Latest news with #Charybdis
Hindustan Times
26-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Spectacle or stability: America's trade at a crossroads
In the wake of President Trump's threat to slap a 50% tariff on all European Union imports (he has delayed it till July 9) alongside his promise of punitive levies on tech giants, America stands at a crossroads between political posturing and economic prudence. What may play well on the campaign trail risks opening the Pandora's box in boardrooms from Detroit to Dublin. As the Federal Reserve adopts a wait-and-see stance amid sticky price pressures, the real test will be whether policymakers choose spectacle over stability, or whether common sense prevails in preserving the world's most dynamic economy. It is an old adage that 'empty barrels make the most noise,' and in Trump's tariff theatre, the loudest clamour often comes at the expense of nuanced economic argument. Instead of negotiating mutual reductions, the administration resorts to unilateral threats that risk a spiral of retaliation. As European leaders contemplate their next move, the warning is clear: If you live by tariffs, you may also die by them, hurting consumers and producers on both sides of the Atlantic. Behind the headlines lurks a more sober concern — the risk of stagflation. With consumer-price inflation still running above the Fed's two per cent target and wage growth edging higher, central bankers find themselves between Scylla and Charybdis. As JPMorgan's Jamie Dimon has warned, the confluence of fiscal deficits, geopolitical fragmentation, and services-driven price stickiness could slow growth even as prices stubbornly rise. The Federal Reserve's wait-and-see posture is not a retreat into dovishness but rather an exercise in disciplined restraint recognising that an ill-timed rate cut amid tariff-induced uncertainty could fan the flames of inflation. Yet patience wears thin when households confront rising housing and health care costs, and businesses postpone investment decisions in an environment of shifting trade winds. In short, America may find itself stuck in a growth-sapping quagmire if policy missteps escalate. Parallel to Europe, US policy towards China underscores another illusion: the myth of decoupling. Political rhetoric promises a clean break, yet real-world supply chains remain intertwined from semiconductors to rare-earth minerals. As one commentator quipped, 'you can't change horses midstream,' and the world's factories and financial markets have too many co-dependencies to sever without self-inflicted wounds. Moreover, capital markets continue to operate under commercial logic unless explicitly curtailed by sanctions. JPMorgan's underwriting of bonds for CATL, China's battery champion, reinforces that markets will fill any void left by politics. This pragmatism runs through corporate boardrooms and portfolio strategies worldwide: Firms seek opportunity, not political blame games. If Trump's tariff theatre embodies the art of the deal on steroids, then the path forward must be guided by the art of the possible. First, Washington and Brussels should revive a 'zero-for-zero' roadmap — under which the US lifts existing 25% duties on autos, steel, and aluminium in exchange for reciprocal EU cuts on a broader basket of industrial goods. This will re-establish trust and avert escalation. Second, policymakers must recognise that trade deficits are neither inherently villainous nor indicative of exploitation. Economies trade because they gain from specialisation — the very principle that powered US growth in the 20th century and underpins today's global value chains. A 'common sense and economic sense' approach, as one market observer put it, would accept that deficits in goods can be offset by surpluses in high-value services such as software, finance, and entertainment. Finally, the Federal Reserve should maintain its disciplined stance, ready to act if inflation expectations become unanchored but cautious about cutting rates before the fog of tariffs lifts. A clear, jointly communicated roadmap on trade policy would reduce uncertainty and allow the Fed to calibrate policy without the overhang of political theatrics. In politics, as in economics, words without action are like 'bells without tongues' — loud but hollow. The real test for US leadership will be to balance the electoral allure of tough talk with the needs of an open, efficient economy. The world is watching: Will Washington choose spectacle, or will it choose stability? Shruti Punia is fellow, Helsinki Geoeconomics. The views expressed are personal
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Contributor: The tension between overestimating risks and ignoring them
Not long ago, I met a woman from Belarus. She told me about the terrible aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear accident in April 1986. As a child, she'd had to evacuate her home, which was contaminated by radioactivity, and permanently relocate. She said that many people she knew, many children, had gotten cancer and died after the disaster. I suddenly went cold. I had just published a book in which I cited assessments concluding that the death toll from the accident was surprisingly low. According to the World Health Organization, in the two decades after the accident, fewer than 50 people had died because of radiation exposure, almost all of them rescue workers. (I did note that some estimates were higher.) The discrepancy between these different claims posed a familiar dilemma. As a journalist covering nuclear power and the debate over its role in the fight against climate change — and as a Californian closely following the San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear plant controversies — I have been