a weakening dollar and higher inflation by increasing their allocations to international equities, particularly those with low exposure to the U.S. economy,' says Waters. He suggests investors focus on firms with strong pricing power, since they can pass along inflation to their own customers, as well as those that own real assets. International stocks that own a significant portion of their sales in non-dollar currencies may see their sales in dollar terms rise if the dollar continues its slide. Since the start of the year, the dollar has dipped significantly against major world currencies such as the euro and the pound. But investors shouldn't fully count out America's largest companies, either. Some 41 percent of the S&P 500's sales are earned abroad, meaning that the hundreds of companies in this stock index do offer some diversification benefits, even if they have major U.S. exposure. Importantly, these companies tend to be among the world's best businesses, and they do wield pricing power. President and allies attack Fed's Powell Since the Fed won't bend to his will, Trump has begun attacking Powell in a variety of ways. Trump has taken to social media to build up a following of people who are vocally critical of Powell and the Fed's stance on rates, calling the chair a litany of insulting names and saying he should be removed. However, experts believe that Trump doesn't have the authority to oust Powell. Powell's term as Fed chair ends in May 2026, at which point the Trump administration can nominate a new leader. Meanwhile, William Pulte, the chair of government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, recently claimed Powell lied to the Senate Banking Committee in late June about the cost and lavishness of renovations to the Fed's D.C. headquarters. In response, Powell asked the bank's inspector general to review the cost of the project — in effect, calling the cops on himself — a silly move if someone had something nefarious to hide. Then earlier this week, Trump reportedly drafted a letter firing Powell and showed it to roughly a dozen Republican members of Congress, asking them whether he should fire Powell, according to The New York Times. Why a loss of Fed independence would be so damaging Trump's attacks on Powell and the Fed more generally are damaging, say experts, because investors expect the Fed to operate independently of political interference. The Fed should be setting monetary policy based on the needs of the economy, not on what's politically expedient for those in power now. 'Federal Reserve independence has been shown to result in more effective monetary policy,' says Hamrick. 'Central banks beholden to heads of state or government are encumbered from making decisions in the best interests of the citizenry.' In fact, even if Trump were successful at ousting Powell, it's not just the chair who sets the Fed's interest rates. The Federal Open Market Committee consists of 12 members who together establish the Fed's policy on rates and other monetary policies. Editorial Disclaimer: All investors are advised to conduct their own independent research into investment strategies before making an investment decision. In addition, investors are advised that past investment product performance is no guarantee of future price appreciation. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Tariffs Are Killing Affordable Cars in US: Study
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's new tariffs on vehicles and auto parts have contributed to a slowdown in affordable car availability in the United States, according to a study by The findings suggested that the 25 percent auto tariffs imposed in April, alongside the 50 percent metals tariffs targeting the European Union (EU), Mexico, and Canada, have affected new and used car prices, impacting average Americans seeking budget vehicles. Why It Matters The rise in car prices and tightening supply of affordable models present challenges for millions of Americans facing high transportation and insurance costs. Industry analysts, dealership owners, and consumer advocates have warned that tariffs would make new and used vehicles less accessible, further straining surging auto repair bills and insurance premiums. The Trump administration imposed a sweeping 25 percent tariff on imported vehicles and car parts in April. The president also hiked the 25 percent levy on steel and aluminum up to 50 percent last month. However, an earlier executive order prevents tariff "stacking" on auto parts for two years, with firms assembling the vehicles in the U.S. allowed small reimbursements. What To Know reported that cars priced under $30,000—long a staple for cost-conscious buyers—had inventory growth of just 3.9 percent year-over-year during the first half of 2025. The vast majority, 92 percent, of sub-$30,000 models in the U.S. are imports meaning they are especially susceptible to Trump's tariffs. The new study also found imported models dominated the more affordable new car market, with only the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla being produced domestically for under $30,000—and some trims of those were still imported. Price increases for new cars have been relatively modest, at $97 on average, since the tariffs were announced. However, sharp rises were seen for certain models, especially those from the United Kingdom, which were over $10,000 more expensive, and the EU