♋ Cancer Daily Horoscope for July 8, 2025
Love & Relationships
Your relationships deepen subtly but significantly today. Honest conversations and gentle reassurance foster stronger, richer connections. Celebrate how both you and your loved ones have grown—small adjustments have led to profound closeness.
Career & Ambitions
Trust your intuition—ideas that arise now are grounded in clarity and foresight. Leadership doesn't require loud impact; your elegant, thoughtful approach at work will be appreciated by peers and superiors alike .
Finance
Emotional steadiness helps you make practical choices. Focus on resourcefulness rather than impulse. Avoid rash decisions—careful budgeting and small, steady steps strengthen your financial foundations.
Health & Well‑being
Stability is your keyword. Balance activity with rest: a calm walk, a nourishing meal, or time in nature helps maintain emotional and physical equilibrium.
Other Guidance
Today encourages unity. Gathering with trusted friends or family can spark inspiration or mutual encouragement. Prioritize connections that feel genuine and uplifting .
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Federal Reserve holds US interest rates despite Trump pressure
A divided Federal Reserve held US interest rates steady on Wednesday, even as President Donald Trump intensified his pressure campaign on the central bank to lower borrowing costs. The Fed's target range remained set at 4.25 to 4.50 per cent following the central bank's decision to extend its rate-cut pause for a fifth consecutive month. The UAE Central Bank, which follows Fed decisions because of the dollar peg, also maintained its base rate at 4.4 per cent following the US central bank's announcement. "Although swings in net exports continue to affect the data, recent indicators suggest that growth of economic activity moderated in the first half of the year," the Fed said in a statement. Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman dissented, preferring to lower the target range by 25 basis points. It was the first time in more than two decades that two Fed governors dissented on a policy decision. Fed officials have adopted a 'wait-and-see' approach in policy decisions this year after cutting rates by 100 basis points in 2024. Mr Trump's trade, fiscal and immigration agendas have raised expectations among most economists that a trend in moderating inflation could change course, and that economic growth and the jobs market could weaken if the administration follows through with its policies. Earlier on Wednesday, Mr Trump seized on a better-than-expected GDP report to demand lower interest rates. '2Q GDP JUST OUT: 3%, WAY BETTER THAN EXPECTED! 'Too Late' MUST NOW LOWER THE RATE. No Inflation! Let people buy, and refinance, their homes!' he wrote on the Truth Social media platform. Trump pressure The President claims that reducing the federal funds rate to 1 per cent would save the US $1 trillion on interest costs to help service the national debt – a concept known as fiscal dominance. However, data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis showed the US spent $1.1 trillion in interest on its debt last year. So far, Mr Trump's unrelenting demands to lower rates have had no effect on Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell or his colleagues. And even Fed members who have called for rate cuts have suggested doing so at a far more moderate pace than what Mr Trump wants. Mr Trump's attacks have tested the independence of the Fed, which is a quasi-private institution that presidents typically do not interfere with. Tension between Mr Trump and Mr Powell spilt out in public last week when the two bickered over the Fed's renovation costs at its headquarters in Washington. Some observers believe that Mr Trump is using the project's cost overruns as a pretext to fire the Mr Powell, although the President said he does not believe firing Mr Powell is necessary. Mr Powell and his 11 colleagues on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) entered this week divided on interest rates. Two members had publicly backed cutting rates now in the weeks leading up to the July meeting, while others expressed a desire to wait for greater clarity on tariffs' impact on the economy. A separate camp argued that rates should remain steady until there is clear weakening in the labour market. While Mr Trump has demanded rate cuts, his tariff agenda is likely to have had the opposite effect. Fed officials have repeatedly said they want greater clarity on the new tariffs' effects on the economy before moving to cut rates again. Mr Powell has also said the Fed would have cut rates by now were it not for the uncertainty caused by the tariffs. The effective US tariff rate today is 18.2 per cent, the highest since 1934, according to The Budget Lab at Yale. Economists argue businesses will eventually pass those costs on to consumers, and the Fed has suggested such prices could be seen this summer. Mr Powell has previously warned higher costs could come this summer. And he has exercised extreme caution towards cutting interest rates in the face of Mr Trump's tariffs after nearly returning inflation back to its 2 per cent goal following a post-pandemic price surge. The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index rose to as high as 7 per cent in June 2022 before moderating to its current 2.3 per cent rate – although still above the Fed's long-term goal. Fed divisions Debates within the Fed were expected to centre on which side of the central bank's dual mandate would require immediate attention. Unlike other central banks, the Fed is tasked with promoting price stability and maximum unemployment. Heading into this week's two-day meeting, though, policymakers were still more concerned about the inflationary impact of tariffs and whether businesses would handle or pass the costs associated with the new tariffs. Mr Waller has been among the minority of Fed officials in favour of cutting rates this month, arguing that they need to move soon before the labour market further