MAR 23, 2018 @ 01:25 PM 1,655 The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
How 'Trade Wars' Can Impact Markets
Kenneth Rapoza , CONTRIBUTOR
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
History shows us that trade conflicts are rarely good for markets.
Selling its Treasury position to an extreme level would impact the yuan.
Deal or no deal? Some in the market believe that tariff threats are a means to bring China to the negotiating table on trade.
We are supposedly on the brink of a trade war with China. While consensus errs on the side of cooler heads prevailing, and better trade deals being worked out, it may be best to err on the side of caution. That means staying away from stocks that might be impacted from retaliatory measures.
"Most of our investments are not linked to trade, so we are not worried about the earnings impact," says Mike Reynal, chief investment officer for Sophus Capital in Des Moines. "On the other hand, we do worry about sentiment in the stock market."
Trade wars conjurs up bad members of Herbert Hoover.
The global trade wars that followed the harsh tariffs imposed by the Hoover administration in the early 1930s following the stock market crash of 1929, deepened the trough of the Great Depression. Worldwide economic hardship led to political restructuring and eventually to World War II.
History shows us that trade conflicts are rarely good for markets.
In a more recent example, President George W. Bush imposed steel tariffs of between 8% and 30% in March 2002, scheduled to remain in effect until 2005. Canada and Mexico were exempt. Like Trump's recent steel and aluminum tariffs (which amounted to a non-tariff), the European Union threatened retaliatory measures, and went to the World Trade Organization (WTO).
The WTO ruled against the U.S. two years later and Bush dropped the tariffs. Here's what happened to the dollar index over the period.
Schroders
Dollar down.
Equities also took a hit.
Schroders
Equities struggled before making a recovery. Germany’s stock market took the brunt of the hit in Europe.
See: The Fed Is Now A 'Wet Blanket' For Stocks -- Forbes
The prospect of a trade war-driven slowdown follows a period of rising optimism around the outlook for the world, and the U.S. economy in particular, the Schroders investment team wrote in a blog post on Friday.
The International Monetary Fund upgraded its global growth forecasts for 2018 and 2019 by 0.2 percentage points to 3.9% in January. A trade war would probably force them to revisit those numbers.
Some have noted that China can seek revenge by selling U.S. Treasuries. But in doing so, they would likely cause a spike in yield, lowering the value of the bonds they have now, and thus hurting their own dollar reserves. It is not in China's interest to cut off its nose to spite its face, so to speak. Selling its Treasury position to an extreme level would impact the yuan. China has been reducing its Treasury purchases all year.
"It might be that eventually President Trump dials back on his protectionist measures by providing more exemptions from tariffs, or scales back the range of products and/or tariff levels," says Neil MacKinnon, an economist with VTB Capital in London. "The risk of a global recession would then be averted."
In addition to the threat of a global trade war, equity markets have been faced with a more hawkish Fed and the Special Counsel investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. The investigation is now switching from a pure Russia-related investigation during the 2016 campaign, and is now going back to 2014 Trump Organization financial records. Anything goes.
On Thursday, markets were susceptible to the fall in Facebook's share price, which turned some funds negative on the market leading tech sector.
The memorandum on China signed yesterday by the President makes it clear that the ultimate decision of applying tariffs is on Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer. He is a China hawk.
Lighthizer has 15 days to come up with a list of products and goods that the U.S. will impose tariffs on and then there will be a 30-day public comment period before they are implemented. China’s tariff announcement was also framed in terms of non-absolutes.
The bottom line is that there are no tariffs yet, and the threat of them gives China a deadline to come up with a better trade deal for the U.S.
Saturday, March 24, 2018
Warren Buffett Barely Makes More Than Average Berkshire Workers - Bloomberg
Warren Buffett Barely Makes More Than Average Berkshire Workers
By and
March 17, 2018, 9:38 AM GMT+11
Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s Warren Buffett is scoring particularly well on a new rule requiring companies to disclose the ratio of a chief executive officer’s pay to that of the median employee.
His annual compensation of $100,000 was just 1.87 times the median employee’s pay of $53,510, a figure calculated from a sample of about two-thirds of Berkshire’s total employees, according to a filing released Friday. He also gives back about $50,000 to the company “for minor items such as postage or phone calls that are personal,” meaning his take-home pay would be less than that median figure.
Buffett’s not struggling for money. He’s worth about $88.8 billion, making him the world’s third-richest person, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. A chunk of that wealth comes from his stake in Berkshire itself, where he’s the largest holder of Class A shares, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Billionaire executives at other firms including Leon Black at Apollo Global Management LLC have also reported favorable ratios.
By and
March 17, 2018, 9:38 AM GMT+11
Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s Warren Buffett is scoring particularly well on a new rule requiring companies to disclose the ratio of a chief executive officer’s pay to that of the median employee.
His annual compensation of $100,000 was just 1.87 times the median employee’s pay of $53,510, a figure calculated from a sample of about two-thirds of Berkshire’s total employees, according to a filing released Friday. He also gives back about $50,000 to the company “for minor items such as postage or phone calls that are personal,” meaning his take-home pay would be less than that median figure.
Buffett’s not struggling for money. He’s worth about $88.8 billion, making him the world’s third-richest person, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. A chunk of that wealth comes from his stake in Berkshire itself, where he’s the largest holder of Class A shares, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Billionaire executives at other firms including Leon Black at Apollo Global Management LLC have also reported favorable ratios.
Trump's low-profile trade leader gains more power - CNN Money
Trump's low-profile trade leader gains more power
by Patrick Gillespie @CNNMoney
March 23, 2018: 10:39 AM ET
President Trump is about to get tough on China and other trading partners. But the powerful figure carrying out those orders is someone you've probably never heard of.
He rarely does interviews and never tweets, but US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is arguably President Trump's most important trade official.
His team and his influence are growing, and he has an expanding portfolio of responsibilities at the core of the issue Trump credits with securing his election victory.
At Lighthizer's recommendation, Trump announced a plan Thursday to impose tariffs on Chinese exports to the United States to retaliate for China's theft of US intellectual property.
Officials say the tariffs will target $50 billion of Chinese goods. Lighthizer's office said in a document Thursday that the trade penalties will include 25% tariffs on communications technology, aerospace products and machinery. A full list is expected within two weeks.
Content by Breguet
The horologist who was admired by Louis XVIII
A.-L. Breguet consistently demonstrated his exceptional mastery of time measurement.
Trump also directed Lighthizer to play a key role in the execution of global tariffs on steel and aluminum, which take effect Friday.
And while all this is happening, Lighthizer is the lead negotiator for the United States on talks to rewrite NAFTA, the free trade pact with Mexico and Canada. He's also leading trade talks between the US and South Korea.
On trade, Trump hears an array of other voices, including those of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro. But Lighthizer's appears to carry the most influence.
"He's keeping a low profile, but he's building his reputation within the administration and with President Trump," says Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "Lighthizer really knows the details and is probably the best guy to be doing the negotiations" on trade deals and tariffs.
Hufbauer added that Lighthizer knows much more about trade laws than Ross, and that "Navarro is more of an ax guy. Lighthizer is more of a surgeon."
A White House spokesperson told CNN that Trump deeply values all members of his trade team, and that Ross' "real world know-how" in the private sector plays a critical role in trade policy and negotiations.
From tech theft to NAFTA
Trump does seem to lean toward Lighthizer's expertise.
He made Lighthizer the point of contact for countries seeking to get out of the steel and aluminum tariffs. When European Union and Japanese officials demanded exemptions, they met with Lighthizer in Brussels, even though these tariffs are technically coming from Ross' Commerce Department.
Canada and Mexico were granted early exemptions. Lighthizer told a Senate committee on Thursday that the EU, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina and Australia would also be excluded from the trade penalties.
Lighthizer, 70, has brushed aside concerns about escalating retaliation.
"The response that we're going to start a trade war is nonsense," he told Fox News in February.
Related: China is cutting its huge stash of US debt
Lighthizer also led the investigation into China's alleged theft of US intellectual property, such as software and patents.
