Though Donald Trump defends his deployment of tariffs as a radical shake-up of world trade, he is using a dusty playbook. While the president certainly has the legal authority to impose duties, the statutes on which his administration relies are based an economic order that no longer exists.
ELON MUSK HAS long established himself as a both a visionary CEO and a lightning rod for attention, good and bad. The bad reared its head dramatically this week as the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Musk with securities fraud for misleading investors with August tweets about taking Tesla private.
SO IT FINALLY happened. Apple announced stellar quarterly earnings; investors liked them; the stock rose; and Apple became the first US company to surpass $1 trillion in market value. In our love for big numbers, that made it a big story.
In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened tariffs on $500 billion of Chinese imports, on $200 billion of auto imports from various countries and on any nation he perceives as ripping off the United States.
A frequent media trope is anxiety that the Trump administration is undermining American rule of law in the name of his own personal power, ego and profit. One recent Trump tweet in particular – “I have the absolute right to pardon myself”
IN THE LATEST installment of the simmering trade war, the Trump administration reportedly plans to impose restrictions on Chinese investments in US technology companies and American technology exports to China. If implemented as rumored, any company with more than 25 percent Chinese ownership
Apparently, according to multiple reports, U.S. President Donald Trump blew up the post-Cold War world order during brief, contentious meetings at the G-7 summit in Ottawa this weekend. His summit with North Korea, of course, promises more of the same, though at least in a manner that most support.
SO, ABOUT THAT trade war. Recent days have presented a dizzying series of reversalsfollowed by reversals of reversals over whether, when, or if the United States will impose punitive tariffs on China in response to unresolved issues, ranging from intellectual property theft to lack of access
WALL STREET AND Silicon Valley have never been happy bedfellows, and that was on full display this week during Tesla’s quarterly earnings call. These calls are usually dull affairs, with CEOs or CFOs reading a prepared script summarizing the already-released financial results and articulating
Last week’s summit between North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and South Korea’s president Moon Jae-in was as close to breathtaking as it gets in international relations. In the space of a few months, the world went from trepidation about a possible nuclear confrontation
AS PUBLIC ATTITUDES towards Silicon Valley and Big Tech continue their rapid pivot from admiration to vilification, the current occupant of the White House has sought to lead the chorus. Several weeks ago, he launched a tweet-driven crusade against Amazon and CEO Jeff Bezos, accusing the company of ripping off the US Postal Service and harming
Donald Trump is right—the United States is not in a trade war with China.At least, not yet. As the rhetoric has flown back and forth between Washington and Beijing, breathless news coverage has made it seem as though the war of tariffs has already begun. It has not—hardly any new duties have been levied.
LAST WEEK, THE White House announced plans to levy tariffson up to $60 billion of Chinese imports. The primary, and legal, rationale hinges on the little-used Section 301 of a 1974 trade law that permits retaliation against countries that infringe US intellectual-property rights.
After a year of hemming and fulminating, President Trump finally unleashed the trade war that he had been promising since his campaign — and indeed for years before that. The stock market tanked on the news, and the commentariat exploded, with the bulk of the response negative.
PETER THIEL, NEVER one to keep a low profile, made his most recent set of waves with reports that he is prepared to decamp from Silicon Valley to more benign haunts in Los Angeles along with several of his companies. His rationale, according to a piece in the Wall Street Journal, is that the Valley is
"Dow plunges 391 points as fear grips markets." A headline from two days ago? Try two years ago. Monday, the Dow Jones industrial average was down about 1,600 points, the largest intraday point-drop ever, before ending the day down a mere 1,175 points, or 4.6 percent.
“Dow plunges 391 points as fear grips markets.” A headline from two days ago? Try two years ago. Jan. 15, 2016, to be precise. The last time stocks exhibited the sharp sell-off — followed by an equally sharp run-up — that characterized the past few days. Monday, the Dow Jones industrial average was down about 1,600 points, the largest intraday point-drop ever,
Now that President Trump has declared his asking price for a DACA deal includes $25 billion for a wall, here’s a speech Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) could give at any point in the current debate:
AS IF THERE wasn’t enough angst in the world, what with the Washington soap opera, #MeToo, false nuclear alerts, and a general sense of apprehension, now we also have a growing sense of alarm about how smartphones and their applications are impacting children.
As the Trump administration prepares to take a tougher trade stance on what it sees as unfair Chinese trade policies, China has signaled that it won’t accept such measures lying down, saying it will “resolutely safeguard” its economic interests.
Last week’s repeal of net neutrality regulations by the Federal Communications Commission generated considerable controversy. Many characterized the decision as a win for telecom and cable companies at the expense of both consumers and content companies.
Judging from their flurry of op-eds and tweets denouncing, dismissing or analyzing President Trump’s new National Security Strategy, America’s foreign policy mandarins would have you believe that the document is either dangerous, irrelevant or both. It is neither.
As congressional Republicans prepare to pass their tax bill , the Federal Reserve is about to say goodbye to Janet Yellen as chair. She’s had a good run: The United States and the world recovered from the financial crisis; steady, if unspectacular, growth resumed. Yet now the Fed is in an unusual spot as Jerome Powell takes over.
FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL, rulers have built new cities to satisfy everything from security to vanity. Some of those cities crumbled into obsolescence; others blossomed into capitals of legend. The recipe for success remains elusive, but that hasn’t stopped successive generations from trying. And if recent moves are any gauge
It’s no secret that the People’s Republic of China is nearing completion of a decades-long project to reassert itself as a global force. Whether it’s via the “One Belt, One Road” initiative to spend billions on infrastructure spanning Africa and Asia, its formation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
The “gig economy” is hardly new, but there’s still a yawning gap between the attention it receives and our understanding of how it is—or isn’t—altering the nature of work in America. It may be a Bay Area joke that everyone is either working in the valley or for Task Rabbit, and Uber may be the world’s most valuable startup,
Growth versus value. For many years, that was one of the central debates for investors, analysts, managers, and financial advisors. Growth and value stocks seemed to be the yin and yang of stock investing, with radically different characteristics that attracted investors with different temperaments.
It’s fashionable these days to compare our present to the Gilded Age: rising inequality, labor struggling while capital thrives, an astonishingly wealthy and concentrated elite appearing to amass an inordinate amount of power. But a stark difference between our era and the last decades of the 19th century is the nature of the American presidency.
Can't get enough?
Looking for something specific?
The Latest Tweets by @ZacharyKarabell