RBI's rate cut hopes fade as Trump threatens India with 25% tariffs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Jim Cramer Breaks Down the Selloff in Align Technology Stock
Align Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ:ALGN) is one of the stocks that Jim Cramer spoke about. Cramer highlighted that the company 'missed its numbers badly.' He remarked: 'What do you make of the shocking decline in a company like Align Technology? That's the maker of Invisalign clear aligners. It's the gold standard, the one that dentists love to recommend, but it missed its numbers badly, and its stock collapsed, down nearly 37%, one session. Let me tell you what CEO Joe Hogan, who again is no slouch, gave as his excuse for the weakness in his conference call. Listen to this, 'In the face of a challenging and uncertain macroeconomic backdrop characterized by global tariff volatility, ongoing inflation, elevated interest rates, and unstable consumer confidence, we're navigating with a clear focus to control what we can.' Then he says, 'significant headwinds across the consumer discretionary spend landscape' has come to hurt these guys. I say, well, wait, wait a second, wait a second. We're talking about clear braces here; we're talking about your teeth. To me, that's not really that much of a discretionary item, at least not in America, maybe in Britain. But most Americans get their teeth straightened, or at least they did. I mean, apparently now it's becoming discretionary spending. People must really be strapped. Because I believe Hogan, I've had him on the show a bunch of times.' A laptop and a computer monitor display a detailed stock market technical analysis chart. Photo by Jakub Zerdzicki on Pexels Align Technology (NASDAQ:ALGN) develops and markets Invisalign clear aligners, retainers, and iTero intraoral scanners, as it provides digital solutions for orthodontic and restorative dental treatments. The company's products include aligner systems for all age groups, 3D printed devices, and CAD/CAM software for dental professionals. While we acknowledge the potential of ALGN as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 30 Stocks That Should Double in 3 Years and 11 Hidden AI Stocks to Buy Right Now. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey. 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
The Hill
2 minutes ago
- The Hill
The numbers in Trump's EU trade deal are a joke
President Trump announced a trade deal with the European Union last month, proclaiming a 'generational modernization of the transatlantic alliance' that will 'provide Americans with unprecedented levels of market access' and is 'yet another agreement that positions the United States as the world's preeminent destination for investment, innovation, and advanced manufacturing.' The EU has been criticized heavily for folding to Trump. However, after many years of studying, practicing and teaching negotiations, I am not nearly so critical of the European strategy. Negotiating with Trump inevitably leads to three possible tactics: ignoring, retaliating or capitulating. Everyone goes for one or more of these tactics. But most have ended up at the last one, capitulating. The U.K. (like Columbia University, and perhaps soon Harvard) was much derided when it pioneered the capitulation strategy in May. But it is not necessarily a bad strategy when confronted by Trump. Alan Beattie of the Financial Times perceptively notes that 'Trump likes deals that aren't worth the handshake they're written on.' 'Roll with the punch,' he suggests, 'get the lowest baseline tariff you can, offer him some concessions with good optics but low impact, talk up the importance of the deal for the benefit of his ego and hope he moves on.' And so the EU has done. The U.S.-EU trade 'agreement' is apocryphal. Others have called it delusional. It is both — and thus important to understand. First, some context. In 2015, roughly the end of the Bretton Woods era for trade, the average weighted U.S. tariff against all goods was about 1.7 percent. Against EU goods it was 1.47 percent, versus 1.35 percent on U.S. goods into the EU. America currently imports more than $605 billion a year in goods from the EU. Trump's 'biggest deal ever made,' with a few exceptions, 'reduces' tariffs to 15 percent (steel and aluminum remain at 50 percent). However, it is not technically a deal. It is filled with numerous ' commitments ' such as 'work to address' and 'intend to work together,' or 'intend to address' and, curiously, 'take complementary actions to address.' This is the type of language used in a preliminary phase of a framework agreement, which would be the precursor to a serious trade negotiation. The White House is claiming that, first, that the EU will invest $600 billion directly in the U.S. during Trump's term (three times the rate it has invested in the past). This is, if not delusional, at least fantastical. The second concrete claim by the White House is that 'the EU will double down on America as the Energy Superpower by purchasing $750 billion of U.S. energy exports through 2028.' As Clyde Russell shows clearly in Reuters, these numbers simply do not make sense. But then, they need not. They serve their performative purpose well enough. Chalk up a specious victory and move on. Consider that in 2024, the EU