Gold falls on strong US jobs data and improved trade outlook
Gold prices fell on Monday as a stronger-than-expected U.S. jobs report cooled expectations of interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve, while optimism over easing trade tensions between U.S.-China weighed on the bullion's safe-haven demand.
ADVERTISEMENT
* Spot gold fell 0.2% to $3,303.19 an ounce, as of 0056 GMT. U.S. gold futures fell 0.7% to $3,323.40.
* Three of U.S. President Donald Trump's top aides will meet with their Chinese counterparts in London on Monday for talks aimed at resolving the trade dispute between the two largest economies that has kept global markets on edge.
* The U.S. economy added 139,000 jobs in May, surpassing analysts' expectations, while the unemployment rate was unchanged at 4.2%, the Labor Department said. * Wage growth also exceeded forecasts, dampening the likelihood of imminent rate cuts. * Investors have scaled back bets on rate cuts, now anticipating one reduction in October.
ADVERTISEMENT * Trump, meanwhile, said that a decision on the next Federal Reserve chair would be announced soon, adding that a "good Fed chair" would lower interest rates. * The U.S. dollar index edged slightly up, making gold more expensive for overseas buyers. * On the geopolitical front, Trump's order banning citizens of 12 countries from entering the U.S. goes into effect on Monday. * Russia stated on Sunday that its forces had advanced to the edge of Ukraine's Dnipropetrovsk region amid tensions over peace talks and the repatriation of soldiers' remains.
ADVERTISEMENT
* Gold, often seen as a hedge against inflation and geopolitical uncertainty, could face pressure from higher interest rates, which reduce its appeal as a non-yielding asset.
* Elsewhere, spot silver remains unchanged at $35.94 per ounce, platinum fell 0.5% to $1,163.10, while palladium was down 0.5% to $1,041.75. DATA/EVENTS (GMT) 0130 China PPI, CPI YY May.
ADVERTISEMENT
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
12 minutes ago
- Mint
Canada's Ex-Minister Urges Better China Ties to Hedge US Risks
Canada should bolster ties with China to hedge against uncertainty from US President Donald Trump's approach to bilateral relations, according to a former top Canadian official. 'Who are the other reliable partners we have in the world?' said Bill Morneau, who served as finance minister under former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau through 2020. Noting that China is Canada's second-largest trading partner, after the US, he said it's no surprise that Prime Minister Mark Carney is looking to build 'a more stable and expansive trading relationship with China and other countries.' Morneau's comments come as Canada seeks to diversify its economic partnerships while talks with the US drag on. Earlier this month, Carney spoke with Chinese Premier Li Qiang about trade and tackling the fentanyl crisis in a sign of warming ties. Carney's government also invited Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the Group of Seven leaders' summit in Alberta this weekend. Morneau, speaking Wednesday at the Bloomberg Invest conference in Hong Kong, said that while Ottawa should look to reach a trade deal with Washington and maintain strong ties, officials also need to protect the economy and Canada's own interests from the currently 'very volatile' relationship with its southern neighbor. Canadian and US officials have been holding trade talks for months, with Trump and Carney in direct contact ahead of the G-7 meeting beginning June 15. The two sides are looking to negotiate a deal to ease tariffs on each other's goods. Meanwhile, many of the issues Trump has raised, including undocumented migration into the US, don't relate to Canada, Morneau said. 'My expectation is that much of this is obviously posturing,' said Morneau, who was also previously governor of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. The renegotiation of the trade agreement between the nations will likely include greater access into Canada's protected dairy market and an increased Canadian role in NATO, Morneau said, while any major change to natural-resource sharing — such as Canadian fresh water — is off the table. Carney this week announced a boost to defense spending to meet NATO's target this year, saying it's needed in a 'darker, more competitive world.' Trump has called for all countries to increase their share of global military spending in order to rely less on the US. 'You want to get to as best you can with as many partners as you can, whether its with China or with other parts of the world,' Morneau said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
India Today
12 minutes ago
- India Today
Bros again? Elon Musk's posts spark buzz of 'big, beautiful' patch up with Trump
Months of bromance, a surprise resignation, social media rant, public fiery fallout and regret: Elon Musk's relationship with Donald Trump has been nothing short of a Bollywood drama. The duo once appeared inseparable, sharing stages at public events, Oval Office meetings, and joint press conferences. Then came Musk's shock resignation, and with it, an all-out public fallout. What followed was a no-holds-bar attack from both sides, with people and even Musk's father hoping that the frenemies would soon be back regret some of my posts on Donald Trump," said Musk in a humble post on Wednesday after a week of public rants against 'One Big Beautiful Bill'. Though unanticipated, Musk's walk-back didn't come out of nowhere. In recent days, he's been aligning with the Trump administration's stance on the violent protests in Los Angeles, publicly supporting the crackdown while dialling back his earlier attacks."This is not ok," Musk wrote on X just days after calling for Trump's impeachment and denouncing his signature legislation as a 'disgusting abomination.' MUSK DROPPED HINTS Before today's post, Musk softened his stance on Trump, deleted harsh criticisms, reshared US President's posts and re-followed key allies. He reshared posts from Vance, who declared that the 'president will not tolerate rioting and violence,' and included American flag emojis in his also went on a spree to delete his previous posts critical of Trump. In a now-deleted X post, Musk wrote: 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!'Musk also deleted a post promising to apologise only 'as soon as there is a full dump of the Epstein files.' In another post, Trump had expressed support for Trump's impeachment. When a user suggested to replace him with Vance, Musk replied 'Yes.'These posts disappeared gradually, some overnight with the links to these post now showing a message that says, "Nothing to see here."Apart from deleting these posts, he re-followed Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff, after unfollowing him during their feud last NOT INTERESTED?On Friday, he told ABC News' Jonathan Karl that he was "not particularly" interested in talking with Musk."You mean the man who has lost his mind?" he Friday evening, Trump told reporters, "I'm not thinking about Elon Musk. I just wish him well."Earlier, Trump warned Musk of "very serious consequences" if the tech billionaire follows through on funding primary challengers against sitting Republican have to pay very serious consequences if he does that," Trump said while speaking to NBC News, adding that he has no intentions of reconciliation with the SpaceX CEO.
