Bank of America golf program helps Austin kids
Why it matters: Golf with Us is one of a number of initiatives in Austin and across the country aiming to make a sport long associated with country clubs more accessible.
How it works: Through a partnership with Youth on Course, a nonprofit that makes golf more financially accessible to children, Bank of America is funding golf for kids ages 6–18 at thousands of courses around the country.
As part of the initiative, kids and teens can get a free golf lesson from pro athletes and celebrities.
Kids can enroll in a free one-year membership to Youth on Course through May 24.
Zoom in: Golf with Us includes access to Hancock, Lions, Morris Williams, Harvey Penick, Jimmy Clay, Roy Kizer, Point Venture and Lago Vista golf courses for $5 or less per round.
18-hole rounds for teenagers normally start at $14 on Austin courses.
Meanwhile, another program trying to get kids on Austin courses is First Tee, a nonprofit that aims to help kids build confidence and manage their emotions through golf.
What they're saying:"At Bank of America, we believe in building stronger communities from the ground up, starting with our youth," said David Bader, Bank of America Austin president.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
US will dodge recession, but Trump's policies will slow economic growth: Report
President Donald Trump's aggressive economic policies will likely significantly slow U.S. growth and push up inflation but stop short of causing a recession or 'stagflation' – the dire scenarios that forecasters envisioned before he took office, a report says. 'The totality of the policies does not push the economy to the brink of recession but it significantly diminishes growth' during Trump's four-year term, said economist Justin Begley of Moody's Analytics. He added, 'It's not yet stagflation but it's edging that way.' Stagflation is an economy characterized by high inflation, slow or stagnant growth and high unemployment – an unusual and toxic cocktail. Typically, a sluggish economy leads to low inflation, allowing the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates to stimulate more borrowing and activity. The Fed, however, faces a dilemma because lowering rates to bolster a softening labor market could further drive up inflation. Consumer price increases generally have eased substantially after a pandemic-related spike but recently edged higher, in part because of Trump's sweeping import levies. His policies are imposing countervailing forces on the economy. Tax cuts and increased spending on border security and defense are set to juice growth. But those positive catalysts are expected to be more than offset by the tariffs, a historic immigration crackdown, layoffs of hundreds of thousands of federal workers and big cuts to social services programs such as Medicaid and food stamps, Begley said. During Trump's presidential race against former Vice President Kamala Harris last year, Moody's, among other research firms, predicted Trump's economic blueprint would spark a recession by mid-2025. Moody's has updated its forecast in part because the contours of his plan recently have become more clearly defined, Begley said. 'We have a better view where things are going,' he said. For example, high double-digit tariffs are in place for steel and aluminum, foreign cars and Chinese imports. And the White House has reached deals with trading partners such as Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and the UK that set tariffs at 10% to 20%. Trump's deportations and constraints on Southern border crossings are well under way. And his huge budget bill, which he signed into law on July 4, expanded his 2017 tax cuts, beefed up military and border security outlays, and slashed some entitlement spending. All told, Moody's projects Trump's policies will reduce economic growth by an average 0.4 percentage points annually – nearly half a point – during his term. That would leave the economy expanding an average 1.7% annually over the four years, with growth bottoming at 1.4% next year and peaking at 2.2% in 2028. The economy grew at an annual rate of 1.2% the first half of 2025. It's projected to grow at slightly less than a 1% pace in the second half, according to economists surveyed by Wolters Kluwer Blue Chip Economic Indicators. By contrast, the economy averaged 2.3% growth the decade after the Great Recession of 2007-2009 and 3.5% during former president Joe Biden's term. The latter, however, included unusually strong gains as the nation emerged from the pandemic recession. In 2024, Biden's last year in office, the economy grew a healthy 2.8%. Growth had been expected to downshift no matter who won the 2024 election as a post-COVID-19 surge in consumer demand petered out, Americans depleted government pandemic aid and other government stimulus measures faded. But by the end of Trump's term in 2028, the economy will be 1.3% smaller than if his policies had not been enacted, Begley wrote in a report. Also, the unemployment rate is expected to peak at 4.7% in 2027 before falling to 4.4% by the time Trump leaves office. Without his policies, unemployment would broadly hold steady at about 4% and there would be about 885,000 additional jobs, Moody's said. Trump's policies similarly are poised to push up inflation by an average of nearly half a