Latest news with #Midwesterners
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's tariffs make manufacturing workers more expendable than ever
Whenever President Trump's tariff fiasco comes to an end, we will turn attention to the lasting impacts. It is not a pretty picture. One of the many contradictory explanations of the Trump tariffs is that this will bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. That is asinine. The dominant effect of the Trump tariffs will be to raise production costs on almost every American manufacturing firm. This includes many that don't even know it yet. One way to predict consequences for factories is to consider how families will adapt. The Yale Budget lab estimates the average family will see costs rise between $1,900 and $7,600 this year, depending on income and consumption. As a result, families will delay some purchases and choose lower-cost substitutes for others. They will shift toward services, which are not subject to a tariff. This will reverse the pandemic-era move toward goods consumption, which benefited domestic manufacturers. I expect a 2-3% decrease in long-term demand for goods. That will be very bad for manufacturing firms. On the production side, American factories will scramble to regain consumer demand. That means cutting costs. Trump hopes that this means onshoring factories. But, why would an American business onshore a factory when the tariffs are likely to disappear, then reappear and disappear, by the end of next week? They won't. The biggest target of cost-cutting will be the American manufacturing workforce. American manufacturing workers are the best in the world, and it isn't even a close call. But a $25-an-hour American worker actually costs the business more like $37 or $38 per hour in labor costs, including health care, FICA taxes and more. Hicks: Braun cut taxes for businesses, but most Hoosiers will pay more The simplest way to cut supply chain costs, without worrying about Trump's melodramatic decision-making, is to automate. The workforce accounts for about 40% of the cost of production, and there's no presidential whimsy associated with cutting it. Automation happens in fits and starts as technology and borrowing costs change. Labor cost also plays a role, as do import costs, tariffs and taxes. All signs point toward a rush of automation. I once asked a seasoned manufacturing executive how often his business recalculated the decision to fully automate his factory and warehouse. His answer stunned me — he said quarterly. We Midwesterners ought to expect this. America's densest use of robotics is in Toledo, Detroit, Grand Rapids and Louisville — the latter mostly on the Indiana side. Last year saw more than 10% growth in robotics. I expect 2025 and 2026 to be the two biggest years in workplace automation in U.S. history. It is worth noting that U.S. manufacturing production peaked in 2024. It will peak again in a few years; we'll just be doing it with fewer workers. Of course, there is more than just U.S. tariffs. We are in a trade war with the world, while the rest of the world is just in a trade war with us. Most countries will offer retaliatory tariffs. That is an economic mistake, yet politically useful. As recent elections in Canada and Australia have demonstrated, standing up to Trump brings huge political benefits abroad. Most of our trading partners will suffer a bit of pain to hurt us a little. The U.S. is a huge exporter of services — tourism, education, financial services, professional services and movies. These will be targeted by tariffs, as well as boycotts. The 2018 Trump tariff experience illustrates much of the long-term damages of tariffs. From roughly 1650 until 2017, the U.S. was a net exporter of agricultural goods. Trump ended that in 2018, as China invested in Brazilian soybean farms. We are now a net importer of food. It is not an emergency or national crisis that we import more food than we export. We aren't going to starve. But, it demonstrates how shockingly little the Trump administration understands about high school economics. And how little he really cares about the places he claims to care about. Hicks: IEDC needs to get out of the real estate development business We are a resilient nation. Sanity, congressional action and thoughtful diplomacy can restore much of the damage done to our economy. Still, these effects will be felt for decades. On average, we will all be worse off for it. The effects won't be evenly distributed. The biggest losers in this turmoil will be rural communities and small cities, particularly those with a large share of manufacturing and agricultural production. Importers and exporters will be clobbered, and so will communities that produce energy, particularly oil and coal. Those that will be hurt less are urban places, with large concentrations of knowledge workers in service sectors. That geographic divide will make the lasting impacts of Trump tariffs the biggest electoral self-own in American history. Michael J. Hicks is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Tariffs are the death of America's manufacturing boom | Opinion
Indianapolis Star
27-05-2025
- Business
- Indianapolis Star
Trump's tariffs make manufacturing workers more expendable than ever