Mint
13 minutes ago
- Mint
MAGA's remaking of universities could have dire consequences
'THIS IS an economic revolution and we will win." Donald Trump's line on tariffs sounds like something from Robespierre or Engels. And as any revolutionary knows, to sweep away the old order it is not enough just to raise import duties. You also have to seize and refashion the institutions that control the culture. In America that means wresting control of Ivy League universities which play an outsize role in forming the elite (including Mr Trump's cabinet). The MAGA plan to remake the Ivies could have terrible consequences for higher education, for innovation, for economic growth and even for what sort of country America is. And it is only just beginning. The target has been exquisitely chosen. Over the past decade elite universities have lost the bipartisan support they used to enjoy. This was partly their own fault. In too many cases they succumbed to faddish groupthink about oppression, became scared of their student-customers and turned away speakers in the name of safety. At the same time, American politics became more polarised by educational achievement. Kamala Harris lost the popular vote in the 2024 presidential election. But she won Americans with post-graduate degrees by 20 points. This combination left the academy vulnerable. But the most substantive change has been within the Republican Party. Conservatives considered elite universities to be hostile territory even before William F. Buckley published 'God and Man at Yale" in 1951. Yet they also respected the basic compact that exists between universities and the federal government: that taxpayers fund scientific research and provide grants for students from poor families, and in return, universities do world-changing research. Some of the researchers may have views that irk the White House of the day. Many are foreigners. But their work ends up benefiting America. That is why, in 1962, the government funded a particle accelerator, even though some people who would use it had long hair and hated American foreign policy. And why, later that decade, researchers at American universities invented the internet, with military funding. This deal has been the source of military as well as economic power. It has contributed to almost every technological leap that has boosted output, from the internet to mRNA vaccines and GLP-1 agonists to artificial intelligence. It has made America a magnet for talented, ambitious people from around the world. It is this compact—not bringing car factories back to the rust belt—that is the key to America's prosperity. And now the Trump administration wants to tear it up. His government has used federal grants to take revenge on universities: the presidents of Princeton and Cornell criticised the government and promptly had over $1bn in grants cancelled or frozen. It has arrested foreign students who have criticised the conduct of Israel's war in Gaza. It has threatened to increase the tax on endowments: J.D. Vance (Yale Law School) has proposed raising it on large endowments from 1.4% to 35%. What it wants in return varies. Sometimes it is to eradicate the woke-mind virus. Sometimes it is to eradicate antisemitism. It always involves a double standard on free speech, according to which you can complain about cancel culture and then cheer on the deportation of a foreign student for publishing an op-ed in a college newspaper. This suggests that, as with any revolution, it is about who has power and control. So far, universities have tried to lie flat and hope Mr Trump leaves them alone, just like many of the big law firms that the president has targeted. The Ivy presidents meet every month or so, but have yet to come up with a common approach. Meanwhile, Harvard is changing the leadership of its Middle East studies centre and Columbia is on its third president in a year. This strategy is unlikely to work. The MAGA vanguard cannot believe how quickly the Ivies have capitulated. The Ivies also underestimate the fervour of the revolutionaries they are up against. Some of them don't just want to tax Harvard—they want to burn it down. Resisting the administration's assault requires courage. Harvard's endowment is about the same size as the sovereign-wealth fund of the oil-rich sultanate of Oman, which should buy some bravery. But that mooted tax could shrink it quickly. Harvard receives over $1bn in grants each year. Columbia's annual budget is $6bn; it receives $1.3bn in grants. Other elite universities are less fortunate. If even the Ivies cannot stand up to bullying, there is not much hope for elite public universities, which are just as dependent on research funding and do not have vast endowments to absorb government pressure. How, then, should universities respond? Some things that their presidents want to do anyway, such as adopting codes protecting free speech on campus, cutting administrative staff, banning the use of 'diversity" statements in hiring and ensuring more diverse viewpoints among academics, accord with the views of many Republicans (and this newspaper). But the universities should draw a clear line: even if it means losing government funding, what they teach and research is for them to decide. Like Ike This principle is one reason why America became the world's most innovative economy over the past 70 years, and why Russia and China did not. Yet even that undersells its value. Free inquiry is one of the cornerstones of American liberty, along with the freedom to criticise the president without fear of retribution. True conservatives have always known this. 'The free university", said Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell presidential address in 1961, has been 'the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery". Eisenhower, who was president of Columbia before he was president of the United States, warned that when universities become dependent on government grants, the government can control scholarship. For a long time that warning seemed a bit hysterical. America never had a president willing to exert such authority over colleges. Now it does. Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.