Members of both parties agree China should be penalized for stealing US tech innovations. But they are divided about the right remedy. Lighthizer's solution was tariffs, and possibly restricting Chinese investment in the United States.
Lighthizer finally has a high-level team, too. Congress confirmed four high-ranking deputies at USTR in March. Lighthizer says a bigger team will help him execute Trump's trade agenda.
It's typical for the USTR to be the point person on the White House's trade agenda. But Trump is the first president in decades to make tariffs a focal point of his campaign platform, magnifying Lighthizer's importance.
Related: Trade war would wipe out gains from tax cuts
Two of a kind or odd bedfellows?
Trump and Lighthizer's paths to the White House run both parallel and perpendicular. Both have lambasted America's trade practices for years, but Lighthizer isn't the type of negotiator Trump promised voters he'd bring on board.
In a 2010 Op-Ed in The New York Times, Lighthizer blamed lawmakers for their "failure to make free trade work for America." Lighthizer declined to comment for this article.
Trump hit a nerve on the campaign trail, speaking to Rust Belt manufacturing workers who feel that bad trade agreements have doomed their industries.
"We have people who are political hacks negotiating our trade deals," Trump said during a 2016 campaign debate.
In a 2015 interview with Fox News, he said, "I know the best negotiators. I'm in New York."
With that in mind, Trump promised voters he would "drain the swamp" by getting rid of Washington lifers in White House ranks.
But Lighthizer has been a career Washington lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. He went to Georgetown for his undergraduate and graduate degrees.
Related: A trade deficit isn't always a bad thing
Lighthizer chose another Washingtonian, assistant US Trade Representative John Melle, to lead NAFTA talks for the administration. Melle helped get the original NAFTA, which Trump slams as the worst deal ever, passed through Congress in 1993 while with the Clinton administration.
— CNN's Jeremy Diamond contributed to this report.
by Patrick Gillespie @CNNMoney
March 23, 2018: 10:39 AM ET
President Trump is about to get tough on China and other trading partners. But the powerful figure carrying out those orders is someone you've probably never heard of.
He rarely does interviews and never tweets, but US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is arguably President Trump's most important trade official.
His team and his influence are growing, and he has an expanding portfolio of responsibilities at the core of the issue Trump credits with securing his election victory.
At Lighthizer's recommendation, Trump announced a plan Thursday to impose tariffs on Chinese exports to the United States to retaliate for China's theft of US intellectual property.
Officials say the tariffs will target $50 billion of Chinese goods. Lighthizer's office said in a document Thursday that the trade penalties will include 25% tariffs on communications technology, aerospace products and machinery. A full list is expected within two weeks.
Content by Breguet
The horologist who was admired by Louis XVIII
A.-L. Breguet consistently demonstrated his exceptional mastery of time measurement.
Trump also directed Lighthizer to play a key role in the execution of global tariffs on steel and aluminum, which take effect Friday.
And while all this is happening, Lighthizer is the lead negotiator for the United States on talks to rewrite NAFTA, the free trade pact with Mexico and Canada. He's also leading trade talks between the US and South Korea.
On trade, Trump hears an array of other voices, including those of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro. But Lighthizer's appears to carry the most influence.
"He's keeping a low profile, but he's building his reputation within the administration and with President Trump," says Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "Lighthizer really knows the details and is probably the best guy to be doing the negotiations" on trade deals and tariffs.
Hufbauer added that Lighthizer knows much more about trade laws than Ross, and that "Navarro is more of an ax guy. Lighthizer is more of a surgeon."
A White House spokesperson told CNN that Trump deeply values all members of his trade team, and that Ross' "real world know-how" in the private sector plays a critical role in trade policy and negotiations.
From tech theft to NAFTA
Trump does seem to lean toward Lighthizer's expertise.
He made Lighthizer the point of contact for countries seeking to get out of the steel and aluminum tariffs. When European Union and Japanese officials demanded exemptions, they met with Lighthizer in Brussels, even though these tariffs are technically coming from Ross' Commerce Department.
Canada and Mexico were granted early exemptions. Lighthizer told a Senate committee on Thursday that the EU, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina and Australia would also be excluded from the trade penalties.
Lighthizer, 70, has brushed aside concerns about escalating retaliation.
"The response that we're going to start a trade war is nonsense," he told Fox News in February.
Related: China is cutting its huge stash of US debt
Lighthizer also led the investigation into China's alleged theft of US intellectual property, such as software and patents.
Members of both parties agree China should be penalized for stealing US tech innovations. But they are divided about the right remedy. Lighthizer's solution was tariffs, and possibly restricting Chinese investment in the United States.
Lighthizer finally has a high-level team, too. Congress confirmed four high-ranking deputies at USTR in March. Lighthizer says a bigger team will help him execute Trump's trade agenda.
It's typical for the USTR to be the point person on the White House's trade agenda. But Trump is the first president in decades to make tariffs a focal point of his campaign platform, magnifying Lighthizer's importance.
Related: Trade war would wipe out gains from tax cuts
Two of a kind or odd bedfellows?
Trump and Lighthizer's paths to the White House run both parallel and perpendicular. Both have lambasted America's trade practices for years, but Lighthizer isn't the type of negotiator Trump promised voters he'd bring on board.
In a 2010 Op-Ed in The New York Times, Lighthizer blamed lawmakers for their "failure to make free trade work for America." Lighthizer declined to comment for this article.
Trump hit a nerve on the campaign trail, speaking to Rust Belt manufacturing workers who feel that bad trade agreements have doomed their industries.
"We have people who are political hacks negotiating our trade deals," Trump said during a 2016 campaign debate.
In a 2015 interview with Fox News, he said, "I know the best negotiators. I'm in New York."
With that in mind, Trump promised voters he would "drain the swamp" by getting rid of Washington lifers in White House ranks.
But Lighthizer has been a career Washington lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. He went to Georgetown for his undergraduate and graduate degrees.
Related: A trade deficit isn't always a bad thing
Lighthizer chose another Washingtonian, assistant US Trade Representative John Melle, to lead NAFTA talks for the administration. Melle helped get the original NAFTA, which Trump slams as the worst deal ever, passed through Congress in 1993 while with the Clinton administration.
— CNN's Jeremy Diamond contributed to this report.
The world is on the brink of a trade war - CNN Money
The world is on the brink of a trade war
by Charles Riley @CRrileyCNN
March 23, 2018: 11:50 AM ET
The United States and China have fired the dramatic opening shots of what could become a trade war. But it's what happens next that matters most.
President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he would impose tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese exports to the United States. Beijing quickly outlined new import taxes of its own on US products worth $3 billion.
The increasingly bellicose rhetoric suggests that further escalation is possible: Trump described his actions targeting China as "the first of many," while Beijing said "it is impolite not to reciprocate" and promised a "fight to the end."
Analysts are worried. China's response Friday was framed as retaliation for steel and aluminum tariffs Trump unveiled earlier in March, not his Thursday broadside. That means a second strike could be in the works.
If Trump unveils yet more punitive measures, Beijing is almost certain to respond. That could be followed by another round, and another. That pattern of retaliation is what economists call a trade war.
Content by Breguet
The horologist who was admired by Louis XVIII
A.-L. Breguet consistently demonstrated his exceptional mastery of time measurement.
"The main source of lingering concern is uncertainty over what happens next," said Mark Williams, chief Asia economist at Capital Economics.
What Trump wants
It's difficult to predict how the spat will evolve, but there may be clues in what's happened so far.
Trump said repeatedly during his campaign that he would take tough stance on trade with China. He said the United States had been ripped off, and he would take action to reduce the US trade deficit with China.
In recent weeks, he has demanded that China cut the deficit by $100 billion.
In addition to steel and aluminum, the Trump administration has targeted imported washing machines and solar panels with taxes that would affect China. It has not said which products will be hit by the latest round of tariffs.
Trump has framed these and other actions as part of a negotiation. Several US allies, for example, were given an 11th hour temporary reprieve from the steel and aluminum tariffs.