percentage point a year. That would leave annual inflation averaging 2.6% during Trump's term and peaking at 3.1% in 2026, based on the Commerce Department's personal consumption expenditures price index. Inflation then would decline and nearly reach the Fed's 2% goal in 2028, the last year of his term. Absent the president's policies, inflation would achieve the Fed's target next year, Begley's analysis shows. Tariffs, by far, represent both the biggest drag on growth and the largest contributor to inflation, Begley said. Companies are expected to pass most of the costs of the duties to consumers, driving up prices. And that's expected to sap their buying power and reduce consumption, which makes up 70% of economic activity. Without the tariffs, the net effects of Trump's policies on growth would be slightly positive, Begley said. The benefits of tax cuts and increased defense and border spending would outweigh the toll taken by the immigration crackdown, federal layoffs and cutbacks to Medicaid and food stamps, he said. Another big hit comes from the deportations. Like the tariffs, the immigration crackdown is projected to both curtail growth and boost inflation. A reduced supply of workers in industries such as construction, agriculture and hospitality is expected to drive up wages and prices. And a smaller population of immigrants means less consumer spending. Here's why Moody's forecast of the effects of Trump's policies is less dire than it was before he took office: Although Trump's tariffs are higher than anticipated, Moody's expected more significant retaliation from foreign countries that would batter U.S. manufacturers' exports. At least so far, those nations have taken a more restrained approach. Moody's figured the Trump administration would seek to deport about 1 million immigrants who lack permanent legal status each year. But Begley said that has proven logistically challenging. Goldman Sachs estimates monthly deportations have averaged an annualized pace of about 600,000. Although Trump vowed during his campaign to eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, Moody's didn't necessarily expect him to follow through. The budget bill, however, scraps taxes on tips up to $25,000 a year and over time up to $12,500. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Will the US dodge a recession? Economist weighs in on Trump policies 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
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Apple's 10% Stock Pop: Time to Invest in the Technology Giant Embracing America?
Key Points Apple has increased its spending plans in the United States from $500 billion to $600 billion. There are positives and negatives to the announcement from an investor's perspective. Shares of Apple stock look expensive today relative to its growth rate. 10 stocks we like better than Apple › Investors are back on the Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) train. The stock of the multinational technology giant is still down slightly in 2025 but popped over 10% in the last week after management announced new planned spending in the U.S. CEO Tim Cook even visited the White House in a joint press conference with President Donald Trump to announce this new planned spending on components for the iPhone as well as other Apple products in America. It has helped the company achieve some breathing room around potential tariffs on semiconductors, iPhone components, and iPhones themselves getting imported to America. Apple's stock got its mojo back on this upsized spending news, but should you actually buy shares today? Here's what the numbers say. A $600 billion investment Earlier this year, Apple announced that it would spend $500 billion over the next four years in the United States. Last week, it upped its estimate to $600 billion, or $150 billion annually. This is different than a company's announced capital expenditure plans, such as when Amazon promises $100 billion in investments related to data centers and its delivery network. Apple is spending money with its suppliers, including advanced glass screens and various semiconductor manufacturers. It is more of an announcement around committed orders for products, which will spur demand for factory work in the United States. Apple is a sprawling company, and the announced spending will occur in all 50 states, impact 450,000 jobs, and involve 79 different factories. It is astounding how complex Apple's supply chain for the iPhone and other computing hardware is today. However, Apple is still not at the point of a "Made in America iPhone" as assembly and other services are performed in China and India, with Apple negotiating with the U.S. government around what is feasible to bring to the United States. Investors applauded the spending plans as a way to shy away from tariff risks on iPhone and semiconductor imports, which could have added huge costs to Apple's supply chain, damaging its profits. Now, it seems to be in good standing with the U.S. government and regulation authorities again. Does the announcement matter? In regard to tariffs, this spending announcement won't necessarily hurt the company, it just prevents Apple from having future cost increases across its supply chain. However, since the U.S. has higher salaries and labor standards, this investment may lead to higher