constantly in the position of trying to assess risk. I've been navigating between the Scylla of overestimating risk and the Charybdis of underestimating it. If we underestimate the hazards of nuclear power, we risk contaminating the environment and jeopardizing public health. If we exaggerate them, we could miss out on an important tool for weaning ourselves off fossil fuels. If I were sanguine about the dangers of nuclear, the anti-nuclear side would consider me a chump, perhaps even an industry shill. If I emphasized the dangers, the pro-nuclear side would consider me alarmist, accuse me of fearmongering. More consequential than what activists might say, of course, was the possibility of misleading readers about these high-stakes issues. My dilemma also intersected with another question. When should we believe the authorities, and when should we distrust them? In the case of nuclear power, this question has a fascinating history. The anti-nuclear movement of the '70s grew out of a deep suspicion of authority and institutions. Nuclear power was promoted by a 'nuclear priesthood' of scientists and government bureaucrats, who came across as opaque and condescending. Protesters carried signs with messages such as 'Hell no, we won't glow' and 'Better active today than radioactive tomorrow.' To be anti-nuclear went along with the 'question authority' left-wing ethos of the era. Today, much has changed. In recent years, scientists have been telling us that we need to decarbonize our energy system, and in left-leaning circles, scientists and experts have become the good guys again (in no small part because many MAGA voices have become loudly anti-science). Institutions such as the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have said that nuclear power can play a key role in that decarbonized system. The official estimates of deaths from nuclear accidents are quite low, and meanwhile the suffering aggravated by climate change is ever more apparent. For these reasons, many environmentalists and progressives, including me, have grown more supportive of nuclear power. Yet I am always uncomfortably aware of the extent to which I am taking the experts' word for their conclusions. If we never question authorities, we are credulous sheep; if we never trust them, we become unhinged conspiracy theorists. Although these quandaries are particularly salient for a journalist covering nuclear power, they are essentially universal in our modern world. When deciding whether to wear a mask or vaccinate our children, or what to make of the threat of climate change, or how worried to be about 'forever chemicals' in our cookware, we are all perpetually trying to gauge risks. Unable to be experts in every field, we must decide whom to trust. Recently, matters have become even more complex. As President Trump eviscerates federal agencies and cuts funding from the National Institutes of Health and universities, it raises new concerns about how well-equipped these institutions will be to provide reliable information — both because of their diminished capacity and because we increasingly must wonder to what extent their work is influenced by a fear of further funding cuts. I've learned a few lessons to help navigate the dilemmas we all face. Don't consider risks in isolation; put them in context. Take both expert assessments and anecdotal evidence with a grain of salt. Resist allying yourself with any particular tribe or team. Be honest, with yourself and others, about your own biases and predispositions. Even in today's chaotic and degraded information ecosystem, we can find people who share our values who know much more about a given subject than we do. Listen to those who share your concerns and who consistently address them using solid data and reasoning. Following these guidelines led me to the conclusion that nuclear power certainly poses risks and challenges but that, if managed properly, it is one viable low-carbon energy source that can complement others. Yet we must also recognize that our knowledge will never be perfect. Our understanding of the world is ever evolving, as is the world itself. I came to accept that occupying the position between chump and alarmist is simply part of the modern condition. And I'll keep trying not to veer too far in either direction. Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, a journalist based in Orange County, is the author of 'Atomic Dreams: The New Nuclear Evangelists and the Fight for the Future of Energy.' If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
This deadly prehistoric wasp captured prey with 'Venus flytrap' abs
In Greek mythology, the sea monster Charybdis swallowed and regurgitated large volumes of water, creating whirlpools powerful enough to drag passing ships to their doom. Ninety-nine million years earlier, in the mid-Cretaceous, the wasp Sirenobethylus charybdis deployed a similar deadly trap that earned it a scientific name inspired by the mythological monster. A Venus flytrap-like structure on the wasp's abdomen held captives in place as the wasp deposited its eggs into its victim, forcing it to incubate its offspring. That's the finding of a new paper published in the journal BMC Biology that examined dozens of wasps entrapped in amber. 'This discovery reveals that ancient insects had already developed sophisticated prey capture strategies,' says Wu Qiong, the lead author and a doctoral student from the College of Life Sciences at Capital Normal University, 'It's reshaping our understanding of parasitic wasp evolution.' The amber containing the specimen Sirenobethylus charybdis is no larger than a dime. In 2015, a Chinese fossil collector purchased these fossils from Myanmar's Kachin state and donated them to Capital Normal University of China. To the naked eye, Sirenobethylus charybdis looks like a modern wasp with a wider-than-average abdomen. 