"When it comes to China, the US is looking for a large deal that addresses the trade balance and liberalizes China's market," said Scott Kennedy, a China expert at the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
Williams said that Beijing is unlikely to change its trade practices, which have given its companies a leg up.
The big question: Are the actions Trump has already taken enough to satisfy the president and his supporters?
"The key uncertainty now is whether President Trump sees [the tariffs] as an end in themselves, or whether they are followed by a further escalation when, as seems likely, they fail to narrow the trade imbalance significantly," said Williams.
The response from China
It takes two countries to have a trade war.
So analysts are watching very closely to see how Beijing responds in the coming weeks and months.
China has plenty of options to hit back at the United States. It is one of the biggest buyers of US crops, including soybeans or sorghum. China could put a tax on those, or buy more soy from places like Brazil and Argentina.
Beijing could also slap tariffs on American aircraft, doing great damage to US companies such as Boeing (BA). Or it could simply direct its state-backed airlines to buy more from Airbus (EADSF) in future.
China's retaliation has, so far, been limited.
It's possible that more measures will be announced when the scale and impact of the latest round of tariffs from Washington become clear. Still, China knows it has a lot to lose if things get out of hand.
"[Beijing] may want to appear to be standing up to foreign bullying in the coming weeks. But at this stage, they can afford to be fairly relaxed and their response is likely to be limited," said Williams. "China's leaders have no desire to see the global trading system further destabilized."
U.S. trade moves could spark Chinese retaliation
U.S. trade moves could spark Chinese retaliation
How to avoid a trade war
Cooler heads may prevail if Washington and Beijing look at the bigger picture.
The actions announced so far will have relatively little impact on the world's two largest economies. Capital Economics estimates, for example, that the new US tariffs will cause China's GDP to decline by just 0.1%.
A full blown trade war would have much more profound economic implications for the United States and China. It would also drag down global trade and put vulnerable economies under pressure.
US allies are calling on the Trump administration to change its tactics, and address trade grievances through discussion and in accordance with global trade rules.
"Preserving the global rules-based system for trade is what we should all be working towards," EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmström tweeted Friday.
Roberto Azevêdo, director general of the World Trade Organization, urged countries to resolve their trade disputes by using the mechanisms of the WTO.
"Actions taken outside these collective processes greatly increase the risk of escalation in a confrontation that will have no winners, and which could quickly lead to a less stable trading system," he said on Friday.
-- CNN's Patrick Gillespie, Daniel Shane and Steven Jiang contributed to this report.
by Charles Riley @CRrileyCNN
March 23, 2018: 11:50 AM ET
The United States and China have fired the dramatic opening shots of what could become a trade war. But it's what happens next that matters most.
President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he would impose tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese exports to the United States. Beijing quickly outlined new import taxes of its own on US products worth $3 billion.
The increasingly bellicose rhetoric suggests that further escalation is possible: Trump described his actions targeting China as "the first of many," while Beijing said "it is impolite not to reciprocate" and promised a "fight to the end."
Analysts are worried. China's response Friday was framed as retaliation for steel and aluminum tariffs Trump unveiled earlier in March, not his Thursday broadside. That means a second strike could be in the works.
If Trump unveils yet more punitive measures, Beijing is almost certain to respond. That could be followed by another round, and another. That pattern of retaliation is what economists call a trade war.
Content by Breguet
The horologist who was admired by Louis XVIII
A.-L. Breguet consistently demonstrated his exceptional mastery of time measurement.
"The main source of lingering concern is uncertainty over what happens next," said Mark Williams, chief Asia economist at Capital Economics.
What Trump wants
It's difficult to predict how the spat will evolve, but there may be clues in what's happened so far.
Trump said repeatedly during his campaign that he would take tough stance on trade with China. He said the United States had been ripped off, and he would take action to reduce the US trade deficit with China.
In recent weeks, he has demanded that China cut the deficit by $100 billion.
In addition to steel and aluminum, the Trump administration has targeted imported washing machines and solar panels with taxes that would affect China. It has not said which products will be hit by the latest round of tariffs.
Trump has framed these and other actions as part of a negotiation. Several US allies, for example, were given an 11th hour temporary reprieve from the steel and aluminum tariffs.
"When it comes to China, the US is looking for a large deal that addresses the trade balance and liberalizes China's market," said Scott Kennedy, a China expert at the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
Williams said that Beijing is unlikely to change its trade practices, which have given its companies a leg up.
The big question: Are the actions Trump has already taken enough to satisfy the president and his supporters?
"The key uncertainty now is whether President Trump sees [the tariffs] as an end in themselves, or whether they are followed by a further escalation when, as seems likely, they fail to narrow the trade imbalance significantly," said Williams.
The response from China
It takes two countries to have a trade war.
So analysts are watching very closely to see how Beijing responds in the coming weeks and months.
China has plenty of options to hit back at the United States. It is one of the biggest buyers of US crops, including soybeans or sorghum. China could put a tax on those, or buy more soy from places like Brazil and Argentina.
Beijing could also slap tariffs on American aircraft, doing great damage to US companies such as Boeing (BA). Or it could simply direct its state-backed airlines to buy more from Airbus (EADSF) in future.
China's retaliation has, so far, been limited.
It's possible that more measures will be announced when the scale and impact of the latest round of tariffs from Washington become clear. Still, China knows it has a lot to lose if things get out of hand.
"[Beijing] may want to appear to be standing up to foreign bullying in the coming weeks. But at this stage, they can afford to be fairly relaxed and their response is likely to be limited," said Williams. "China's leaders have no desire to see the global trading system further destabilized."
U.S. trade moves could spark Chinese retaliation
U.S. trade moves could spark Chinese retaliation
How to avoid a trade war
Cooler heads may prevail if Washington and Beijing look at the bigger picture.
The actions announced so far will have relatively little impact on the world's two largest economies. Capital Economics estimates, for example, that the new US tariffs will cause China's GDP to decline by just 0.1%.
A full blown trade war would have much more profound economic implications for the United States and China. It would also drag down global trade and put vulnerable economies under pressure.
US allies are calling on the Trump administration to change its tactics, and address trade grievances through discussion and in accordance with global trade rules.
"Preserving the global rules-based system for trade is what we should all be working towards," EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmström tweeted Friday.
Roberto Azevêdo, director general of the World Trade Organization, urged countries to resolve their trade disputes by using the mechanisms of the WTO.
"Actions taken outside these collective processes greatly increase the risk of escalation in a confrontation that will have no winners, and which could quickly lead to a less stable trading system," he said on Friday.
-- CNN's Patrick Gillespie, Daniel Shane and Steven Jiang contributed to this report.
Russia names Putin's new 'super weapons' after a quirky public vote - Reuters
WORLD NEWSMARCH 23, 2018 / 10:57 PM / UPDATED 20 HOURS AGO
Russia names Putin's new 'super weapons' after a quirky public vote
Andrew Osborn
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia has unveiled the names for a new generation of nuclear-powered missiles touted by President Vladimir Putin as invincible after more than seven million people took part in a quirky public vote organized by the Russian military.
The names chosen include ‘Peresvet,’ after a medieval warrior monk, for a laser and ‘Burevestnik,’ after a seabird, for a cruise missile.
The arms systems, which Putin revealed in a bellicose state-of-the-nation speech this month, include a nuclear-powered cruise missile, an underwater nuclear-powered drone, and a laser weapon.
Putin has often used militaristic rhetoric to mobilize support and buttress his narrative that Russia is under siege from the West, and some critics complain that public discourse increasingly resembles that of a country at war.
The culmination of the “name that weapon” vote comes amid fears in both Russia and the West about a new arms race, something Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump have said they don’t want, and after Putin won a landslide re-election victory.
Russia’s Ministry of Defence asked the public to name the weapons systems in an online vote, something it has never done before, and unveiled the results late on Thursday on state TV.
After the results were announced, Deputy Defence Minister Yuri Borisov explained on state TV, to ripples of applause, what the new weapons were capable of.