input costs for product components, which could lead to margin compression. Apple's operating margin has steadily risen since the COVID-19 pandemic, hitting a record high of 32% over the last 12 months. Sourcing components in the United States may reverse this expansion. What matters more at the end of the day is demand for Apple's products. Last quarter, the company released solid figures for the three months ending in June. Total revenue grew just under 10% year over year, driven by services revenue and iPhone revenue growth. Even though the iPhone is almost 20 years old, it remains the bread and butter of Apple's business today. This puts the company in a tough spot. Even though the iPhone remains wildly popular, unit volumes have stagnated for years, meaning Apple is only able to grow revenue by increasing prices. This is not an ideal position to be in. Price increases may be necessary just to maintain profit margins in the future if input costs grow due to the Made-in-America investments. All in all, this announcement does matter. It just might be a negative for Apple's business, contrary to the stock's initial reaction. The truth about Apple stock There are a lot of arguments to be made -- both bearish and bullish -- for Apple stock. Bulls might say this is a fantastic brand with major lock-in effects along with a growing services division with strong profit margins. Bears may say that Apple's unit volumes for the iPhone have fallen with no new successful products coming down the pipeline. For example, the Apple Vision Pro has turned into a total product bust, likely losing the company billions if not tens of billions of dollars. A deciding factor in this debate could be the stock's valuation. Apple's price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) is 35. This is quite expensive for a business with low revenue growth. Compare that to Alphabet, which has grown its revenue significantly faster than Apple over the last few years but trades at a more reasonable P/E ratio of 22. Apple may be a great business, but that doesn't mean you should ignore the price you pay when analyzing its stock. Avoid buying shares of Apple after this post-announcement pop. Should you invest $1,000 in Apple right now? Before you buy stock in Apple, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Apple wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $663,630!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,115,695!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,071% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Brett Schafer has positions in Alphabet and Amazon. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, and Apple. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Apple's 10% Stock Pop: Time to Invest in the Technology Giant Embracing America? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
How investors should be thinking as the stock market nears a P/E ratio of 30—a number that spelled disaster before the dotcom crash
Something doesn't make sense about the current stock market boom. U.S. big caps keep soaring while the economic outlook keeps getting worse. Right now, the atmospherics, Big Momentum and AI euphoria, are winning over the negative news flow and daunting market metrics. But sooner or later the fundamentals will take charge, and then, watch out for flying glass. On the macro scene, the danger signs are multiplying. The latest employment report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics disclosed that the U.S. added a meager 73,000 jobs in July, and revised the May and June figures radically downward, bringing total net hires for the past three months to just 106,000, less than one fourth the increase for the same period last year. Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, described the feeble data as a 'game changer' demonstrating that 'the labor market is deteriorating quickly.' GDP growth has also proved disappointing, clocking far below the Trump administration's highly aspirational target of 3%. The economy expanded at an annualized clip of just 1.75% through the first half of 2025, way down from the 2.7% average in Q3 and Q4 of last year. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is forecasting tepid expansion of 1.7% to 1.8% from 2026 to 2035, not nearly fast enough to shrink the federal debt that the agency projects will swell from 100% of national income this year to 110% by 2031. On the inflation front, it appears that the Trump tariffs are finally starting to bite. The Labor Department's producer price index surged 0.9% in June, the largest increase in almost three years. It's unclear if the Trump duties are causing the surge, but at the least they amount to a giant tax increase. The Tax Foundation projects that the onslaught will cost consumers and companies roughly $200 billion annually, the equivalent of around 6% of the total Washington collected last year in all personal and corporate income levies, amounting to the biggest hit since 1993. On average, Americans will be spending an extra 1.4% of their after-tax incomes on toys, apparel, autos, and other heavily taxed imports, leaving fewer dollars for everything else. The CBO views the Trump tariffs as a growth-depressant that its director recently told Congress will 'reduce the size of the U.S. economy' going forward. The full force of