Latest news with #SaulLoeb
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
How the Steel and Aluminum Tariff Hike Will Hit Consumers
A US Steel logo is seen on a vehicle loaded with rolls of steel during a visit by the U.S. President to U.S. Steel - Irvin Works in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, May 30, 2025 Credit - Saul Loeb—AFP via Getty Images Canned foods, cars, houses, and a range of other goods could soon get more expensive as businesses face a newly doubled tariff rate of 50% for steel and aluminum imports. President Donald Trump described the increase, which raised the levies from the 25% rate announced in February beginning on Wednesday, as an effort to 'further secure the steel industry in the United States' during a Friday rally at a steel mill in Pittsburgh, Penn.—once the heart of the domestic steel industry. But while American steel industry groups have hailed the tariff hike, economic experts have sounded alarms, saying it could further disrupt the already-volatile global supply chain and put more strain on businesses—and Americans' wallets. 'Consumers will have to pay the price,' says Virginia Tech economics professor David Beiri. 'The continued uncertainty that is created by the government is poisoning business plans.' The United States is highly reliant on steel imports, bringing in more of the material from abroad than any other country in the world, according to the International Trade Administration. More than 26 million metric tons of steel were imported last year, most of which came from Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and China. 'We are equally dependent on aluminum,' says Jonathan Colehower, managing director at consulting company UST. The domestic steel industry has voiced support for the increased tariffs, saying they will help it weather increased competition from foreign steel manufacturers. 'Chinese steel exports to the world have more than doubled since 2020, surging to 118 million MT in 2024—more than total North American steel production,' the American Iron and Steel Institute, one of several trade associations representing the American steel industry, said in a statement after Trump announced the higher rate. 'This tariff action will help prevent new surges in imports that would injure American steel producers and their workers.' But experts worry about the industry's ability to meet increased demand as businesses, facing the additional import costs, seek cheaper alternatives for their products. While the U.S. once dominated the steel industry, the boom has died down in the last century. 'With domestic capacity not necessarily being able to produce what we might need…there is going to be a transitory effect,' says Beiri, referring to the adjustment period the steel industry will have to navigate as the supply chain changes. Colehower says the domestic steel supply may tighten as a result of the increased tariffs, which could cause domestic prices to rise amid high demand. 'There's absolutely no way it's going to be able to make up the difference immediately,' he says of the domestic steel industry. The Aluminum Association, a trade group that represents both U.S.-based and foreign companies, said it supports tariff-free Canadian aluminum, pointing to the American aluminum industry's reliance on the country's northern neighbor. 'Aluminum is a critical material for our economy and national defense – used in everything from cars to beverage cans to fighter jets. Today, the United States is investing significantly and will need both smelted and recycled aluminum to meet growing demand,' the association said. 'In the years if not decades it will take to build new U.S. smelter capacity, our metal needs must be met by importing.' Steel and aluminum are used in various products, from beer cans and office supplies to automobiles—the prices for all of which are likely to rise as a result of the doubled import taxes. The Can Manufacturers Institute, the trade association of the metal can manufacturing industry, opposed the tariff increase in a statement after Trump announced the coming change in the rate, saying it would 'further increase the cost of canned goods at the grocery store.' The can manufacturing industry imports nearly 80% of its tin-mill steel from foreign countries. 'Doubling steel tariffs will inflate domestic canned food prices, and it plays into the hands of China and other foreign canned food producers, which are more than happy to undercut American farmers and food producers,' the trade association said. Beer companies and other beverage businesses are also set to be impacted. The real estate and construction industries, both of which use steel to build homes, warehouses, and other structures will be footing a bigger bill, as well, Colehower says. He predicts businesses such as Lowe's and Home Depot, the latter of which vowed before the tariff hike that it would not be increasing the cost of its goods, will be severely affected. Farm equipment and transportation vehicles, including cars, bicycles, and others, will also likely cost more as a result of the new tariff rate, Colehower says. Some companies could seek to adjust their business models in the face of increased costs. Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey, for instance, said in February that the company would consider making more beverages in plastic bottles to offset aluminum price hikes under the tariffs announced that month. Negotiations over the tariffs are ongoing between the U.S. and its trading partners, several of which have expressed ire at the increased import taxes. Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, called the steel tariffs a 'direct attack on Canadian workers.' A European Commission official on Friday said the decision 'adds further uncertainty to the global economy and increases costs for consumers and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.' The U.K. has been spared from the tariff hike; Mexico announced Wednesday that it plans to ask for a similar exemption. Canada, Mexico, and the European Union were previously exempt from steel and aluminum tariffs Trump imposed during his first term in 2016, but are subject to the current levies. Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