'At first, we attributed this to deformation during preservation, especially since such deformation and distortion is common during fossilization,' says Wu. But under closer inspection—through microscope and CT scans—a remarkable structure was revealed. The abdominal tip of the wasp featured three flaps arranged in a configuration similar to a Venus flytrap. On multiple fossils, the lower flap opened at slightly different angles, suggesting it can move and grab onto things. Just like a Venus flytrap, the underside of the lower flap is also lined with long, flexible hairs that sense movement. When an unsuspecting insect triggered these hairs, it may have activated the swift closure of the abdominal flaps, allowing the wasp to secure the host. Scientists don't think the wasp killed its victims right away but instead used it as a living incubator for its offspring. Numerous stiff, hair-like structures on the upper side of the lower flap, along with the relatively pliable middle flap, would gently but firmly secure the host until the wasp finished laying its eggs. Only then would the wasp release its captive. 'The 'Venus flytrap' structure exhibited by the abdomen of Sirenobethylus charybdis is unprecedented in the entire history of Mesozoic insect research,' says Wu, 'nor has anything similar been documented in living insects.' Chenyang Cai, who was not involved in the study, is a paleoentomologist at Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. He praised the fossil wasp as a 'unique' discovery. He explained that Sirenobethylus charybdis is 'very different from today's wasps or other insects' and its existence 'highlights the diversity of insects in the mid-Cretaceous period, revealing forms we had never imagined'. Scientists don't know which insects Sirenobethylus charybdis used to host its eggs. Given the small size of its trapping structure, these hosts were possibly tiny, agile insects such as springtails or small flies. By studying similar species living today, the team pieced together other theories about this prehistoric wasp. As a distant relative of Sirenobethylus charybdis, the present-day pincer wasp has also evolved the ability to trap its host—temporarily restraining it, laying eggs, and then releasing it. Female pincer wasps have front legs modified with a pinching apparatus, allowing them to firmly grasp hosts when they lay eggs. These wingless hunters, with large eyes and slender legs, are well adapted for moving swiftly and capturing other insects. In contrast, Sirenobethylus charybdis appears to be more cumbersome. They have smaller eyes and shorter legs, which suggest they were slower than pincer wasps. The grasping structure located at the rear of their body also makes it difficult to capture hosts in motion. Based on these characteristics, researchers think it was a sit-and-wait predator—likely remaining stationary and ambushing hosts that wandered too close. Mid-Cretaceous amber fossils like this one, noted Cai, reveal insects of that age were 'incredibly diverse—perhaps even more specialized in some cases than what we see today.' Such findings, he emphasizes, are 'a crucial reminder that studying only living species will never give us the complete story of evolution.'
National Geographic
15-05-2025
- Science
- National Geographic
This deadly prehistoric wasp captured prey with 'Venus flytrap' abs
In Greek mythology, the sea monster Charybdis swallowed and regurgitated large volumes of water, creating whirlpools powerful enough to drag passing ships to their doom. Ninety-nine million years earlier, in the mid-Cretaceous, the wasp Sirenobethylus charybdis deployed a similar deadly trap that earned it a scientific name inspired by the mythological monster. A Venus flytrap-like structure on the wasp's abdomen held captives in place as the wasp deposited its eggs into its victim, forcing it to incubate its offspring. That's the finding of a new paper published in the journal BMC Biology that examined dozens of wasps entrapped in amber. 'This discovery reveals that ancient insects had already developed sophisticated prey capture strategies,' says Wu Qiong, the lead author and a doctoral student from the College of Life Sciences at Capital Normal University, 'It's reshaping our understanding of parasitic wasp evolution.' The amber containing the specimen Sirenobethylus charybdis is no larger than a dime. In 2015, a Chinese fossil collector purchased these fossils from Myanmar's Kachin state and donated them to Capital Normal University of China. To the naked eye, Sirenobethylus charybdis looks like a modern wasp with a wider-than-average abdomen. 'At first, we attributed this to deformation during preservation, especially since such deformation and distortion is common during fossilization,' says Wu. But under closer inspection—through microscope and CT scans—a remarkable structure was revealed. The abdominal tip of the wasp featured three flaps arranged in a configuration similar to a Venus flytrap. On multiple fossils, the lower flap opened at slightly different angles, suggesting it can move and grab onto things. Just like a Venus flytrap, the underside of the lower flap is also lined with long, flexible hairs that sense movement. A closer examination of the fossil revealed a feature that allowed the wasp to grasp prey, similar to a Venus flytrap. When an unsuspecting insect triggered these hairs, it may have activated the swift closure of the abdominal flaps, allowing the wasp to secure the host. Scientists don't think the wasp killed its victims right away but instead used it as a living incubator for its offspring. Numerous stiff, hair-like structures on the upper side of the lower flap, along with the relatively pliable middle flap, would gently but firmly secure the host until the wasp finished laying its eggs. Only then would the wasp release its captive. 