The defense ministry said Russians had voted to name the new military laser ‘Peresvet’ after a medieval warrior monk, Alexander Peresvet, who took part in a 14th century battle against the Mongols. Peresvet is revered by some clerics in the Russian Orthodox Church, whose influence has grown under Putin.
The winning name for the underwater nuclear drone was more conventional - ‘Poseidon’ after the Greek god of the sea, drawing criticism from some Russians who complained the name was too foreign.
The new nuclear-powered cruise missile, which Putin has boasted could hit almost any point in the world and evade a U.S.-built missile shield, will be called ‘Burevestnik,’ Russian for the Storm Petrel bird, the defense ministry said.
The Storm Petrel is a seabird whose presence mariners believe foretells bad weather.
Putin’s boasts about the new weapons have been greeted with scepticism in Washington, where officials have cast doubt on whether Russia has added any new capabilities to its nuclear arsenal beyond those already known to the U.S. military and intelligence agencies.
Among the suggested names for the weapons systems that did not make the final cut: ‘Stalin,’ after the Soviet dictator, and ‘Palmyra,’ after the Syrian city which Russian forces helped Syrian President Bashar al-Assad take back from Islamic State.
Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg
Factbox: Want to know how Bolton will advise Trump? Read his tweets - Reuters
POLITICS MARCH 23, 2018 / 10:56 AM / A DAY AGO
Factbox: Want to know how Bolton will advise Trump? Read his tweets
Reuters Staff
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - John Bolton, who was named by President Donald Trump on Thursday as his new national security adviser, has a history of taking hardline positions on foreign policy.
He has been an active presence on television and on Twitter. His recent tweets give some insight on what he will bring to Trump’s White House.
ON NORTH KOREA
“It’s important to stand behind our South Korean allies, but if we pay heed to the lessons of history, talking to #NorthKorea would be fruitless.” (Feb. 13)
“We have a very limited amount of time left before #NorthKorea gains deliverable nuclear weapons. We’ve got to look at the very unattractive choice of using military force to deny them that capability.” (Jan. 11)
ON RUSSIA
“There needs to be a strategic response to Russia’s new nuclear missiles to show our allies in Europe that we will not let #Russia push the U.S. or its allies around.” (March 2)
“The U.S must strengthen its allies in Central and Eastern Europe through #NATO and ensure that there are effective countermeasures to the cyber war that Russia is engaging.” (Feb. 20)
“Washington and its allies do not need more #Russian adventurism in #MiddleEast, especially given the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis.” (Jan. 24)
ON IRAN
“The #Irannucleardeal was a strategic mistake in 2015. This deal needs to be abrogated and America must craft a new reality that reflects the actions of the Iranian regime.” (Jan. 29)
“If the Iranian opposition is prepared to take outside support, the US should provide it to them.” (Jan. 5)
ON THE MIDDLE EAST
“The Middle East peace process has long needed clarity and an injection of reality, and Trump has provided it by making the decision to move the US embassy in #Israel to #Jerusalem.” (Dec. 14, 2017)
Writing by Yara Bayoumy and James Oliphant; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Peter Cooney
Factbox: Want to know how Bolton will advise Trump? Read his tweets
Reuters Staff
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - John Bolton, who was named by President Donald Trump on Thursday as his new national security adviser, has a history of taking hardline positions on foreign policy.
He has been an active presence on television and on Twitter. His recent tweets give some insight on what he will bring to Trump’s White House.
ON NORTH KOREA
“It’s important to stand behind our South Korean allies, but if we pay heed to the lessons of history, talking to #NorthKorea would be fruitless.” (Feb. 13)
“We have a very limited amount of time left before #NorthKorea gains deliverable nuclear weapons. We’ve got to look at the very unattractive choice of using military force to deny them that capability.” (Jan. 11)
ON RUSSIA
“There needs to be a strategic response to Russia’s new nuclear missiles to show our allies in Europe that we will not let #Russia push the U.S. or its allies around.” (March 2)
“The U.S must strengthen its allies in Central and Eastern Europe through #NATO and ensure that there are effective countermeasures to the cyber war that Russia is engaging.” (Feb. 20)
“Washington and its allies do not need more #Russian adventurism in #MiddleEast, especially given the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis.” (Jan. 24)
ON IRAN
“The #Irannucleardeal was a strategic mistake in 2015. This deal needs to be abrogated and America must craft a new reality that reflects the actions of the Iranian regime.” (Jan. 29)
“If the Iranian opposition is prepared to take outside support, the US should provide it to them.” (Jan. 5)
ON THE MIDDLE EAST
“The Middle East peace process has long needed clarity and an injection of reality, and Trump has provided it by making the decision to move the US embassy in #Israel to #Jerusalem.” (Dec. 14, 2017)
Writing by Yara Bayoumy and James Oliphant; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Peter Cooney
The Billionaire Behind Bratz Dolls Is Leading a Last-Minute Push to Save Toys R Us - TIMR BUsiness
The Billionaire Behind Bratz Dolls Is Leading a Last-Minute Push to Save Toys R Us
Posted: 22 Mar 2018 02:20 AM PDT
(NEW YORK) — Toy company executive Isaac Larian says he and other investors have pledged a total of $200 million in financing and hope to raise four times that amount in crowdfunding in order to bid for up to 400 of the Toys R Us stores being liquidated in bankruptcy.
The unsolicited bid still faces many hurdles, including finding other deep-pocked investors and getting a bankruptcy judge to agree to it. But this is the first public plan to keep the cherished toy brand in existence in the United States.
Such a long-shot move would also greatly benefit Larian’s primary business. He’s CEO of Bratz doll-maker MGA Entertainment, which relies on Toys R Us for nearly 1 in every 5 sales.
Larian says he and the other investors, which he declined to name, believe salvaging part of the Toys R Us business will be good for the toy industry, customers and workers. They’re interested in more than half the 735 U.S. stores Toys R Us plans to liquidate, and want to be able to use the valuable brand name.
And they’re hoping the outpouring of affectionate nostalgia when Toys R Us announced its plans — #SaveToysRUs has been a trend on social media — translates into pledges toward their $1 billion goal.
Toys R Us sought court approval last week to liquidate its remaining U.S. stores, threatening the jobs of some 30,000 employees and spelling the end for a chain known to generations of children and parents for its sprawling stores, sing-along jingle and Geoffrey the giraffe mascot.
The store has an iconic place in American culture, said Larian. “We can’t just sit back and just let it disappear.” Larian, who is a billionaire, is using his own money, not MGA funds, for the bid.
Why might Larian be successful with a retail chain struggling to stay relevant in the age of Amazon? For one thing, Larian wouldn’t have the massive $5 billion in debt that hampered the current owner of Toys R Us. He also says the toy industry needs a big chain like Toys R Us, where children can touch and feel the toys and toymaker’s can test new products.
The chain’s liquidation will have a “devastating effect” on the toy industry, said Larian, who estimates that 130,000 jobs in the U.S. could be lost when you include layoffs at suppliers and logistic operations. He said a total Toys R Us liquidation could mean MGA would have to lay off workers at an Ohio plant that makes the Little Tikes toy vehicles. That brand accounts for 25 percent of MGA total sales, and Larian says only Toys R Us really had enough room to display the cars. It’s harder to ship such bulky items on Amazon.
The Toys R Us troubles have hurt big toy makers like Mattel and Hasbro, which have been key suppliers to the chain. MGA, based in Van Nuys, California, is the world’s largest privately held toy company. The planned liquidation would have a bigger impact on smaller toy makers that rely more on the chain for sales.
“People do not realize the hole that can’t be filled by other retailers,” said Larian, noting that Toys R Us accounts for 18 to 19 percent of MGA’s worldwide sales. “The pipeline is too big.”
Larian claims that if 400 U.S. Toys R Us stores are salvaged, he could save one-third of the 130,000 jobs.
The planned closure of the U.S. Toys R Us stores over the coming months will finalize the downfall of the chain that succumbed to heavy debt and relentless trends that undercut its business, from online shopping to mobile games.
When the chain filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last fall, it pledged to stay open. But after what CEO David Brandon called a “devastating” holiday shopping season, Toys R Us announced in January it would close 182 stores, and then last week that it would liquidate.