What Trump Revoking Emergency Abortion Guidance Means for Care
Abortion-rights activists rally for reproductive rights and emergency abortion care outside the U.S. Supreme Court as it hears arguments in a case that deals with whether Idaho's near-total abortion ban conflicts with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, in Washington, D.C., on April 24, 2024. Credit - Saul Loeb—AFP/Getty Images The Trump Administration has added to the confusion surrounding the U.S.'s shifting patchwork of abortion laws by rescinding Biden-era guidance that directed hospitals to provide abortions in emergency situations, even in states where abortion is restricted. The decision, announced on Tuesday, does not change the federal law that was at the heart of the Biden Administration's guidance: the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding—which is most of them—to provide stabilizing treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies or transfer them to a hospital that can. The Trump Administration's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said in a press release that it 'will continue to enforce EMTALA, which protects all individuals who present to a hospital emergency department seeking examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy.' But the agency also said that it 'will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions.' Doctors and abortion-rights advocates, however, said they feared that the Administration's move will amplify confusion over whether doctors can provide critical care, thereby putting lives at risk. Dr. Jamila Perritt—an ob-gyn in Washington, D.C., and the president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health—said in a press release that rescinding the Biden-era guidance would force "providers like me to choose between caring for someone in their time of need and turning my back on them to comply with cruel and dangerous laws.' 'This action sends a clear message: the lives and health of pregnant people are not worth protecting,' Perritt said. The Biden Administration issued the guidance after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, reminding hospitals of their 'obligations' under EMTALA, as state laws restricting or banning abortion began going into effect. 'Any state actions against a physician who provides an abortion in order to stabilize an emergency medical condition in a pregnant individual presenting to the hospital would be preempted by the federal EMTALA statute due to the direct conflict with the 'stabilized' provision of the statute,' the guidance stressed. 'Moreover, EMTALA contains a whistleblower provision that prevents retaliation by the hospital against any hospital employee or physician who refuses to transfer a patient with an emergency medical condition that has not been stabilized by the initial hospital, such as a patient with an emergent ectopic pregnancy, or a patient with an incomplete medical abortion.' The guidance also said that physicians' fear of violating state laws prohibiting abortion could not be used as the basis for transferring a patient. 'When a direct conflict occurs between EMTALA and a state law, EMTALA must be followed,' the guidance stated. EMTALA remains in place despite the change in the guidance. The Trump Administration did not explicitly advise hospitals that they could deny patients abortions in emergency situations. CMS did specify in the memo announcing the revocation that the Department of Health and Human Services may not enforce the interpretation in the Biden Administration's guidance that EMTALA preempts Texas' near-total abortion ban, pointing to court rulings that have temporarily blocked the guidance in the state. But abortion-rights advocates sharply criticized the Trump Administration's move, saying it endangers the lives of pregnant people. 'The Trump Administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive life-saving abortions,' Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a press release. 'In pulling back guidance, this administration is feeding the fear and confusion that already exists at hospitals in every state where abortion is banned. Hospitals need more guidance right now, not less.' 'We're making our health care professionals have to operate in a gray area when their work really needs to be clear,' says Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong, a reproductive justice collective. 'They're in the business of providing life-saving care to people on a daily basis, and they don't need to be put in a position where their decision making is compromised.' When that confusion happens, she says, 'people die.' Simpson says that, for states that have banned or restricted abortion, like her home state of Georgia, rescinding the Biden-era guidance is 'just going to make things worse.' 'It's making it incredibly scary for the American people and pregnant folks who would need access to emergency services,' Simpson says. 'People's lives are at stake.' Anti-abortion groups, meanwhile, celebrated the move. 'The Trump administration has delivered another win for life and truth – stopping Biden's attack on emergency care for both pregnant moms and their unborn children,' Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a press release. She accused Democrats of creating confusion about people's access to care in medical emergencies, including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. 'In situations where every minute counts, their lies lead to delayed care and put women in needless, unacceptable danger,' she said. More than a dozen states have banned abortion in almost all cases or after six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they're pregnant. There have been many reports of pregnant people experiencing complications being turned away from hospitals in states that have banned abortion. Previously, the Biden Administration had sued Idaho over its near-total abortion ban, saying that the state's restrictions conflicted with EMTALA. In March, the Trump Administration dropped the lawsuit. Contact us at letters@
The Citizen
19-05-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