Whenever President Trump's tariff fiasco comes to an end, we will turn attention to the lasting impacts. It is not a pretty picture. One of the many contradictory explanations of the Trump tariffs is that this will bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. That is asinine. The dominant effect of the Trump tariffs will be to raise production costs on almost every American manufacturing firm. This includes many that don't even know it yet. One way to predict consequences for factories is to consider how families will adapt. The Yale Budget lab estimates the average family will see costs rise between $1,900 and $7,600 this year, depending on income and consumption. As a result, families will delay some purchases and choose lower-cost substitutes for others. They will shift toward services, which are not subject to a tariff. This will reverse the pandemic-era move toward goods consumption, which benefited domestic manufacturers. I expect a 2-3% decrease in long-term demand for goods. That will be very bad for manufacturing firms. On the production side, American factories will scramble to regain consumer demand. That means cutting costs. Trump hopes that this means onshoring factories. But, why would an American business onshore a factory when the tariffs are likely to disappear, then reappear and disappear, by the end of next week? They won't. The biggest target of cost-cutting will be the American manufacturing workforce. American manufacturing workers are the best in the world, and it isn't even a close call. But a $25-an-hour American worker actually costs the business more like $37 or $38 per hour in labor costs, including health care, FICA taxes and more. Hicks: Braun cut taxes for businesses, but most Hoosiers will pay more The simplest way to cut supply chain costs, without worrying about Trump's melodramatic decision-making, is to automate. The workforce accounts for about 40% of the cost of production, and there's no presidential whimsy associated with cutting it. Automation happens in fits and starts as technology and borrowing costs change. Labor cost also plays a role, as do import costs, tariffs and taxes. All signs point toward a rush of automation. I once asked a seasoned manufacturing executive how often his business recalculated the decision to fully automate his factory and warehouse. His answer stunned me — he said quarterly. We Midwesterners ought to expect this. America's densest use of robotics is in Toledo, Detroit, Grand Rapids and Louisville — the latter mostly on the Indiana side. Last year saw more than 10% growth in robotics. I expect 2025 and 2026 to be the two biggest years in workplace automation in U.S. history. It is worth noting that U.S. manufacturing production peaked in 2024. It will peak again in a few years; we'll just be doing it with fewer workers. Of course, there is more than just U.S. tariffs. We are in a trade war with the world, while the rest of the world is just in a trade war with us. Most countries will offer retaliatory tariffs. That is an economic mistake, yet politically useful. As recent elections in Canada and Australia have demonstrated, standing up to Trump brings huge political benefits abroad. Most of our trading partners will suffer a bit of pain to hurt us a little. The U.S. is a huge exporter of services — tourism, education, financial services, professional services and movies. These will be targeted by tariffs, as well as boycotts. The 2018 Trump tariff experience illustrates much of the long-term damages of tariffs. From roughly 1650 until 2017, the U.S. was a net exporter of agricultural goods. Trump ended that in 2018, as China invested in Brazilian soybean farms. We are now a net importer of food. It is not an emergency or national crisis that we import more food than we export. We aren't going to starve. But, it demonstrates how shockingly little the Trump administration understands about high school economics. And how little he really cares about the places he claims to care about. Hicks: IEDC needs to get out of the real estate development business We are a resilient nation. Sanity, congressional action and thoughtful diplomacy can restore much of the damage done to our economy. Still, these effects will be felt for decades. On average, we will all be worse off for it. The effects won't be evenly distributed. The biggest losers in this turmoil will be rural communities and small cities, particularly those with a large share of manufacturing and agricultural production. Importers and exporters will be clobbered, and so will communities that produce energy, particularly oil and coal. Those that will be hurt less are urban places, with large concentrations of knowledge workers in service sectors. That geographic divide will make the lasting impacts of Trump tariffs the biggest electoral self-own in American history.
Elle
22-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Elle
Caitlin Clark Shares Rare Insight Into Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce's Life ‘in Vacation Mode'
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce have only been photographed together twice since the Super Bowl. This is all by design, as they have been taking a break from the spotlight during their time off from work. This week, Indiana Fever player Caitlin Clark offered a rare update on the couple—and confirmed that they aren't about to return to the public eye. When USA Today asked Clark if she thought Swift and Kelce would attend one of her games, the WNBA star responded, 'Oh gosh, I don't know. I mean, I hope so. I feel like they're also living—they're in a nice, in vacation mode right now. So I hope they enjoy a nice little break out of the spotlight. But I'm sure they'll be cheering for the Fever either way.' Clark is a fan of Swift and attended her Indianapolis Eras Tour show on November 2. She met Swift's boyfriend, Kelce, there and told Time in December that Swift left her a special surprise: four bags of tour merchandise and a note. The singer wrote that she and 'Trav' would love to watch Clark play once the tour ends and that Clark 'was inspiring to watch from afar.' Kelce had wonderful things to say about chatting with Clark. On his podcast New Heights, he recapped his experience at the Indianapolis concert, saying, 'Saw Caitlin Clark there, got to meet Caitlin. She's awesome, she loves being out there in Indianapolis, says it's a fun city, and we're both just true Midwesterners to the heart. Played high school ball, college ball, pro ball all out here in the Midwest, and it was cool catching up with her.' Clark later attended Kelce's Jan. 18, 2025 game with Swift. The two women were photographed embracing in an Arrowhead Stadium suite during the game. Kelce and Swift were last seen out in Philadelphia on Mother's Day. She still made headlines this week when a snippet of her 'Look What You Made Me Do (Taylor's Version)' was used in The Handmaid's Tale. It added further fuel to rumors that Swift's Reputation (Taylor's Version) is coming, something the singer has been hinting at for months.