imported 573 million barrels of crude oil from the U.S., which is valued currently at about $40.1 billion. The EU imported U.S. liquified natural gas in 2024 worth about $21.78 billion and bought about $2.67 billion in U.S. coal. So EU energy imports (at $64.55 billion) are about 26 percent of the $250 billion the EU is supposed to spend on American energy each year under the framework agreement. If the EU reaches the $250 billion a year goal, U.S. imports would account for 85 percent of its total spending on those energy commodities. While this appears to be a plus for U.S. producers, it would massively disrupt global energy markets (not to mention violate many long-term supply contracts). But more startling, it would exceed total current U.S. exports. Putting together the value of U.S. exports for all three energy commodities totals $165.8 billion, Russell calculates, 'meaning that even if the EU bought the entire volume it would still fall well short of the $250 billion.' Including nuclear adds a few billion dollars at best. Expanding to refined products, such as diesel? Perhaps another $10 billion. So the EU's commitment to buy $250 billion worth of American energy is entirely unrealistic and unachievable. 'The smart people in the room must know this,' Russell writes, so 'why agree to what is obviously a ridiculous number?' The only answer is the obvious one, and the most troubling. Substance doesn't matter, only performance. Where businesses must operate on substance and factual reality, politicians operate increasingly on attention-gaining performance. This may explain why Trump has done so poorly in business and so well in politics (and in the businesses he is generating based on politics). So, despite substantive criticisms of the EU team, they in fact made a perfectly understandable agreement. Specifically, when only attention matters and the substance of the deal is a mere side story of the performance, one can agree to almost anything. In this case, the more fantastical the better. Why didn't EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen promise $900 billion? Trump would be even happier and Europe even less likely to uphold the 'agreement.' Smile, suck-up, sign, shrug and move on. The real negotiation is somewhere down the road; perhaps tomorrow afternoon. Well, maybe. Trump's authority even to make such a deal is still being litigated. The one unavoidable fact is that America has abandoned the rules-based trading system it carefully built over three-quarters of a century. It is a brave new world of U.S. trade 'agreements' based on rapid-fire, plainly meaningless commitments — but what a performance! Robert A. Rogowsky is professor of trade and diplomacy at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies and adjunct professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. He is a former chief economist and director of operations at the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas redistricting war escalates across the country
The decision by Texas Democrats to flee the state has ratcheted up tensions and started a new phase in the redistricting war around the country. Democrats from the Lone Star State's Legislature fled to Illinois, New York and Massachusetts starting Sunday to avoid giving Republicans the quorum needed to pass a highly unusual effort for partisan, middecade redistricting that could benefit them in next year's midterms. In response, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) ordered the arrest of the 'delinquent' Democrats, not long after Republicans in the state House passed a motion directing officials to bring them back to the state under warrant. 'Texas House Democrats abandoned their duty to Texans,' Abbott said in a statement Monday afternoon. 'By fleeing the state, Texas House Democrats are holding hostage critical legislation to aid flood victims and advance property tax relief. There are consequences for dereliction of duty.' The rapidly escalating tit for tat underscores how the redistricting battle has turned into an all-out national brawl ahead of what both parties expect to be a fiercely fought midterm election. 'Let's be clear, this is not just rigging the system in Texas,' Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) told reporters on Sunday, flanked by Texas Democrats. 'It's about rigging the system against the rights of all Americans for years to come.' The Texas Democrats' decision to break quorum — or the minimum number of lawmakers needed in order to conduct business in the Legislature — came as Republicans look to advance an even friendlier GOP congressional map that could net them five additional seats ahead of next year. The redistricting move was encouraged by President Trump as Republicans brace for an unfavorable political environment next year — and the possibility of Democratic investigations into his administration if the party loses the House. Democrats have portrayed the redistricting effort as a naked power grab by Republicans. The current map, authored by a Republican-dominated statehouse in 2021, gives Republicans 65 percent of the state congressional seats — a sizable advantage over the 55 percent of the state electorate who votes for the party. But if Trump gets the five additional seats he wants, that advantage would expand to 80 percent of the state's congressional House caucus — a 25 percent advantage secured with no additional need for persuasion. A Texas House panel advanced the House map last week, teeing it up for a floor vote. With Democrats out of the state, however, the efforts to pass the new map are temporarily stalled. In addition to the threats of arrest, Abbott also said he would strip lawmakers who failed to return to the state Capitol of their seats. Texas lawmakers already incur a daily $500 fine and threat of arrest for breaking quorum, and Abbott previously threatened them with bribery charges if national Democrats pick up the tab. 