that effective national sales tax is building. A parade of companies including Walmart, Target, Nintendo, Ford, and GM have stated that though they're swallowing part of the tariff costs, they're already starting to pass a portion of the burden to consumers, and their narrow margins will mandate bigger increases to come. The residential real estate market, for both sales and construction, remains stymied by a combination of record housing prices and mortgage rates hovering at roughly 6.7%, twice the cost three and a half years ago. Young families facing the affordability chasm may be forced to keep renting and forgo ownership much longer than in previous generations. That gridlock is sapping a powerhouse central to the nation's prosperity. The chief hope for bullish investors: a Fed rate reduction in September and a series of additional cuts arriving later in this year and during 2026. Though the markets now assess the probability of substantial trimming from the current benchmark of 4.3% to 4.5% as a virtual certainty, the prospect hasn't led to a significant decline in the number that matters most: the 10-year Treasury yield, which determines such essentials as the cost of home and car loans and credit for corporations. That figure is holding steady at around 4.3%, just about where it stood prior to the unveiling of Liberation Day tariffs in early April. Why are stocks so high right now? That fading backdrop stands at odds with superrich equity valuations. Prices are so extremely stretched that they risk a sharp fall, or at minimum weak gains looking forward. The problem: The S&P 500's charge is far outpacing the plodding advance in earnings. At the market close on Aug. 14, the big-cap index posted yet another record at 6,469. As of Q1 2025, the last full quarter of reported profits, S&P 500 earnings per share, based on the trailing 12-month results, stood at $216.69. Hence, the S&P price-to-earnings multiple just hit 29.85 (6,469 divided by $216.69)—I'll round it to 30. By historical standards, it's a gigantic, even scary figure. The $3.30 that investors are garnering for every $100 they dispense on the S&P 500 marks the worst deal since the last, heady days just before the tech craze's implosion in early 2002. The market P/E actually did reach just over 30 for five other quarters in the almost quarter-century span, but that's only the result of extraordinary downturns that crushed the earnings denominator, first during the Global Financial Crisis and again in the COVID crash. Except in those special cases where earnings per share (EPS) collapsed and artificially inflated the multiple, this is the first time the P/E has reached within a whisker of 30 since what's renowned as one of the most-unhinged times in the annals of financial markets. It's also cautionary that the P/E struck 30 only during just one period between 1888, where the data begins, and the start of the dotcom takeoff in 1998. The landmark we've just seen repeated occurred in 1929, shortly prior to the wipeout ushering in the Great Depression. What's especially troubling is the way the multiple reached its current heights. The main driver wasn't what matters most: rising profits. Since the pre-COVID end of 2019, EPS for the S&P 500 increased by 67% or 9% annually, while the index has waxed far faster at 120%, or 14% a year. It's those divergent, sprint versus jogging performances that hiked the P/E from 22 to 30. Of course, as Warren Buffett likes to note, stocks compete with bonds for investor money, and falling interest rates are great for equities. But in the past couple of years, we've seen the opposite scenario. Bond yields have spiked after years in the cellar to something like normal levels, making Treasuries far more attractive today than when the 10-year yielded an average of 2.2% from 2015 to early 2022. Now they're paying twice that coupon at 4.3%, while the earnings yield on stocks—that $3.30 for every $100 you're paying—has dwindled. Where will the stock market go from here? Indeed, an excellent proxy for the future expected returns on equities is that earnings yield, now sitting at 3.3%. Assume the consumer price index (CPI) keeps chugging at 2.5%—meaning companies are lifting their prices and profits at that pace—and you get a total gain of 5.8% a year. The S&P dividend yield accounts for 1.2% of that figure. By the way, that tiny cash payout epitomizes why equities are looking so frothy. Here's the math, and it's simple: Even assuming the P/E holds at today's 30, you'll only get that 5.8% (the 3.3% earnings yield plus 2.5% inflation)—just 40% of the sumptuous take since the summer of 2019. But what happens if that multiple drifts downward to, say, a still elevated 25 over the next half-decade? In that case, by August of 2030, the shrinkage in the P/E would completely erase the appreciation driven by earnings growth, plus the dividend's contribution, and S&P stocks would show no gain at all. You'd lose something like 10% to inflation. The market moonshot has been great for people who believed and stayed invested. Despite assurances from Wall Street banks and TV pundits, the argument for leaning heavily on stocks is a lot flimsier today than before the liftoff, and the appeal of bonds much greater. You never know when gravity will take hold, only that it always does. This story was originally featured on
