Trump's EPA targets environmental rules projected to save billions — and many thousands of lives
When the head of the Environmental Protection Agency announced a wide-ranging rollback of environmental regulations, he said it would put a 'dagger through the heart of climate-change religion' and introduce a 'Golden Age' for the American economy.
What Lee Zeldin didn't mention: how ending the rules could have devastating consequences to human health.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
South Florida now emerging as the ‘epicenter of housing weakness' — but will it spread to the rest of the US?
Moneywise and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue through links in the content below. Bubbles don't always burst — sometimes they deflate. But the process can still be painful, as some Florida home sellers are now discovering. According to a Bloomberg analysis of Redfin data, the number of contracts to buy homes in Miami, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach dropped in April compared to a year ago, marking the steepest declines among the 50 largest metro areas in the U.S. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has an important message for the next wave of American retirees — here's how he says you can best weather the US retirement crisis Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) Notably, pending sales in Miami plunged 23%, while transactions in Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach declined by 19% and 14%, respectively. According to Chen Zhao, head of economics research at Redfin, the region is clearly under pressure. 'South Florida is the epicenter of housing market weakness in the United States,' she told Bloomberg. Homes are also sitting on the market much longer than elsewhere. In April, the median time to sell in West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale was 83 days, and 81 days in Miami — more than double the national average of 40 days. South Florida saw a historic run-up in prices during the pandemic, with homes routinely selling above asking price. But the tide has turned. In April, the median home sale price across Florida fell 3.2% year over year. And in West Palm Beach, Miami and Fort Lauderdale, nearly 5% of homes sold below asking — compared to just 0.77% nationally. 'I think you're seeing a really long, slow deflation of that bubble,' Zhao said in the Bloomberg analysis, reflecting on the shifting market dynamics. And while Florida may be feeling the pain, Zhao cautions it might not be the only state that ends up struggling: 'The question for the rest of the country is, will this spread? Florida is uniquely bad right now.' Florida's housing market seems to be under pressure, but that doesn't necessarily signal a nationwide collapse. In fact, according to Redfin, the median U.S. home sale price in April was $437,864 — up 1.3% from a year earlier. Zoom out further, and the long-term trend remains clear: Redfin data show U.S. home prices have surged roughly 45% over the past five years. Affordability, however, remains a major challenge due to the imbalance between supply and demand. As Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged in a press conference last year, the real issue behind America's housing crisis is clear: 'We have had, and are on track to continue to have, not enough housing.' A June 2024 analysis by Zillow estimates the U.S. housing shortage at 4.5 million homes — a gap that continues to support demand and rental prices in many regions. Meanwhile, many investors view real estate as a time-tested hedge against inflation. As the cost of materials, labor and land rises, property values often follow — and so do rents. This allows landlords to earn income that tends to keep pace with inflation. Of course, with today's high home prices, elevated mortgage rates and an uncertain outlook, jumping into the market might feel daunting. But the good news is, you no longer need to buy a property outright to tap into the benefits of real estate investing. Crowdfunding platforms like Arrived offer an easier way to get exposure to this income-generating asset class. Backed by world class investors like Jeff Bezos, Arrived allows you to invest in shares of rental homes with as little as $100, all without the hassle of mowing lawns, fixing leaky faucets or handling difficult tenants. The process is simple: Browse a curated selection of homes that have been vetted for their appreciation and income potential. Once you find a property you like, select the number of shares you'd like to purchase, and then sit back as you start receiving positive rental income distributions from your investment. Another option is First National Realty Partners (FNRP), which allows accredited investors to diversify their portfolio through grocery-anchored commercial properties, without taking on the responsibilities of being a landlord. With a minimum investment of $50,000, investors can own a share of properties leased by national brands like Whole Foods, Kroger and Walmart, which provide essential goods to their communities. Thanks to Triple Net (NNN) leases, accredited investors are able to invest in these properties without worrying about tenant costs cutting into