The company said last week it’s trying to bundle its Canadian business with about 200 U.S. stores and find a buyer. Larian has personally aligned with another investor in a separate bid for those operations, though he declined to specify the value of it.
Toys R Us is also likely to liquidate its businesses in Australia, France, Poland, Portugal and Spain. It’s already shuttering its business in the United Kingdom. That would leave it with the stores in Canada, as well as in central Europe and Asia. It operates more than 700 stores outside the United States.
Posted: 22 Mar 2018 02:20 AM PDT
(NEW YORK) — Toy company executive Isaac Larian says he and other investors have pledged a total of $200 million in financing and hope to raise four times that amount in crowdfunding in order to bid for up to 400 of the Toys R Us stores being liquidated in bankruptcy.
The unsolicited bid still faces many hurdles, including finding other deep-pocked investors and getting a bankruptcy judge to agree to it. But this is the first public plan to keep the cherished toy brand in existence in the United States.
Such a long-shot move would also greatly benefit Larian’s primary business. He’s CEO of Bratz doll-maker MGA Entertainment, which relies on Toys R Us for nearly 1 in every 5 sales.
Larian says he and the other investors, which he declined to name, believe salvaging part of the Toys R Us business will be good for the toy industry, customers and workers. They’re interested in more than half the 735 U.S. stores Toys R Us plans to liquidate, and want to be able to use the valuable brand name.
And they’re hoping the outpouring of affectionate nostalgia when Toys R Us announced its plans — #SaveToysRUs has been a trend on social media — translates into pledges toward their $1 billion goal.
Toys R Us sought court approval last week to liquidate its remaining U.S. stores, threatening the jobs of some 30,000 employees and spelling the end for a chain known to generations of children and parents for its sprawling stores, sing-along jingle and Geoffrey the giraffe mascot.
The store has an iconic place in American culture, said Larian. “We can’t just sit back and just let it disappear.” Larian, who is a billionaire, is using his own money, not MGA funds, for the bid.
Why might Larian be successful with a retail chain struggling to stay relevant in the age of Amazon? For one thing, Larian wouldn’t have the massive $5 billion in debt that hampered the current owner of Toys R Us. He also says the toy industry needs a big chain like Toys R Us, where children can touch and feel the toys and toymaker’s can test new products.
The chain’s liquidation will have a “devastating effect” on the toy industry, said Larian, who estimates that 130,000 jobs in the U.S. could be lost when you include layoffs at suppliers and logistic operations. He said a total Toys R Us liquidation could mean MGA would have to lay off workers at an Ohio plant that makes the Little Tikes toy vehicles. That brand accounts for 25 percent of MGA total sales, and Larian says only Toys R Us really had enough room to display the cars. It’s harder to ship such bulky items on Amazon.
The Toys R Us troubles have hurt big toy makers like Mattel and Hasbro, which have been key suppliers to the chain. MGA, based in Van Nuys, California, is the world’s largest privately held toy company. The planned liquidation would have a bigger impact on smaller toy makers that rely more on the chain for sales.
“People do not realize the hole that can’t be filled by other retailers,” said Larian, noting that Toys R Us accounts for 18 to 19 percent of MGA’s worldwide sales. “The pipeline is too big.”
Larian claims that if 400 U.S. Toys R Us stores are salvaged, he could save one-third of the 130,000 jobs.
The planned closure of the U.S. Toys R Us stores over the coming months will finalize the downfall of the chain that succumbed to heavy debt and relentless trends that undercut its business, from online shopping to mobile games.
When the chain filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last fall, it pledged to stay open. But after what CEO David Brandon called a “devastating” holiday shopping season, Toys R Us announced in January it would close 182 stores, and then last week that it would liquidate.
The company said last week it’s trying to bundle its Canadian business with about 200 U.S. stores and find a buyer. Larian has personally aligned with another investor in a separate bid for those operations, though he declined to specify the value of it.
Toys R Us is also likely to liquidate its businesses in Australia, France, Poland, Portugal and Spain. It’s already shuttering its business in the United Kingdom. That would leave it with the stores in Canada, as well as in central Europe and Asia. It operates more than 700 stores outside the United States.
U.S. Businesses Brace for a Backlash as Trump Turns Up the Trade Pressure on Beijing - TIME Business
U.S. Businesses Brace for a Backlash as Trump Turns Up the Trade Pressure on Beijing
Posted: 22 Mar 2018 12:32 AM PDT
(WASHINGTON) — Farmers, electronics retailers and other U.S. businesses are bracing for a backlash as President Donald Trump targets China for stealing American technology or pressuring U.S. companies to hand it over.
The administration is expected Thursday to slap trade sanctions on China, perhaps including restrictions on Chinese investment and tariffs on as much as $60 billion worth of Chinese products.
Dozens of industry groups sent a letter last weekend to Trump warning that “the imposition of sweeping tariffs would trigger a chain reaction of negative consequences for the U.S. economy, provoking retaliation; stifling U.S. agriculture, goods, and services exports; and raising costs for businesses and consumers.”
The announcement will mark the end of a seven-month U.S. investigation into the hardball tactics China has used to challenge U.S. supremacy in technology, including dispatching hackers to steal commercial secrets and demanding that U.S. companies hand over trade secrets in exchange for access to the Chinese market. The administration argues that years of negotiations with China have failed to produce results.
“It could be a watershed moment,” said Stephen Ezell, vice president of global innovation policy at the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a think tank. “The Trump administration’s decision to go down this path is illustrative that previous strategies have not borne the hoped-for fruit.”
Business groups mostly agree that something needs to be done about China’s aggressive push in technology — but they worry that China will retaliate by targeting U.S. exports of aircraft, soybeans and other products and start a tit-for-tat trade war of escalating sanctions between the world’s two biggest economies.
“The sanctions are a very big deal,” says Mary Lovely, a Syracuse University economist and senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “The Chinese see them as a major threat and do not want a costly trade war.”
The move against China comes just as the United States prepares to impose tariffs of 25 percent on imported steel and 10 percent on aluminum — sanctions that are meant to hit China for flooding the world with cheap steel and aluminum but will likely fall hardest on U.S. allies like South Korea and Brazil because they ship more of the metals to the United States.
Trump campaigned on promises to bring down America’s massive trade deficit — $566 billion last year — by rewriting trade agreements and cracking down on what he called abusive commercial practices by U.S. trading partners. But he was slow to turn rhetoric to action. In January, he imposed tariffs on imported solar panels and washing machines. Then he unveiled the steel and aluminum tariffs, saying reliance on imported metals jeopardizes U.S. national security.
To target China, Trump has dusted off a Cold War weapon for trade disputes: Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, which lets the president unilaterally impose tariffs. It was meant for a world in which large swaths of global commerce were not covered by trade agreements. With the arrival in 1995 of the World Trade Organization, which polices global trade, Section 301 fell largely into disuse.
At first it looked like Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping were going to get along fine. They enjoyed an amiable summit nearly a year ago at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. But America’s longstanding complaints about Chinese economic practices continued to simmer, and it became more and more apparent that the U.S. investigation into China technology policies was going to end in trade sanctions.
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang this week urged Washington to act “rationally” and promised to open China up to more foreign products and investment. “China has been trying to cool things down for weeks. They have offered concessions,” Lovely says. “Nothing seems to cool the fire. I fear they will take a hard line now that their efforts have been rebuffed. … China cannot appear subservient to the U.S.”
Stocks Just Tumbled to a 6-Week Low. Here’s Why - TIME Business
Stocks Just Tumbled to a 6-Week Low. Here’s Why
Posted: 22 Mar 2018 02:03 PM PDT
U.S. stocks tumbled the most in six weeks and Treasuries rallied as investors shifted focus from the Federal Reserve to the threat of an escalating trade war with China that has the potential to disrupt global growth.
The benchmark S&P 500 Index slumped the most since early February and the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost more than 700 points after President Donald Trump ordered tariffs on about $50 billion in Chinese goods. The 10-year Treasury yield slid toward 2.8 percent and the yen advanced as investors sought safe havens. The dollar rebounded.