New York Post
22-05-2025
- Business
- New York Post
Love ain't cheap: Here's where Americans splurge — and skimp —on first dates
Romance is in the air — and it's charging by the minute. A new survey has exposed the price tag on first impressions, revealing just how much Americans are shelling out for that all-important first date. And let's just say: folks in the Northeast are dropping dollar bills faster than hearts in a rom-com, as reported by Newsweek. Single people in the Northeast are the biggest spenders, topping the list at $138.40, followed by the West at $133 — while Midwesterners are keeping things humble at $118.50. Nationwide, the average amount people say they'd cough up for a first date is a whopping $125.60 — with regional wallets telling very different love stories. 3 According to the survey and map, Northeasterners came in first at $138.40, then came the West at $133. Midwesterners, however, were more modest at $118.50. U.S. Census Bureau 2021 boundaries And while 34% of Americans opt for the relatively reasonable $51–$100 range, 10% of Northeasterners are willing to dish out $151 to $200, with another 4% fine to blow past $300. But don't confuse spending with sentiment, warns relationship therapist Aly Bullock. How much people spend on a first date '…could also be influenced by the types of activities and restaurants available in your area…' Bullock told Newsweek in a recent interview. Still, that first-date fever comes with financial consequences. 3 Dating isn't cheap — especially in this economy. Syda Productions – The average American has gone on $3,025.12 worth of dates over the past year, according to a 2023 survey conducted by OnePoll in partnership with LELO — with each romantic rendezvous ringing in at around $189. And good luck splitting the check. While 27% of daters alternate tabs, men still overwhelmingly foot the bill (54%) compared to just 12% of women. That gap adds up — especially for Gen Zers, who are leading the love economy with $194 per date and nearly 14 outings per year, according to a February 2025 study by BMO Real Financial Progress Index. This totals a heart-thumping $2,676 annually. Even so, younger singles aren't all-in on pricey meetups — 46% say they feel pressured to plan expensive dates. Bullock warns that breaking the bank too soon could blow up in your face. 'Spending too much can look like love-bombing and set you up for unrealistic expectations in the relationship, and spending nothing can indicate that you're not super excited about making a great impression,' she said to Newsweek. Translation: Don't bring steakhouse energy to a situationship. Singles might be spending less per date than couples, but committed millennial men are the real high-rollers — dropping an average $252 per outing. But as inflation tightens purse strings, many are scaling back — 37% say they'll go on fewer dates this year and 60% are budgeting for love. 3 With prices up and wallets down, romance is on a budget — 37% plan to date less this year, and 60% are putting their love lives on a spending diet. Adobe Stock Luka Matutinovic, chief marketing officer at LELO, says it's time for a reality check. 'In the dynamic landscape of modern relationships, where 'infla-dating' is reshaping connection costs, we encourage couples to redefine their approach to love's expenses,' Matutinovic said in an interview with SWNS. 'Stretch your budget wisely, opting for meaningful moments over extravagant expenses, and watch your relationship thrive without financial strain.'
Boston Globe
21-05-2025
- Boston Globe
Federal authorities put this old wiseguy away. He's accused of plotting to kill them.