their potential returns. Simply answer a few questions — including how much you would like to invest — to start browsing their full list of available properties. Read more: Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — If you're uneasy about where the U.S. housing market — or the broader economy — is headed, you're not alone. Warnings from top economists and investors are piling up. Nobel Prize–winning economist Paul Krugman has cautioned that a recession could hit the U.S. this year. Meanwhile, Ray Dalio — founder of the world's largest hedge fund, Bridgewater Associates — recently sounded the alarm on 'something worse than a recession.' With soaring national debt, persistent fiscal deficits and rising geopolitical tensions, it's no surprise that markets have been on edge. So where can investors turn for shelter? Dalio points to a familiar safe haven: gold. 'People don't have, typically, an adequate amount of gold in their portfolio,' he told CNBC in February. 'When bad times come, gold is a very effective diversifier.' Long viewed as the ultimate safe haven, gold isn't tied to any single country, currency or economy. It can't be printed out of thin air like fiat money, and in times of economic turmoil or geopolitical uncertainty, investors tend to pile in — driving up its value. Hence why, over the past 12 months, gold prices have surged by more than 40%. One way to invest in gold that also provides significant tax advantages is to open a gold IRA with the help of Priority Gold. Gold IRAs allow investors to hold physical gold or gold-related assets within a retirement account, thereby combining the tax advantages of an IRA with the protective benefits of investing in gold, making it an option for those looking to help shield their retirement funds against economic uncertainties. When you make a qualifying purchase with Priority Gold, you can receive up to $10,000 in silver for free. JPMorgan sees gold soaring to $6,000/ounce — use this 1 simple IRA trick to lock in those potential shiny gains (before it's too late) Are you rich enough to join the top 1%? Here's the net worth you need to rank among America's wealthiest — plus a few strategies to build that first-class portfolio You're probably already overpaying for this 1 'must-have' expense — and thanks to Trump's tariffs, your monthly bill could soar even higher. Here's how 2 minutes can protect your wallet right now Access to this $22.5 trillion asset class has traditionally been limited to elite investors — until now. Here's how to become the landlord of Walmart or Whole Foods without lifting a finger This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. 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
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's new approach to Russia's war in Ukraine might be his worst yet
Donald Trump and his team have spent a fair amount of time recently trying to convince the public that the president's policy toward Russia's war in Ukraine is having a positive impact. In mid-March, for example, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt boasted, 'I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we've never been closer to a peace deal than we are in this moment.' Two months later, Trump participated in a two-hour phone meeting with Vladimir Putin, and the Republican touted the discussion as a possible breakthrough. 'The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,' the American president declared, adding that his chat would 'immediately' lead to new diplomatic negotiations. Soon after, Kyiv came under a large-scale Russian drone and missile attack, described by Ukrainian officials as the largest aerial assault on the country since the war began. It was soon followed by Ukraine's surprise drone attack that proved disastrous for Russia, and that jolted global perceptions. This in turn led Russia to launch one of the largest barrages of missiles and drones of the war at targets across Ukraine. This does not look like 'the 10th yard line of peace.' It was against this backdrop that Trump has apparently come up with a new metaphor. The New York Times reported: As Germany's chancellor, Friedrich Merz, sat beside him watching in silence, President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine to two fighting children who needed to work out their differences for a while before anyone could intervene. 'Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. 'They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' 'And I gave that analogy to Putin yesterday,' the Republican added. 