Panama suspends constitutional protections in the northwest after destructive protests
PANAMA CITY (AP) — Panama suspended constitutional protections for five days in its northwestern Bocas del Toro province Friday after two months of protests and road blockades turned more destructive the previous night.
Presidential Minister Juan Carlos Orillac said in a news conference that the move would allow the government to reestablish order and 'rescue the province' from 'radical groups.'
What began as nationwide protests against changes to the social security system morphed Thursday night into people damaging the local airport and the facilities of banana giant Chiquita Brands, which fired thousands of striking workers in the province last month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom Urges JD Vance to Meet With Wildfire Victims During LA Visit
Gavin Newsom urged Vice President JD Vance to meet with wildfire victims during his trip to Los Angeles on Friday. In a video posted midday on X, the California governor indicated that the vice president should also speak with President Donald Trump about securing disaster aid for those who need it in the state. The call came amid heightened tensions between the governor and POTUS as they continue their legal battle over sending the National Guard to L.A. to quell protests related to increased ICE raids in the city. Watch Newsom's video below: I just read JD Vance is coming into town. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 20, 2025 According to Vance's office, the vice president is scheduled to hold briefings with officials from the DOD, DEA, Homeland Security, ICE, the LAPD and California Highway Patrol to address the protests, raids and continued federal presence in L.A. More to come … The post Gavin Newsom Urges JD Vance to Meet With Wildfire Victims During LA Visit | Video appeared first on TheWrap.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
President Donald Trump Broke His Vow Not to Tax Social Security Benefits -- and Retirees Are Being Given This Concession Instead
Getting as much as possible out of Social Security isn't a luxury for most retirees -- it's a borderline necessity. Though President Trump's pledge to end the tax on Social Security benefits had overwhelming support from retirees, it would have been a fiscally irresponsible move. Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill offers a concession directed at low to mid earners aged 65 and up. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › In May, the average monthly Social Security benefit for retired workers hit an important milestone by crossing above $2,000 for the first time in the program's history. Though this is a fairly modest monthly payout, Social Security income plays a foundational role for most retirees in helping make ends meet. Based on an analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Social Security helped pull more than 22 million people above the federal poverty line in 2023, including roughly 16.3 million adults aged 65 and above. What's more, the poverty rate for retirees would soar to an estimated 37.3% if Social Security didn't exist, compared to the 10.1% poverty rate with Social Security income, as of 2023. For many retirees, getting as much out of Social Security as possible isn't a luxury -- it's a borderline necessity to ensure a rock-solid financial foundation. When Trump campaigned on the idea of eliminating the taxation of Social Security benefits, which would allow select recipients to hang onto more of the benefits they receive, his idea garnered overwhelming support from current retirees. But with Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill working its way through Congress, it's become clear that the president's vow to shelve the taxation of benefits has been broken and replaced by a concession instead. On July 31, then-candidate Donald Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social that "Seniors should not pay tax on Social Security." This message was followed up just months after his Jan. 20 inauguration with a speech during a town hall event that proclaimed: In the coming weeks and months, we will pass the largest tax cuts in American history -- and that will include no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, and no tax on overtime. It's called The One, Big Beautiful Bill. Based on an informal poll from nonpartisan senior advocacy group The Senior Citizens League, well over 90% of retired survey-takers believe Social Security benefits shouldn't be subject to federal taxation. Taxing a portion of Social Security benefits for select individuals and jointly filing couples was implemented following the signing of the Social Security Amendments of 1983 into law. Beginning in 1984, up to 50% of benefits could be subject to the federal tax rate if provisional income -- adjusted gross income + tax-free interest + one-half of benefits -- surpassed $25,000 for single filers and $32,000 for couples filing jointly. A second tax tier allowing up to 85% of Social Security benefits to be subject to the federal tax rate was added a decade later for individuals and joint filers topping $34,000 and $44,000 in provisional income, respectively. Aside from the common misconception that this represents a form of double taxation, the reason the tax on benefits is so disliked is because these income thresholds that were introduced in the mid-1980s and mid-1990s haven't once been adjusted for inflation. Due to rising wages and salaries over time, coupled with near-annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), the percentage of senior households subject to this tax has grown from around 10% four decades ago to approximately 50% of all senior households today. The president's One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which was narrowly passed by the House of Representatives and is currently being discussed by lawmakers in the Senate, covers a laundry list of tax changes. It would make the personal income tax brackets under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (which are on track to sunset on Dec. 31, 2025) permanent, increase the state and local income tax deduction, and provide temporary tax relief for overtime pay and tips for four years to qualified individuals. But one key provision that's missing is Trump's vow to eliminate the tax on Social Security benefits. If you're wondering why this promise failed to pass muster, look no further than the economics supporting America's leading social program. Social Security has three sources of funding: The 12.4% payroll tax on wages and salary up to $176,100 (as of 2025). In 2023, the payroll tax accounted for north of 91% of the income collected. The interest income earned on the asset reserves of the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund (OASI) and Disability Insurance trust fund. This excess capital is required by law to be invested in special-issue, interest-bearing government bonds. The taxation of Social Security benefits. The OASI's asset reserves are forecast to run dry by 2033. Though the OASI is in no danger of bankruptcy or insolvency, it does mean most of Social Security's interest income will go away over the next eight years. Furthermore, depleting the OASI's asset reserves would result in sweeping benefit cuts of up to 21% in eight years for retired workers and survivor beneficiaries, according to the 2024 Social Security Board of Trustees Report. Removing the tax on benefits at a time when Social Security is financially challenged would be a fiscally poor decision that can expedite the OASI's asset reserve depletion timeline and potentially result in steeper sweeping benefit cuts. Additionally, President Trump may not have wanted to risk the passage of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill on his "no tax on Social Security" provision. Amending the Social Security Act requires 60 votes in the upper house of Congress, and it's not even clear if all 53 members of his party in the Senate would vote in favor of such a measure. Rather than risk the potential embarrassment of defeat, the president left this provision out of his flagship bill. Although retirees aren't going to be getting rid of the hated tax on Social Security benefits anytime soon, the president and/or lawmakers did throw a concession into The One, Big, Beautiful Bill that's designed to help retirees who need it most. Donald Trump's original plan to shelve the tax on benefits would have padded the pocketbooks of Social Security's highest earners -- i.e., the roughly 50% of senior households whose provisional income surpassed the thresholds that trigger federal taxation on a portion of their Social Security income. The concession placed in The One, Big, Beautiful Bill is designed to reward low- and middle-income retirees who need the financial boost. Keeping in mind that bills are subject to change in Congress, one of the key provisions for retirees in the current bill would temporarily increase the standard deduction for single filers aged 65 and above by $4,000 (and $8,000 for qualifying couples filing jointly) from 2025 through 2028. The catch is that single filers and joint-filing couples would need to have modified adjusted gross incomes below $75,000 and $150,000, respectively, before a phase-out would kick in. This ensures that low- to mid-income retirees are the ones who'd receive the boost in their standard deduction. This enhanced deduction would come atop the extra $2,000 single filers and $3,200 married filers are already able to deduct if aged 65 and above. While this beefed-up standard deduction for seniors aged 65 and older is far less, in nominal dollar terms, than what would be seen if the taxation of benefits was eliminated, it does direct the benefit to those who need it most and likely rely on Social Security as a necessary source of income. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. President Donald Trump Broke His Vow Not to Tax Social Security Benefits -- and Retirees Are Being Given This Concession Instead was originally published by The Motley Fool
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
'The View' host Ana Navarro pleads for Obama to speak out against Trump's 'American nightmare'
"The View" co-host Ana Navarro called Friday on former President Barack Obama to publicly condemn President Donald Trump, saying we are living in "an American nightmare" in his second term and it was his duty to take a stand. After Sunny Hostin and Sara Haines largely defended Obama's right to stay out of the limelight after recent media discussions about his role in the Democratic Party, Navarro pushed for Obama and other past presidents to use their platforms to fight against the Trump administration. "In normal times, former presidents would remain quiet and not criticize or attack the current president, particularly in year one when it was the honeymoon period. Well, this isn't the honeymoon period. It's a nightmare. It's an American nightmare. These are not normal times," she said. Navarro referenced the "No Kings" protests across the nation last weekend where an estimated 5 million people took to the streets to protest the president and his agenda, as Trump held a military parade in Washington, D.C., to mark the Army's 250th birthday. "The American people are taking it upon themselves. They're not waiting for a leader," Navarro continued. "They're not waiting for a great White knight or a Black knight or Latino knight to drive them out of the forest into the wilderness. They're doing it upon themselves." Navarro said she loved that Obama was "happy" and enjoying life out of the political spotlight by "making money" and "making movies." But she insisted it was his obligation to speak out against Trump for endangering the country. "America is in danger. Our democratic values are in danger. I think if you feel that way, each and every one of us has to do everything we absolutely can," she said. "Some of us have a bigger voice. Some of us have a smaller voice." Navarro suggested all the living presidents could come out and make a unified public declaration rebuking the sitting president. Some progressives shared their disappointment that Obama hasn't been more outspoken in his criticism of Trump during the president's second term. "There are many grandmas and Rachel Maddow viewers who have been more vocal in this moment than Barack Obama has," co-founder of the Progressive Change Institute, Adam Green, told The Atlantic in a report published earlier this month. "It is heartbreaking," Green said, "to see him sacrificing that megaphone when nobody else quite has it." Obama campaigned alongside former President Joe Biden before he dropped out of the race and also stumped for former Vice President Kamala Harris when she became the nominee last year. The former president spoke out against Trump in April at an event in New York, but has largely remained out of the spotlight since Trump won. This week in remarks in Connecticut, Obama took veiled shots at Trump but never mentioned him by name. He chided affluent liberals that they might have to go to uncomfortable places if they wanted to be truly progressive in this new era. Obama's office didn't return a request for comment.