weakens. Recent data showed that the labour market as being in a state of stasis with both hiring and quit rates near historic lows, even as the unemployment rate remains stable at 4.1 per cent. Separate data showed that tariffs are beginning to appear in some aspects of the economy. Inflation data released this month showed the prices of everyday products like toys and household appliances increased last month in a sign that costs are beginning to be passed on to consumers. A report from the Commerce Department earlier on Wednesday showed the US GDP also bounced back in the second quarter after businesses had stocked up on imports – which are subtracted from the measure of economic activity – in the first quarter. And while consumer spending rose from 0.5 per cent to 1.4 per cent, business and residential investment dipped. Final sales to private domestic purchasers, meanwhile, slowed from 1.9 per cent in the first quarter to 1.2 per cent in the second quarter. Fed officials were expected to receive more information this week including inflation and unemployment data from June on Thursday and Friday, respectively.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Google, Chrome and default settings: what's at stake for Alphabet's anti-trust remedy
An antitrust remedy decision that could bring an end to Google's search dominance is expected soon. During closing arguments in late May, US District Judge Amit Mehta indicated he would be likely to release his remedy order for Google by early August. According to court filings, Mr Mehta on Tuesday asked the search company to file a brief to clarify an issue related to device manufacturers who have agreed to use the company's Chrome browser by default. Mr Mehta gave Google until August 1 to file the brief, which likely means he is nearing a decision. Because of lengthy litigation, which began in 2020, followed by the remedy portion of the trial, which began this year, it's easy to forget that Mr Mehta had decided in late 2024 that Alphabet-owned Google unfairly used its search monopoly to hurt competition, and as a result, harm consumers. And in a separate antitrust case, Google was also found to have unfairly boxed out competition in search advertising by coupling its publisher advertising server and advertising exchange technologies. The search giant is appealing part of that decision. Throughout the remedy portion of the trial, which heard testimony from technology executives, economists and regulatory experts, the Justice Department made clear that it wants Mr Mehta to enact far-reaching penalties against Google that would be a warning to other companies, while also providing more choice for consumers. Federal prosecutors want Google to divest its Chrome browser from its portfolio, and it wants the tech giant to share coveted search data with competitors. Yet, Google and its bench heavy with lawyers have pushed for a far less stringent remedy that would allow it to retain control of its Chrome browser, while also giving device manufacturers, and ultimately users, more windows of opportunity to change their default search provider within browsers. 'Our proposal allows browsers to continue to offer Google Search to their users and earn revenue from that partnership … but it also provides them with additional flexibility,' Google said during closing arguments in May. The decision has browser companies like Mozilla, maker of the Firefox browser, walking a tightrope between wanting more market share amid Google's Chrome dominance, and also not upsetting existing revenue streams provided by contracts with Google. 'Essentially, the remedies may hand even more power to Big Tech, threatening long-term competition and the health of the open web,' read an email from a public relations firm hired by Mozilla. Google's influence is unrivalled and its deep pockets have allowed it to secure a presence on various devices through lucrative contracts with companies like Apple. Depending on the severity of the remedy, Apple could lose out on reoccurring payments from Google. Eddy Cue, one of Apple's senior executives, took the witness box during the remedy hearings in May, claiming that Google's power was beginning to erode, with users starting to pivot from search engines to AI chatbots. Sceptics of antitrust intervention might look at those comments and say that a harsh penalty on Google would be superfluous, and that the free market should be allowed to, eventually, dethrone the company. Others, however, might point to the wealth that's been stockpiled from Google's search dominance, and how that wealth has enabled the company to create an arsenal of AI technologies like Gemini and its research division DeepMind, and that the Alphabet-owned company would just find ways to abuse its power in the emerging sector. Mark MacCarthy, a senior fellow at the Institute for Technology Law and Policy at Georgetown University in Washington, who has studied antitrust policy for several decades, acknowledged in a previous interview with The National that Google's dominance presents a unique challenge for Mr Mehta. He said that with Google's recent antitrust defeat over its advertising business and the forthcoming decision related to browsers and search dominance, there could be a large amount of co-operation between the courts involved. But Prof MacCarthy said that the current regulatory agencies might not be up to the challenge of properly enforcing the remedy. 'My view is that this would be better done by a new digital regulatory agency,' he said. That said, given the sweeping layoffs in the federal government under President Donald Trump, there's little indication that the White House has any appetite for a new regulatory agency. All of the moving parts, combined with a dismantling of the federal workforce, invariably forces Mr Mehta to approach his decision with delicacy, and it will also likely work in Google's favour. Yet, even if the remedy is all bark and no bite, it could be enough of a distraction that a technology company like Google dreads amid a rapid rise in competitors.