'I said, 'President, maybe you have to keep fighting and suffering a lot, because both sides are suffering, before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart.'' So, a few things. First, comparing this conflict to a dispute among children on a playground is unhelpful, and Trump complaining about anyone engaging in juvenile behavior is unwise, given everything we know about his temperament and frequent tantrums. Second, the idea that the White House is prepared to let Russia and Ukraine 'fight for a while' overlooks the inconvenient fact that they've already been fighting for a while. Indeed, Russia invaded Ukraine back in February 2022 — more than three years ago — which Trump described at the time as 'genius' and part of a 'wonderful' strategy. But let's also not lose sight of the evolution of the American president's thinking. Trump's Plan A for the war in Ukraine was ending the conflict within 24 hours by way of a secret strategy he assured voters was real. When it became obvious that this strategy didn't actually exist, Trump moved on to Plan B: He told Russia that if it failed to end the conflict quickly, the White House 'would have no other choice' but to impose new economic sanctions. When Putin ignored those threats and Trump failed to follow through, the American president floated Plan C (international economic penalties designed to force a ceasefire), Plan D (Trump-backed bilateral talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy) and Plan E (bilateral talks between Trump and Putin). Plan F — White House passivity — is now increasingly coming into focus. Trump's latest plan to end the conflict is apparently to stop trying to end the conflict. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The AI lobby plants its flag in Washington
Top artificial intelligence companies are rapidly expanding their lobbying footprint in Washington — and so far, Washington is turning out to be a very soft target. Two privately held AI companies, OpenAI and Anthropic — which once positioned themselves as cautious, research-driven counterweights to aggressive Big Tech firms — are now adding Washington staff, ramping up their lobbying spending and chasing contracts from the estimated $75 billion federal IT budget, a significant portion of which now focuses on AI. They have company. Scale AI, a specialist contractor with the Pentagon and other agencies, is also planning to expand its government relations and lobbying teams, a spokesperson told POLITICO. In late March, the AI-focused chipmaking giant Nvidia registered its first in-house lobbyists. AI lobbyists are 'very visible' and 'very present on the hill,' said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) in an interview at the Special Competitive Studies Project AI+ Expo this week. 'They're nurturing relationships with lots of senators and a handful of members [of the House] in Congress. It's really important for their ambitions, their expectations of the future of AI, to have Congress involved, even if it's only to stop us from doing anything.' This lobbying push aims to capitalize on a wave of support from both the Trump administration and the Republican Congress, both of which have pumped up the AI industry as a linchpin of American competitiveness and a means for shrinking the federal workforce. They don't all present a unified front — Anthropic, in particular, has found itself at odds with conservatives, and on Thursday its CEO Dario Amodei broke with other companies by urging Congress to pass a national transparency standard for AI companies — but so far the AI lobby is broadly getting what it wants. 'The overarching ask is for no regulation or for light-touch regulation, and so far, they've gotten that," said Doug Calidas, senior vice president of government affairs for the AI policy nonprofit Americans for Responsible Innovation. In a sign of lawmakers' deference to industry, the House passed a ten-year freeze on enforcing state and local AI regulation as part of its megabill that is currently working through the Senate. Critics, however, worry that the AI conversation in Washington has become an overly tight loop between companies and their GOP supporters — muting important concerns about the growth of a powerful but hard-to-control technology. 'There's been a huge pivot for [AI companies] as the money has gotten closer,' Gary Marcus, an AI and cognitive science expert, said of the leading AI firms. 'The Trump administration is too chummy with the big tech companies, and basically ignoring what the American people want, which is protection from the many risks of AI.' Anthropic declined to comment for this story, referring POLITICO to its March submission to the AI Action Plan that the White House is crafting after President Donald Trump repealed a sprawling AI executive order issued by the Biden administration. OpenAI, too, declined to comment. This week several AI firms, including OpenAI, co-sponsored the Special Competitive Studies Project's AI+ Expo, an annual Washington trade show that has quickly emerged as a kind of bazaar for companies trying to sell services to the government. (Disclosure: POLITICO was a media partner of the conference.) They're jostling for influence against more established government contractors like Palantir, which has been steadily building up its lobbying presence in D.C. for years, while Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft — major tech platforms with AI as part of their pitch — already have dozens of lobbyists in their employ. What the AI lobby wants is a classic Washington twofer: fewer regulations to limit its growth, and more government contracts. The government budget for AI has been growing. Federal agencies across the board — from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to the IRS and the Department of Veterans Affairs — are looking to build AI capacity. The Trump administration's