Second chance for Amerikaner ‘refugees'
Amerikaner refugees are bit players who have strayed into the spotlight in a piece of political theatre between the ANC and Trump. The first group of Afrikaners from South Africa to arrive for resettlement in the US. Picture: Saul Loeb / AFP The granting of refugee status to a small group of white Afrikaners by the US – an offer that has been extended to include members of other racial minorities who can credibly demonstrate that they are being discriminated against – will have profoundly negative implications for SA. It puts the ANC-led government in a quandary about a slew of controversial legislation regarding hot-button issues such as race quotas, black economic empowerment, property and language rights and hate speech. Trump placed marker on SA Beyond the silly hyperbole about genocide and rampant land seizures, the important fact is the world's most powerful nation has laid down a marker that there are indeed 'bad things happening in South Africa', to quote US President Donald Trump, and that these amount to racial discrimination. While the local media childishly insists on putting the word refugee in quotation marks whenever they refer to those going to the US under Trump's executive order, that word is now a juristic definition of their status. It's a hugely important legal distinction with far-reaching implications. It not only opens the door to many thousands of minority-group citizens – not just farmers, not just Afrikaners, not just whites – fleeing to the US, but will undoubtedly influence other immigration authorities. WATCH: SA 'refugees' leave for US 'Amerikaner refugees' vs South Africans For the moment, however, the matter is playing on a much pettier level. Who would have thought that the departure of fewer than five dozen Afrikaners could cause such an outpouring of undeserved media vitriol and government anger? It's especially odd given that an estimated 1-2 million people have emigrated unremarked upon since the ANC took power. The national ego has been badly dented and it transpires that hell hath no fury like South Africans scorned. Even our normally imperturbable president has given public vent. Cyril Ramaphosa last week lambasted the group as 'cowards' who would 'very soon' be scuttling back to South Africa with their tails between their legs. ALSO READ: Trump administration slams church for refusing to resettle white South Africans in America Will the Amerikaners get caught in the Trump vs ANC crossfire? Meanwhile, everyone is hard at work seeking scapegoats. Afrikaner civic action group AfriForum, for one, is firmly in the crosshairs. The Amerikaners, as they've derisively been dubbed, hopefully realise things will be hard. They are bit players who have strayed into the spotlight in a piece of political theatre between the ANC and Trump. They should know, too, that back home their every failure will be magnified and gloated over, their every success minimised. It's a misguided response by the government and its cheerleaders. The reality is that SA, if it continues on the ANC's present course, will experience a massive exodus of human capital it can ill afford to lose and those leaving in future will mainly, but by no means only, be minorities. However, all the quibbling about whether the Amerikaners are just wallowing in victimhood or genuinely seeking refuge mean less than the smug commentators assume and the dishonest politicians pretend. Yes, there are gradations of agency, of volition, across the spectrum of emigrant, exile and refugee. But contradictions abound. There are penniless, footsore emigrants and plump, wellshod refugees. Perhaps the thing that they most have in common is heartache. ALSO READ: Afrikaner claims of persecution are a fat lie What lies ahead for Amerikaner refugees While some may leave the land of their forefathers with a sense of relief – a smile on their lips and a song in their hearts – in my experience, they're relatively few. To depart this South Africa, the ancient land that magically weaves through our present hopes, fears, triumphs and defeats, is not easy. To leave behind permanently the land that has forged one's identity and in doing so become part of one's soul, is heartrending. It's a death of sorts. But also, if one is fortunate, it can be a do-over, a second chance, or even a rebirth. NOW READ: Victory for asylum seekers: High Court declares parts of Refugees Act unconstitutional
Scotsman
17-05-2025
- Science
- Scotsman
Labour needs to back Scotland's carbon capture project to help save North East
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... In 1972 – years before climate change became a mainstream concern – the world's first carbon-capture-and-storage (CCS) system began operating at a gas processing plant in Terrell, Texas. The idea was not to reduce carbon emissions but, instead, to use it for 'enhanced oil recovery'. Since then, hundreds of millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide have been safely captured and stored by dozens of facilities around the world. So it can be done. However, hopes that it can be used at scale to allow fossil fuels to be burned without fuelling the fires of global warming rest on whether this will ever be economically viable. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Environmentalists have long been suspicious about CCS, viewing it as a device used by the oil industry to fob off demands to cut carbon emissions – 'don't worry, a fix is just round the corner'. However, with the passage of time, climate scientists have realised that CCS is going to be necessary. A recent report by an International Panel on Climate Change working group said 'the deployment of carbon dioxide removal... is unavoidable if net-zero greenhouse gas emissions are to be achieved'. Carbon capture could allow fossil fuels to be burned without adding to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (Picture: Saul Loeb) | AFP via Getty Images An economic opportunity CCS or CCUS (carbon capture, utilisation and storage) is also about more than reducing emissions. It represents a huge economic opportunity. And, given the oil industry expertise built up over decades, there is surely no place better suited to take advantage of that opportunity in the UK than its oil capital, Aberdeen. Yet both the Conservative and Labour governments have been reluctant to provide the necessary funding for the pioneering Acorn project at St Fergus, Aberdeenshire. However, UK energy minister Michael Shanks has now told The Scotsman: 'We have to start planning for the future and that does mean building up CCUS, hydrogen, renewables, bringing opportunities to Aberdeen and the wider North East.' This may offer some hope but there have also been reports the Chancellor will cut carbon capture funding next month. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad
IOL News
16-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
‘Genocide' lies and white victimhood: How far-right forces are undermining South Africa
Misinformation campaigns threaten South Africa's democracy and sovereignty Image: Saul Loeb Experts have warned that a concerted effort, potentially driven by foreign actors and aligned with domestic far-right groups, is fuelling misinformation campaigns, including false genocide claims against the white minority in South Africa. Independent Political analysts said that the country is currently grappling with a complex web of internal and external forces aiming to destabilise its democratic progress. They argued that these efforts threaten South Africa's sovereignty, damage diplomatic relations—particularly with the United States—and threaten the nation's hard-won social cohesion. Experts asserted that since South Africa publicly took a stand against human rights violations committed by Israel and voiced support for Palestinian rights, it has become the target of a coordinated misinformation campaign. This campaign seeks to distort South Africa's foreign policy, casting it as a rogue state aligned with 'evil' nations such as Iran and China, and accusing it of domestic racism and expropriation policies. Prominent South African-born billionaires, some with ties to President Donald Trump's circles, are believed to be involved in orchestrating smear campaigns. These narratives have gained traction in the US, leading to diplomatic repercussions such as the US government's decision to boycott South Africa's role as G20 chair in 2025—a move seen by analysts as a form of cold sanctioning linked to South Africa's foreign policy stance. Dr Oscar Van Heerden, a University of Johannesburg political analyst, suggested that these narratives are part of a broader effort to craft a negative image of South Africa, portraying it as a nation no longer embodying Nelson Mandela's values. 'It's about creating a narrative that South Africa is a failed state, riddled with corruption and crime, to justify external and internal interventions,' he said. The Rise of White Nationalist Ideology in the US Ashrad Patel, a Senior Research Associate at the Institute for Global Dialogue (IGD), linked these developments to the ideological currents within the current U.S. political landscape, particularly the so-called 'Project 2025' initiative related to the 'Make America Great Again' movement. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading 'This project, centered on white nationalist identity and anxieties over demographic change, echoes old apartheid-era narratives and has been embraced by certain South African opposition groups, including the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the far-right Freedom Front Plus (FF+),' Patel explained. 'The narrative of white victimhood and minority rights in South Africa is being exploited to rally support for these groups in the U.S., framing South Africa's policies, like land reform and affirmative action, as 'anti-white' and 'anti-Constitutional'. 'These narratives are then used to justify lobbying efforts and influence US policy, including the potential undermining of trade agreements like the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).' Domestic and External Power Struggles Patel argued that the influence of South Africa's domestic political landscape is significant. 'The inclusion of the DA and FF+ in the government has provided a platform for these narratives, which are framed as protecting minority rights but are often rooted in racialised perceptions. 'The lobbying efforts by Afriforum, a prominent far-right organisation, and other interest groups have intensified within South Africa and the United States." Meanwhile, the US claims regarding the alleged genocide against white farmers have become a flashpoint. Critics argue that this narrative is weaponised to justify external pressure and distract from domestic challenges like high inequality. Allegations of Covert Operations and Diplomatic Interference Independent political analyst Joe Mhlanga raised concerns about covert operations to tarnish South Africa's image. 'It's alarming that private NGOs, funded by foreign interests, are engaging directly with US government officials on diplomatic issues concerning South Africa,' he said 'This blurs the lines of sovereignty and suggests a form of covert interference aimed at regime change." The South African government has responded by publicly criticising these efforts. Minister Khumbudzo Ntshavheni announced that the State Security Agency is actively gathering intelligence on individuals and organisations spreading misinformation. She condemned the US administration's acceptance of what she called 'Afrikaner Refugees'—a term used by groups like Afriforum to describe white South Africans claiming refugee status—arguing that there is no genocide in South Africa and that these claims are unfounded. Implications for South Africa's Democracy Van Heerden said these developments threaten decades of diplomatic progress and social cohesion. 'The narrative of a 'failed South Africa' is being weaponised to justify external sanctions, internal destabilisation, and the rollback of democratic reforms. 'The convergence of domestic far-right ideology, foreign interference, and misinformation campaigns creates a 'perfect storm' that could undermine the nation's stability." In an effort to mend relations, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced earlier this month that he will meet Trump in the US next week. IOL Politics