'Texans don't run from a fight — they face it head on,' Abbott wrote on the social platform X. 'These Texas Democrats that fled the state are not serving Texans. They are serving themselves. They forfeited their seats and are facing potential felony charges.' Speaking to reporters in Illinois on Sunday, Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu said they didn't make the decision lightly to leave the state, but he added that this was 'absolutely the right thing to do to protect the people of the state of Texas.' Democratic leaders from across the country were quick to join in the fight. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said he's weighing several options, including through a ballot measure or through the state Legislature, for how to proceed as the Golden State eyes redrawing its own maps in response to Texas. Pritzker has vowed to protect lawmakers who traveled to his state from the threat of arrest from top Texas leaders. And while hosting several Texas Democrats in her state on Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) said she will explore different options available to redraw her state's maps. 'We're sick and tired of being pushed around when other states don't have the same aspirations that we always have had, and I hold those dear, but I cannot ignore that the playing field has changed dramatically,' Hochul said. 'And shame on us if we ignore that fact and cling tight to the vestiges of the past. That era is over.' The support from national Democrats, and the threats of arrest, mark a sea change from when Texas Democrats last left the state in response to Republican midcycle redistricting efforts in 2003. The decision then also occurred in response to a then-unprecedented middecade redistricting push by Republicans, which eventually transformed the state's congressional delegation from a comfortably Democratic majority to one with 2-to-1 Republican dominance — and locked in the GOP's generational control over the state Legislature. The latest Texas battle comes as redistricting has become increasingly normalized by both sides. When Republicans took the state House for the first time in 2002, they took power despite generations of redistricting by the state's long-dominant Democratic majority — giving weight to arguments that they deserved their own stab at drawing new lines, Southern Methodist University historian Cal Jillson said. While Democrats have rebuked Texas GOP leaders for gerrymandering an already Republican-favored House map, the party has also been criticized for doing the same in states like New York and Illinois, both of which have hosted Texas lawmakers. In fact, a court struck down a map passed by New York Democrats in 2022 over partisan gerrymandering, mandating a court-appointed special master to draw the House lines instead. The broader redistricting tit for tat has also prompted a reversal among some Democrats around redistricting commissions, which were created with the intent to distance lawmakers from the process of drawing maps. At the same time, the redistricting battle has also created fissures within the GOP, some of whom are against midcycle redistricting. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) is introducing legislation that would block new House maps from being implemented ahead of the next U.S. census in 2030, though notably a statement from the California Republican only invoked Newsom. But the Republican argument that Texas redistricting is their means of addressing what they call an unfair national map marks how much things have changed. Unlike in 2003, 'you can't make the argument' that Republican redistricting is redressing an unfair map in Texas, Jillson said, because the gerrymandered maps the state GOP is now trying to redraw are ones that state Republicans drew just four years ago. Abbott and the majority of state congressional Republicans opposed redistricting, which they worried would threaten their seats — until Trump applied pressure, The Texas Tribune reported. Republicans also say there are risks involved if Abbott tries to oust Democrats from their offices. 'So you take them out of office and you have elections, then you still don't have a quorum. Then you kind of basically shot yourself in the foot,' explained lobbyist and political consultant Bill Miller, who served on state Rep. Tom Craddick's (R) transition team in 2003, when Craddick was Texas House Speaker — and the architect of that year's bitter redistricting fight. 'The only thing that I would say from my experience is these wounds that are created by these fights don't heal easily, and they're remembered,' he said. 'A long time in ways that people forget.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