staff cuts and automation push is expected to accelerate the demand for private firms to fill the gap with AI. For AI, 'growth' also demands energy and, on the policy front, AI companies have been a key driver of the recent push in Congress and the White House to open up new energy sources, streamline permitting for building new data centers and funnel private investment into the construction of these sites. Late last year, OpenAI released an infrastructure blueprint for the U.S. urging the federal government to prepare for a massive spike in demand for computational infrastructure and energy supply. Among its recommendations: creating special AI zones to fast-track permits for energy and data centers, expanding the national power grid and boosting government support for private investment in major energy projects. Those recommendations are now being very closely echoed by Trump administration figures. Last month, at the Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Las Vegas, David Sacks — Trump's AI and crypto czar — laid out a sweeping vision that mirrored the AI industry's lobbying goals. Speaking to a crowd of 35,000, Sacks stressed the foundational role of energy for both AI and cryptocurrency, saying bluntly: 'You need power.' He applauded President Donald Trump's push to expand domestic oil and gas production, framing it as essential to keeping the U.S. ahead in the global AI and crypto race. This is a huge turnaround from a year ago, when AI companies faced a very different landscape in Washington. The Biden administration, and many congressional Democrats, wanted to regulate the industry to guard against bias, job loss and existential risk. No longer. Since Trump's election, AI has become central to the conversation about global competition with China, with Silicon Valley venture capitalists like Sacks and Marc Andreessen now in positions of influence within the Trump orbit. Trump's director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy is Michael Kratsios, former managing director at Scale AI. Trump himself has proudly announced a series of massive Gulf investment deals in AI. Sacks, in his Las Vegas speech, pointed to those recent deal announcements as evidence of what he called a 'total comprehensive shift' in Washington's approach to emerging technologies. But as the U.S. throws its weight behind AI as a strategic asset, critics warn that the enthusiasm is muffling one of the most important conversations about AI: its ability to wreak unforeseen harm on the populace, from fairness to existential risk concerns. Among those concerns: bias embedded in algorithmic decisions that affect housing, policing, and hiring; surveillance that could threaten civil liberties; the erosion of copyright protections, as AI models hoover up data and labor protections as automation replaces human work. Kevin De Liban, founder of TechTonic Justice, a nonprofit that focuses on the impact of AI on low income communities, worries that Washington has abandoned its concerns for AI's impact on citizens. 'Big Tech gets fat government contracts, a testing ground for their technologies, and a liability-free regulatory environment,' he said, of Washington's current AI policy environment. 'Everyday people are left behind to deal with the fallout.' There's a much larger question, too, which dominated the early AI debate: whether cutting-edge AI systems can be controlled at all. These risks, long documented by researchers, are now taking a back seat in Washington as the conversation turns to economic advantage and global competition. There's also the very real concern that if an AI company does bring up the technology's worst-case scenarios, it may find itself at odds with the White House itself. Anthropic CEO Amodei said in a May interview that labor force disruptions due to AI would be severe — which triggered a direct attack from Sacks, Trump's AI czar, on his podcast, who said that line of thinking led to 'woke AI.' Still, both Anthropic and OpenAI are going full steam ahead. Anthropic hired nearly a dozen policy staffers in the last two months, while OpenAI similarly grew its policy office over the past year. They're also pushing to become more important federal contractors by getting critical FedRAMP authorizations — a federal program that certifies cloud services for use across government — which could unlock billions of dollars in contracts. As tech companies grow increasingly cozy with the government, the political will to regulate them is fading — and in fact, Congress appears hostile to any efforts to regulate them at all. In a public comment in March, OpenAI specifically asked the Trump administration for a voluntary federal framework that overrides state AI laws, seeking 'private sector relief' from a patchwork of state AI bills. Two months later, the House added language to its reconciliation bill that would have done exactly that — and more. The provision to impose a 10 year moratorium on state AI regulations passed the House but is expected to be knocked out by the Senate parliamentarian. (Breaking ranks again, Anthropic is lobbying against the moratorium.) Still, the provision has widespread support amongst Republicans and is likely to make a comeback.