'The 'Venus flytrap' structure exhibited by the abdomen of Sirenobethylus charybdis is unprecedented in the entire history of Mesozoic insect research,' says Wu, 'nor has anything similar been documented in living insects.' Chenyang Cai, who was not involved in the study, is a paleoentomologist at Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. He praised the fossil wasp as a 'unique' discovery. He explained that Sirenobethylus charybdis is 'very different from today's wasps or other insects' and its existence 'highlights the diversity of insects in the mid-Cretaceous period, revealing forms we had never imagined'. Scientists don't know which insects Sirenobethylus charybdis used to host its eggs. Given the small size of its trapping structure, these hosts were possibly tiny, agile insects such as springtails or small flies. By studying similar species living today, the team pieced together other theories about this prehistoric wasp. As a distant relative of Sirenobethylus charybdis, the present-day pincer wasp has also evolved the ability to trap its host—temporarily restraining it, laying eggs, and then releasing it. Female pincer wasps have front legs modified with a pinching apparatus, allowing them to firmly grasp hosts when they lay eggs. These wingless hunters, with large eyes and slender legs, are well adapted for moving swiftly and capturing other insects. In contrast, Sirenobethylus charybdis appears to be more cumbersome. They have smaller eyes and shorter legs, which suggest they were slower than pincer wasps. The grasping structure located at the rear of their body also makes it difficult to capture hosts in motion. Based on these characteristics, researchers think it was a sit-and-wait predator—likely remaining stationary and ambushing hosts that wandered too close. Mid-Cretaceous amber fossils like this one, noted Cai, reveal insects of that age were 'incredibly diverse—perhaps even more specialized in some cases than what we see today.' Such findings, he emphasizes, are 'a crucial reminder that studying only living species will never give us the complete story of evolution.'
Daily Mail
04-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
RUTH SUNDERLAND: Fed is part of a deeply flawed system which needs reform, not Trump's vandalism
Donald Trump is waging war with the US central bank, the Federal Reserve, and we should all be worried. A short-lived truce broke out when the President backed down from a social media post suggesting he wanted to 'terminate' Jay Powell's chairmanship of the Fed. But as he marked his first 100 days in office last week, Trump renewed his attacks, saying: 'You're not supposed to criticise the Fed. You're supposed to let him do his own thing – but I know much more than he does about interest rates.' His wrath has been provoked by the Fed's slowness – in Trump's eyes – at cutting rates. Powell, for his part, is concerned that inflation will be exacerbated by Trump's tariffs. But set against that are fears of recession, which would call for rate cuts to boost sagging growth. So the Fed is trying to steer a course through these two perils, with Powell cast as a latter day Odysseus, sailing gingerly between Scylla and Charybdis, the six-headed monster and the deadly whirlpool of Greek legend. Falling prey to one of these scenarios would be bad enough. Both at once would be the nightmare that is stagflation. Trump's behaviour suggests he has little grasp of the importance markets attach to the Fed's independence. Faith in the Fed being willing or able to control inflation would be torpedoed. In a financial crisis, markets rely on the central bank to be a big part of the solution. If the President installs a cat's paw to do his bidding, an important safety brake will have been lost. Trump is reported to have been exploring ways of sacking Powell for some time, including with Kevin Warsh, the former Morgan Stanley banker widely touted as his favourite for a replacement. He may have backed off from the idea for now. But his insults to Powell have already caused damage in themselves. The President's behaviour risks undermining the credibility of Warsh, or whoever he appoints next year as the new Fed chair. Anyone willing to take on the role is liable to be seen as Trump stooge and an enabler for his chaos and incompetence. Markets want a proper grown-up at the Fed – Trump, in his puerile outbursts, seems to want a weak parent willing to indulge his tantrums. There was a mini-version of this in the UK during the short-lived prime ministership of Liz Truss. She wanted to sack Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey, who she saw as being a barrier to her un-costed growth plans for being 'fatalistic about Britain's decline'. The Bank rode to the rescue when her notorious mini-Budget sparked a reaction in an obscure corner of the pensions world that threatened to morph into a full-blown meltdown. The US central bank, like our own, does not have total autonomy. But it is free to make its own decisions on interest rates without political approval or interference. Trump – or any other president – cannot sack a Fed chairman on a whim. The apparent lack of comprehension of central bank independence on the part of the President is par for the course. He seems wilfully blind to the jeopardy he is creating for the financial system through his madcap policies. There is hope the bond market may make him see sense. Apologists for Trump try to present the chaos and the outbursts as part of some genius plan to change a deeply flawed system of which the Fed is part. What is needed is reform, not vandalism.