The National
5 hours ago
- The National
Nvidia defends H20 GPU sales to China amid criticism from Democratic senators
Nvidia has defended itself against recent criticism over a decision by President Donald Trump's administration to grant licences to the company to sell its H20 graphics processing unit (GPU) to China. The response comes after a group of Democratic senators on Monday urged the Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who largely crafts export policies, to reverse course on the licences. The lawmakers said a decision to sell H20 chips to China was "an abrupt departure" from the administration's position in April that Beijing's access to the processors posed a serious national security risk. "And it undermines the administration's recent Al Action Plan, which purports to strengthen export control efforts on Al compute,' the letter states, referring to Mr Trump's AI strategy that included 90 federal policy actions. The senators also warned that such policy reversals would bolster China's push to use AI to 'strengthen military systems'. The letter is the latest in a back-and-forth battle over how to best protect and promote US AI technology. 'The H20 helps America win the support of developers worldwide, promoting America's economic and national security,' an Nvidia representative told The National. 'It does not enhance anyone's military capabilities, and the US government has full visibility and authority over every H20 transaction.' Shortly after a trip to Beijing this month, Nvidia's chief executive Jensen Huang highlighted the Trump administration's assurances about resuming sales of the H20 to China, and said deliveries would begin soon. The H20 is designed to comply with US regulations that seek to prevent powerful AI technology from being used by countries it views as adversaries. But in recent years, and particularly during former president Joe Biden's administration, the US has sought to clamp down on the export of AI technologies to a greater degree, especially CPUs and GPUs, which have become critical for countries seeking to build up AI infrastructure. Nvidia came out in January against the stronger export controls proposed by Mr Biden, saying these undermined US leadership in AI with a 'regulatory morass'. Since his inauguration, Mr Trump has taken a softer approach to AI-related export controls. Recent deals announced with the UAE to build an AI data centre, which also included security stipulations to prevent the potential diffusion of US technology to adversarial countries, was widely seen as a win for US technology companies that have largely opposed strict export policies. Despite efforts in recent years to prevent the diffusion of US AI technology, some analysts have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the overall policy. A new report from Jefferies, an investment banking and capital market firm based in New York, indicated that strict US export policies had prompted China to recalibrate and build up its own chip-making capability, with companies like Huawei and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation making strides. Regardless, in their letter to Mr Lutnick, the senators maintained that 'restricting access to leading-edge chips has been the defining barrier for China's efforts to achieve Al parity', expressing concern that the Trump administration would make further exceptions to loosen various export policies it once advocated. 'This administration is permitting adversaries access to technologies critical to national security as part of trade discussions without consultation or input from Congress,' they wrote. A spokesperson with the US Department of Commerce said Biden administration didn't impose 'any restrictions on the H20 whatsoever and they flowed freely into China,' adding that the Trump White House was the first to implement a licence requirement for the exports to Beijing. 'The Trump administration will consider any H20 licence applications carefully, accounting for both the benefits and the costs of potential exports from America and considering the views of experts across the US Government,' the Commerce Department spokesperson told The National. White House officials have recently indicated that policies seeking to prevent the export of US AI technology might ultimately backfire. 'We don't want to create demand for Huawei,' White House AI chief David Sacks said during a round-table discussion at the Pennsylvania Energy and AI Summit.