“The market doesn’t like trade wars, the market doesn’t like that the Fed is adamant about raising rates,” said Matt Schreiber, president and chief investment strategist at WBI Investments in Red Bank, New Jersey. “Yes the economy has been pretty strong, the labor market has less slack, but there’s nothing to really get fired up about and try to normalize rates to a level way above where we are.”
The threat that a tit-for-tat trade spat with China will erupt and hamper global growth has investors on edge a day after the Fed sought to reassure markets that it’s in no hurry to raise rates even as it lifted growth projections for the world’s largest economy. Trump’s first trade action directly aimed at China comes as policy makers including IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde warn of a global trade conflict that could undermine the broadest world recovery in years.
Stocks were also hit earlier when John Dowd resigned as Trump’s lead attorney countering Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe as the inquiry into possible collusion in the 2016 election intensifies.
Facebook Inc. helped pace a decline in the tech sector, falling 2.7 percent. This week’s selloff in tech stocks is on pace to be the worst since early February. Other notable decliners Thursday included Accenture Plc and Micron Technology Inc.
Elsewhere, West Texas oil fluctuated before falling and the Australian dollar slipped after the country’s unemployment rate climbed. The British pound initially jumped after the country’s central bank voted 7-2 to maintain interest rates, but pared as investors digested comments from policy makers that weren’t overtly hawkish.
(Courtesy of Bloomberg)
Here are some key events on the schedule for the remainder of this week:
The Bank of Russia’s rate decision is on Friday. U.S. government funding is due to expire at the end of the day on Friday.
And these are the main moves in markets:
Stocks
The S&P 500 Index fell 2.5 percent as of 4:03 p.m. New York time, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 2.9 percent and the Nasdaq Composite Index dipped 2.4 percent. The Stoxx Europe 600 Index fell 1.7 percent and the MSCI Asia Pacific Index was little changed. The U.K.’s FTSE 100 Index dipped 1.5 percent, touching the lowest in 15 months. The MSCI Emerging Market Index fell 1.2 percent.
Currencies
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index rose 0.2 percent, rebounding from the largest drop since January. The euro fell 0.2 percent to $1.2318. The British pound dropped 0.2 percent to $1.4111. The Japanese yen rose 0.6 percent to 105.41 per dollar.
Bonds
The yield on 10-year Treasuries fell six basis point to 2.82 percent. Germany’s 10-year yield dropped six basis point to 0.53 percent, declining from the highest in more than a week. Britain’s 10-year yield fell nine basis points to 1.44 percent.
Commodities
West Texas Intermediate crude dropped 1.4 percent to $64.24 a barrel, easing from the highest in almost seven weeks. Gold fell 0.3 percent to $1,329.07 an ounce a day after the biggest rise since May 2017.
Posted: 22 Mar 2018 02:03 PM PDT
U.S. stocks tumbled the most in six weeks and Treasuries rallied as investors shifted focus from the Federal Reserve to the threat of an escalating trade war with China that has the potential to disrupt global growth.
The benchmark S&P 500 Index slumped the most since early February and the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost more than 700 points after President Donald Trump ordered tariffs on about $50 billion in Chinese goods. The 10-year Treasury yield slid toward 2.8 percent and the yen advanced as investors sought safe havens. The dollar rebounded.
“The market doesn’t like trade wars, the market doesn’t like that the Fed is adamant about raising rates,” said Matt Schreiber, president and chief investment strategist at WBI Investments in Red Bank, New Jersey. “Yes the economy has been pretty strong, the labor market has less slack, but there’s nothing to really get fired up about and try to normalize rates to a level way above where we are.”
The threat that a tit-for-tat trade spat with China will erupt and hamper global growth has investors on edge a day after the Fed sought to reassure markets that it’s in no hurry to raise rates even as it lifted growth projections for the world’s largest economy. Trump’s first trade action directly aimed at China comes as policy makers including IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde warn of a global trade conflict that could undermine the broadest world recovery in years.
Stocks were also hit earlier when John Dowd resigned as Trump’s lead attorney countering Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe as the inquiry into possible collusion in the 2016 election intensifies.
Facebook Inc. helped pace a decline in the tech sector, falling 2.7 percent. This week’s selloff in tech stocks is on pace to be the worst since early February. Other notable decliners Thursday included Accenture Plc and Micron Technology Inc.
Elsewhere, West Texas oil fluctuated before falling and the Australian dollar slipped after the country’s unemployment rate climbed. The British pound initially jumped after the country’s central bank voted 7-2 to maintain interest rates, but pared as investors digested comments from policy makers that weren’t overtly hawkish.
(Courtesy of Bloomberg)
Here are some key events on the schedule for the remainder of this week:
The Bank of Russia’s rate decision is on Friday. U.S. government funding is due to expire at the end of the day on Friday.
And these are the main moves in markets:
Stocks
The S&P 500 Index fell 2.5 percent as of 4:03 p.m. New York time, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 2.9 percent and the Nasdaq Composite Index dipped 2.4 percent. The Stoxx Europe 600 Index fell 1.7 percent and the MSCI Asia Pacific Index was little changed. The U.K.’s FTSE 100 Index dipped 1.5 percent, touching the lowest in 15 months. The MSCI Emerging Market Index fell 1.2 percent.
Currencies
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index rose 0.2 percent, rebounding from the largest drop since January. The euro fell 0.2 percent to $1.2318. The British pound dropped 0.2 percent to $1.4111. The Japanese yen rose 0.6 percent to 105.41 per dollar.
Bonds
The yield on 10-year Treasuries fell six basis point to 2.82 percent. Germany’s 10-year yield dropped six basis point to 0.53 percent, declining from the highest in more than a week. Britain’s 10-year yield fell nine basis points to 1.44 percent.
Commodities
West Texas Intermediate crude dropped 1.4 percent to $64.24 a barrel, easing from the highest in almost seven weeks. Gold fell 0.3 percent to $1,329.07 an ounce a day after the biggest rise since May 2017.
Trump signs new transgender military ban - BBC News
24/3/2018
Trump signs new transgender military ban
The blanket ban announced last year was blocked by federal judges
President Trump has signed a memorandum that bans some transgender people from US military service but rolls back the blanket ban he ordered last year.
The new directive adopts recommendations from Defence Secretary Jim Mattis that "transgender persons who require or have undergone gender transition" cannot serve.
But it gives the Pentagon and other agencies some discretion in the matter.
The earlier blanket ban was blocked by federal judges.
The new memorandum says that transgender individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are barred from military service "except under certain limited circumstances".
'My stomach dropped': Transgender troops react to Trump ban
Judge halts transgender ban
The transgender arguments dividing British society
The Department of Defence (DoD) had submitted a report to the president which said allowing those with a history of gender dysphoria to serve entailed "substantial risks" and could, by exempting them from existing physical, mental and sex-based standards, "undermine readiness... and impose an unreasonable burden on the military".
It said the Obama administration's decision to allow transgender individuals to serve in the military was largely based on a 2016 study by the Rand think-tank, which "contained significant shortcomings".
Gender dysphoria
The experience of distress or discomfort as a result of a disparity between a person's biological sex (assigned at birth) and what they feel their gender to be
Also referred to as transgenderism, gender incongruence or GID (gender identity disorder)
The exact causes are unclear. In some cases hormones that trigger biological sex development may function differently and there are rare conditions such as intersex
Treatment is also varied and aims to reduce the distress. The individual may dress or live in the preferred gender or undergo surgery and hormone treatment to change appearance
Gender dysphoria remains rare but is increasing, with the greater public awareness.
The report found that allowing transgender people to serve openly would have a minimal impact on force readiness and healthcare costs.
The new policy approved by President Trump allows current transgender service members with gender dysphoria to continue serving if they were diagnosed after the Obama administration's policy took effect.
'Cowardly and disgusting'
Transgender individuals not diagnosed with gender dysphoria, will be allowed to serve, "like all other service members, in their biological sex".