According to an affidavit filed in US District Court, Ralph plotted to kill three federal officials who were involved in his 2012 conviction for racketeering. One of the most telling nuggets in the affidavit recalls that the informant who tipped the feds off to Ralph's alleged murder plot claimed he was unable to open on his computer documents with the home addresses and names of the targets' family members. Advertisement This isn't Goodfellas. It's Oldfellas. After serving his most recent prison sentence, Ralph had managed to stay out of jail for one whole year before being charged last week with violating probation by lying to federal agents, communicating with convicted felons, and dabbling in steroids and marijuana. Oh, and plotting to murder the feds who put him away. 'DeLeo has been fixated on seeking revenge for years,' federal prosecutors wrote. 'DeLeo's entire life has been devoted to crime.' Ralph has done time for armed robbery in several states and a contract murder in Ohio. He's been convicted of robbing department stores, supermarkets, banks. He's escaped custody. He was a made Mafioso, a 'street boss' for the Colombo crime family in New York. Pretty impressive for a kid from Somerville. Advertisement And yet despite seeming non-stop convictions, he kept getting out of prison. Whatever happened to three strikes and you're out? Ralph has had more strikes than French farmers. His rap sheet is longer than 'War and Peace.' Of all Ralph's myriad criminal exploits, none tops his 1977 murder of Dr. Walter Bond, a physician in Columbus, Ohio. In 1977, Ralph was doing 25-to-40 years at the state prison in Walpole for armed robbery and kidnapping when he managed to escape from the Lemuel Shattuck Hospital in Jamaica Plain after complaining of stomach pain and taking a guard hostage. Ralph hightailed it to Ohio, where he prevailed upon Dr. Donald Plotnick, whom he met while in federal prison in Pennsylvania when Plotnick was serving time for illegally selling firearms. Plotnick allowed Ralph to hide out in a trailer on his farm. Plotnick introduced Ralph to another dubious Ohio physician, Dr. David Ucker. Upon meeting the career criminal from Massachusetts, Ucker realized Ralph was just the kind of guy to sort out a problem he had. According to But after confronting Bond on the doctor's office doorstep, Ralph shot him dead, as he put it, 'only to be nice.' Ralph considered it an act of mercy. After the murder, Plotnick introduced him to yet another Ohio doctor, who tried to alter Ralph's appearance with plastic surgery. Ralph went on the lam, again, but was shot and wounded by police in 1978 after trying to rob a bank in Columbus while armed with a hand grenade. Advertisement With no other cards to play, Ralph copped to shooting Bond and agreed to testify against Ucker. In his thick Boston accent, Ralph regaled a jury of Midwesterners with tales of derring-do and criminal cunning. It was considered the most sensational trial in that part of Ohio. Fortunately for Ucker, the jury didn't believe Ralph and Ucker was acquitted. There's a famous photo of Dr. Ucker and Dr. Plotnick celebrating the acquittal, drinks in hand. But, through his cooperation, Ralph hit the lottery. As part of his plea agreement, he was transferred to a federal prison where he became friendly with Alphonse 'Little Allie Boy' Persico, who was poised to become head of the Colombo crime family in New York. Ralph got lucky, again, in 1991, when Ohio Gov. Richard Celeste granted him clemency for Dr. Bond's murder. Bond's widow, Marie Bond, was shocked, telling the Columbus Dispatch, 'This is a hardened criminal, and they are going to let him loose.' Ralph was returned to Massachusetts, to finish the sentence he was serving when he escaped from the Shattuck. He emerged from prison in 1997 with a standing invitation to do crime with the Colombo crew. According to federal prosecutors, he wasn't out of prison long before he became a 'made' guy in the Colombo family. Presumably the wiseguys in New York either didn't know or didn't care that Ralph had been a government witness in Ohio. Cooperating with the government, at any level, is usually a deal-breaker in that line of business. Ralph used his newfound status as a made guy to carve out a new career as a cocaine trafficker, moving drugs between Massachusetts and, of all places, Arkansas. Advertisement Alas, in 2009, one of Ralph's mules got lugged and so, too, did Ralph. At the age of 66, Ralph was charged with racketeering. As my colleague Shelley Murphy reported in 2010, FBI agents tapped DeLeo's cellphone the year before and recorded Ralph waxing philosophic on the difference between the wiseguy subculture in Boston, where he was a nobody, and New York, where he was a somebody. 'Here,' he said of Boston, 'I'm nothing.' But in New York, 'Everybody is holding the door for ya, helping on your coat, giving you hugs. Kissing you, and all this type of stuff. 'Oh, you gotta sit in front, you gotta do this, are you comfortable? Can I get you coffee?' ' Ralph insisted he was not the kind of wiseguy who needed all that flattery and attention. 'I'm not into that type of stuff,' he said. 'At heart, I'm a regular guy.' A regular guy who regularly gets sent to prison. He got out last May Last week, Ralph 'Danger would be the primary basis,' she said. Eighty-two-years-old, and still dangerous. Ralph's attorney, Kevin Barron, offered a more sympathetic view, describing Ralph as 'an ailing and infirm' man who suffers from a blood disorder, is undergoing chemotherapy treatment, and requires ongoing dental surgery. Ralph complained he couldn't hear the proceedings. Advertisement Ralph's luck appears to have run out. He has a detention hearing Thursday. The dentist can wait. Kevin Cullen is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at