at about $2,500 more. Many experts believe that most of the auto sales this year have been of inventory that was imported before the duties, meaning their prices would be unaffected. Consultants at AlixPartners has projected that tariffs would ultimately add nearly $2,000 per vehicle and reduce total U.S. car sales by approximately 1 million over three years. Trump's tariffs on metals such as steel and aluminum continued to raise production costs for automakers, compounding pressure on entry-level vehicle affordability. While the average American spends approximately $45,000-$48,000 on a new car, according to J.D. Power and Anderson Economic Group, cars at the lower range are essential for millions of Americans who cannot afford higher purchase prices, or the many budget-focused consumers who prefer a more affordable deal. Hondas are seen at a dealership in Bedford, Ohio, on July 8. Hondas are seen at a dealership in Bedford, Ohio, on July 8. Sue Ogrocki/AP Who People Are Saying said in its July report: "The pace of sales and inventory movement will depend on the scope of tariffs, with automakers likely to adjust production to align with a smaller, more price-sensitive buyer pool." Mark Wakefield, global auto market lead for AlixPartners, told reporters in an online briefing last month, "These tariffs bring a big wall of cost..."Consumers [will be] taking the majority of the hit." President Trump said in April as he unveiled his 25 percent auto tariffs: "You're going to see prices go down." Chris Harto, a senior policy analyst at Consumer Reports, told Inside EVs: "It does not appear like any of the policies will result in people paying less to buy and own vehicles in 2028 or 2029 than they do today." Jessica Caldwell, head of insights at auto-buying resource Edmunds, told Associated Press even repairs could become more expensive due to tariffs: "If you are bringing your car to get repaired, chances are, it's going to have a part that comes from another country. That price that you pay is likely going to be directly affected by the increase [from these tariffs]." What Happens Next? Analysts agreed that most of the early 2025 car sales involved vehicles imported before tariffs took effect, delaying the full impact on prices. However, as pre-tariff inventory dwindles in the second half of the year, both new and used car prices are expected to rise.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump threatens to bomb Iran again if it builds new nuclear plants
Donald Trump has warned Iran that he will bomb the country again if it tries to resume its nuclear programme. The US president claimed it would take 'years' to bring the sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan back into service and promised to 'obliterate' any new nuclear sites Iran may try and build. In a post on his Truth Social site sent from his golf club near Washington, he claimed all three of Tehran's nuclear sites had been destroyed after the US dropped 14 30,000lb GBU-57 'bunker buster' bombs on them. 'It would take years to bring them back into service and, if Iran wanted to do so, they would be much better off starting anew, in three different locations, prior to those sites being obliterated, should they decide to do so,' he said before ending with his trademark signoff. 'Thank you for your attention to this matter!' Mr Trump has endured a difficult week, fending off criticism from his supporters about his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case and the embarrassing revelation that he allegedly sent a lewd message and drawing to the billionaire financier in 2003, before he was convicted of sex offences. On Thursday, the White House said the swelling in Mr Trump's legs was caused by chronic venous insufficiency, a condition in which veins have trouble moving blood back to the heart. On Saturday, he pivoted back to one of the major successes of his presidency so far: Operation Midnight Hammer, when B-2 bombers struck Iran's nuclear sites without Iran firing a shot in defence. Mr Trump claims the Iranian programme was 'totally obliterated'. But a recent assessment by US intelligence suggested that only the underground site at Fordow was completely destroyed. Two other sites, at Natanz and Isfahan, may not have been dealt a knockout blow, according to officials who briefed NBC News last week. Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, dismissed the report. He said: 'The credibility of the Fake News Media is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities: destroyed, in the dirt, and will take years to recover.' There have also been questions about whether the lead-up to the strikes on June 21 allowed Iran enough time to move highly enriched uranium to secret locations. For example, 16 lorries were spotted lining up outside Fordow ahead of the attacks. A possible destination was Pickaxe mountain, Kūh-e Kolang Gaz Lā, which is 90 miles south of Fordow, and minutes away from Natanz in central Isfahan province. Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iranian officials refused to answer questions about what was happening at the fortified, underground facility. He said: 'Since it is obvious it is in a place where numerous and important activities related to the programme are taking place, we're asking them, 'What is this for?' And they are telling us, 'It's none of your business.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