Between 4,000 and 10,000 US active-duty and reserve service members are believed to be transgender.
US House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement that the new policy was "the same cowardly, disgusting ban the president announced last summer".
She said it was meant to "humiliate" transgender service members.
Media captionJamie Ewing was kicked out of the US military before Barack Obama repealed a ban on transgender troops
The American Civil Liberties Union, meanwhile, said the policy was "transphobia masquerading as policy" and was not based on new evidence but rather "reverse-engineered for the sole purpose of carrying out President Trump's reckless and unconstitutional ban".
Mr Trump's earlier ban was first announced on Twitter in July 2017, when he posted: "The United States government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the US military."
The order to reverse President Obama's policy was blocked by federal judges who said it was probably unconstitutional.
It is unclear when the new policy will be enacted and it is likely to face legal challenges. On Friday, the Pentagon said it would continue to comply with federal law, and "continue to assess and retain transgender service members".
Trump signs new transgender military ban
The blanket ban announced last year was blocked by federal judges
President Trump has signed a memorandum that bans some transgender people from US military service but rolls back the blanket ban he ordered last year.
The new directive adopts recommendations from Defence Secretary Jim Mattis that "transgender persons who require or have undergone gender transition" cannot serve.
But it gives the Pentagon and other agencies some discretion in the matter.
The earlier blanket ban was blocked by federal judges.
The new memorandum says that transgender individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are barred from military service "except under certain limited circumstances".
'My stomach dropped': Transgender troops react to Trump ban
Judge halts transgender ban
The transgender arguments dividing British society
The Department of Defence (DoD) had submitted a report to the president which said allowing those with a history of gender dysphoria to serve entailed "substantial risks" and could, by exempting them from existing physical, mental and sex-based standards, "undermine readiness... and impose an unreasonable burden on the military".
It said the Obama administration's decision to allow transgender individuals to serve in the military was largely based on a 2016 study by the Rand think-tank, which "contained significant shortcomings".
Gender dysphoria
The experience of distress or discomfort as a result of a disparity between a person's biological sex (assigned at birth) and what they feel their gender to be
Also referred to as transgenderism, gender incongruence or GID (gender identity disorder)
The exact causes are unclear. In some cases hormones that trigger biological sex development may function differently and there are rare conditions such as intersex
Treatment is also varied and aims to reduce the distress. The individual may dress or live in the preferred gender or undergo surgery and hormone treatment to change appearance
Gender dysphoria remains rare but is increasing, with the greater public awareness.
The report found that allowing transgender people to serve openly would have a minimal impact on force readiness and healthcare costs.
The new policy approved by President Trump allows current transgender service members with gender dysphoria to continue serving if they were diagnosed after the Obama administration's policy took effect.
'Cowardly and disgusting'
Transgender individuals not diagnosed with gender dysphoria, will be allowed to serve, "like all other service members, in their biological sex".
Between 4,000 and 10,000 US active-duty and reserve service members are believed to be transgender.
US House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement that the new policy was "the same cowardly, disgusting ban the president announced last summer".
She said it was meant to "humiliate" transgender service members.
Media captionJamie Ewing was kicked out of the US military before Barack Obama repealed a ban on transgender troops
The American Civil Liberties Union, meanwhile, said the policy was "transphobia masquerading as policy" and was not based on new evidence but rather "reverse-engineered for the sole purpose of carrying out President Trump's reckless and unconstitutional ban".
Mr Trump's earlier ban was first announced on Twitter in July 2017, when he posted: "The United States government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the US military."
The order to reverse President Obama's policy was blocked by federal judges who said it was probably unconstitutional.
It is unclear when the new policy will be enacted and it is likely to face legal challenges. On Friday, the Pentagon said it would continue to comply with federal law, and "continue to assess and retain transgender service members".
Trump trade war: China tells US it will defend national interests - BBC News
24/3/2018
Trump trade war: China tells US it will defend national interests
President Trump has announced plans to impose tariffs on up to $60bn of Chinese products
China warned the US it will defend its interests on trade, Chinese state media says, after US President Donald Trump backed tariffs on Chinese goods.
The comments came in a phone call between China's vice-premier Liu He and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.
Mr Trump has announced plans to impose tariffs on up to $60bn (£42.5bn) of Chinese goods, accusing China of intellectual property theft.
The move has rattled markets and stoked fears of a trade war.
Mr Liu, who is Chinese President Xi Jinping's top economic adviser, told Mr Mnuchin that Beijing was "ready to defend its national interests" but hoped that "both sides will remain rational and work together," China's official Xinhua news agency reported.
During the telephone conversation, which is thought to be the highest-level contact between the two governments since Mr Trump announced the tariffs on Thursday, Mr Liu also accused the US of violating international trade rules following its investigation into Chinese intellectual property practices.
What is a trade war - and how would it affect me?
Trump: Tariffs on $60bn in Chinese goods
What could China do in a US trade war?
Amid the tensions on trade, World Trade Organization Director General Roberto Azevêdo has warned that new trade barriers would "jeopardise the global economy".
Mr Trump, however, has said that the US move to raise tariffs against China was already beginning to get results.
"Many other countries are now negotiating fair trade deals with us," the president said on Friday.
Following Mr Trump's move, China said it was planning to retaliate with its own set of proposed tariffs worth $3bn, including tariffs on groceries and aluminium scrap.
Beijing has warned the US that it is "not afraid of a trade war", but has said that it hopes to avoid one through continued dialogue.
Trump trade war: China tells US it will defend national interests
President Trump has announced plans to impose tariffs on up to $60bn of Chinese products
China warned the US it will defend its interests on trade, Chinese state media says, after US President Donald Trump backed tariffs on Chinese goods.
The comments came in a phone call between China's vice-premier Liu He and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.
Mr Trump has announced plans to impose tariffs on up to $60bn (£42.5bn) of Chinese goods, accusing China of intellectual property theft.
The move has rattled markets and stoked fears of a trade war.
Mr Liu, who is Chinese President Xi Jinping's top economic adviser, told Mr Mnuchin that Beijing was "ready to defend its national interests" but hoped that "both sides will remain rational and work together," China's official Xinhua news agency reported.
During the telephone conversation, which is thought to be the highest-level contact between the two governments since Mr Trump announced the tariffs on Thursday, Mr Liu also accused the US of violating international trade rules following its investigation into Chinese intellectual property practices.
What is a trade war - and how would it affect me?
Trump: Tariffs on $60bn in Chinese goods
What could China do in a US trade war?
Amid the tensions on trade, World Trade Organization Director General Roberto Azevêdo has warned that new trade barriers would "jeopardise the global economy".
Mr Trump, however, has said that the US move to raise tariffs against China was already beginning to get results.
"Many other countries are now negotiating fair trade deals with us," the president said on Friday.
Following Mr Trump's move, China said it was planning to retaliate with its own set of proposed tariffs worth $3bn, including tariffs on groceries and aluminium scrap.
Beijing has warned the US that it is "not afraid of a trade war", but has said that it hopes to avoid one through continued dialogue.
The week Facebook's value plunged $58bn - BBC News
The week Facebook's value plunged $58bn
23 March 2018
Mark Zuckerberg-founded Facebook shares fell on news of a historic data issue
Facebook ended the week $58bn lower in value after its handling of a historic data breach.
Its founder Mark Zuckerberg apologised for data breaches that affected 50 million users.
The apology did not stop investors from selling shares in Facebook, with many wondering just how bad the damage would be for the social network.
The breach was called a "light bulb" moment for users, spawning the social media trend #deletefacebook.
All the negative headlines led to some advertisers saying "enough is enough".
Shares in the social media company fell from $176.80 on Monday to around $159.30 by Friday night.
Will the shares recover?
Facebook's initial public offering in 2012 priced shares at $38 each, giving the company a market valuation of close to $104bn.
Following steady user growth and a dominant space in the digital advertising market ensuring revenues, Facebook's share price climbed to $190 by February this year.
Brian Wieser, senior analyst at Pivotal Research, said he had one of the most negative outlooks for Facebook's share price on Wall Street.
"I had a $152 price target on Facebook for 2018 - and that was before the events of this week".
Mr Wieser said the share price slump showed investors were wary of increased regulation and users leaving the platform "but there's little risk of advertisers leaving Facebook. Where else would they go?"
Hargreaves Lansdown senior analyst Laith Khalaf said the week had been a "damaging episode" in Facebook's history.
"One of the secrets of Facebook's success has been that the more people who use Facebook, the more integral it becomes to its customers. Unfortunately for Facebook, the same dynamic cuts in the opposite direction if it loses a meaningful number of users as a result of this scandal. "
What has been the response from advertisers?
Advertising firm M&C Saatchi's founding director David Kershaw said the revelations that a 2014 Facebook quiz essentially harvested data from users and their connected friends without consent have led to a backlash from advertisers.
"Clients have come to the point, quite rightly, where enough is enough, " Mr Kershaw said.
Advertisers Mozilla and Commerzbank on Wednesday suspended ads on the social media platform.
On Friday tech entrepreneur Elon Musk had the official Facebook pages for his companies Tesla and SpaceX deleted.
"Make no mistake Facebook is an amazing medium from the advertiser's point of view because of the accuracy of its targeting - which comes from data. But I think those large companies are very nervous to be associated with a medium where the data is being abused, particularly in a political context," Mr Kershaw said.
Facebook has come under scrutiny for how it used to share user data
Mr Kershaw told the BBC any change in Facebook's data protection policy was more likely to come from the threat of a withdrawal of "hard money from advertisers rather than consumers running hashtag [campaigns] on Twitter," referring to the #DeleteFacebook and #BoycottFacebook hashtags that have become popular.
UK advertising group ISBA met Facebook on Friday and said its "constructive and challenging" summit had convinced the group that the social media company was taking steps to "rapidly address public and advertiser concerns", including app audits and face-to-face meetings with individual UK advertising clients.
It will take some time before it becomes clear if the advertising industry's dissatisfaction with Facebook leads to them actually pulling their money out of the social network, or whether the howls of condemnation amount to mere posturing from a group of concerned clients.
Has Zuckerberg done enough to reassure people?
The Facebook founder tried to reassure users "the most important actions to prevent this from happening again today we have already taken years ago."
However, Passion Capital tech investor Eileen Burbidge, who is also on the Prime Minister's Business Advisory Group, said Facebook's reassurance to users and clients took too long.
"The fact that it took them five days to come out with a statement, which happened to be a fair, sensible and comprehensive statement, was just far too long," Mrs Burbidge said.
"I think they were just really tone deaf for too many days."
The technology venture capitalist said Facebook underestimated the consumer backlash that occurred once their data was used for political purposes.
Facebook user data may have been used by political consultants in the 2016 US election
Cambridge Analytica is at the centre of a row over whether it used the personal data of millions of Facebook users to sway the outcome of the US 2016 presidential election and the UK Brexit referendum.
"Some people are using the term 'political manipulation'.
"They [Facebook] assumed they had already taken care of this... as they had already changed their terms of service, for example," Mrs Burbidge said.
In Mr Zuckerberg's online statement he offered a timeline of how Facebook's data permission agreements with users and other companies had changed since the 2014 personality quiz app was able to scrape data from quiz takers and their contacts without their expressed permission.
Mrs Burbidge said there may need to be new regulation over political campaigning "which really hasn't kept up with social media".
What will Facebook users do?
Technology writer Kate Bevan said the week's events have woken Facebook's users up to the fact that the platform's games, quizzes and apps could harvest their data for more serious intents.
"This week feels to me like a real light bulb moment where people are understanding that it's not just clicking 'like' on Facebook, it's giving your data away".
The sentiment was echoed by the European Union's commissioner for justice, consumers and gender equality Vera Jourova said the Cambridge Analytica allegations had been "a huge wake-up call" for Facebook users about the demand for their data.
"The tiger has gotten out of the cage".
23 March 2018
Mark Zuckerberg-founded Facebook shares fell on news of a historic data issue
Facebook ended the week $58bn lower in value after its handling of a historic data breach.
Its founder Mark Zuckerberg apologised for data breaches that affected 50 million users.
The apology did not stop investors from selling shares in Facebook, with many wondering just how bad the damage would be for the social network.
The breach was called a "light bulb" moment for users, spawning the social media trend #deletefacebook.
All the negative headlines led to some advertisers saying "enough is enough".
Shares in the social media company fell from $176.80 on Monday to around $159.30 by Friday night.
Will the shares recover?
Facebook's initial public offering in 2012 priced shares at $38 each, giving the company a market valuation of close to $104bn.
Following steady user growth and a dominant space in the digital advertising market ensuring revenues, Facebook's share price climbed to $190 by February this year.
Brian Wieser, senior analyst at Pivotal Research, said he had one of the most negative outlooks for Facebook's share price on Wall Street.
"I had a $152 price target on Facebook for 2018 - and that was before the events of this week".
Mr Wieser said the share price slump showed investors were wary of increased regulation and users leaving the platform "but there's little risk of advertisers leaving Facebook. Where else would they go?"
Hargreaves Lansdown senior analyst Laith Khalaf said the week had been a "damaging episode" in Facebook's history.
"One of the secrets of Facebook's success has been that the more people who use Facebook, the more integral it becomes to its customers. Unfortunately for Facebook, the same dynamic cuts in the opposite direction if it loses a meaningful number of users as a result of this scandal. "
What has been the response from advertisers?
Advertising firm M&C Saatchi's founding director David Kershaw said the revelations that a 2014 Facebook quiz essentially harvested data from users and their connected friends without consent have led to a backlash from advertisers.
"Clients have come to the point, quite rightly, where enough is enough, " Mr Kershaw said.
Advertisers Mozilla and Commerzbank on Wednesday suspended ads on the social media platform.
On Friday tech entrepreneur Elon Musk had the official Facebook pages for his companies Tesla and SpaceX deleted.
"Make no mistake Facebook is an amazing medium from the advertiser's point of view because of the accuracy of its targeting - which comes from data. But I think those large companies are very nervous to be associated with a medium where the data is being abused, particularly in a political context," Mr Kershaw said.
Facebook has come under scrutiny for how it used to share user data
Mr Kershaw told the BBC any change in Facebook's data protection policy was more likely to come from the threat of a withdrawal of "hard money from advertisers rather than consumers running hashtag [campaigns] on Twitter," referring to the #DeleteFacebook and #BoycottFacebook hashtags that have become popular.
UK advertising group ISBA met Facebook on Friday and said its "constructive and challenging" summit had convinced the group that the social media company was taking steps to "rapidly address public and advertiser concerns", including app audits and face-to-face meetings with individual UK advertising clients.
It will take some time before it becomes clear if the advertising industry's dissatisfaction with Facebook leads to them actually pulling their money out of the social network, or whether the howls of condemnation amount to mere posturing from a group of concerned clients.
Has Zuckerberg done enough to reassure people?
The Facebook founder tried to reassure users "the most important actions to prevent this from happening again today we have already taken years ago."
However, Passion Capital tech investor Eileen Burbidge, who is also on the Prime Minister's Business Advisory Group, said Facebook's reassurance to users and clients took too long.
"The fact that it took them five days to come out with a statement, which happened to be a fair, sensible and comprehensive statement, was just far too long," Mrs Burbidge said.
"I think they were just really tone deaf for too many days."
The technology venture capitalist said Facebook underestimated the consumer backlash that occurred once their data was used for political purposes.
Facebook user data may have been used by political consultants in the 2016 US election
Cambridge Analytica is at the centre of a row over whether it used the personal data of millions of Facebook users to sway the outcome of the US 2016 presidential election and the UK Brexit referendum.
"Some people are using the term 'political manipulation'.
"They [Facebook] assumed they had already taken care of this... as they had already changed their terms of service, for example," Mrs Burbidge said.
In Mr Zuckerberg's online statement he offered a timeline of how Facebook's data permission agreements with users and other companies had changed since the 2014 personality quiz app was able to scrape data from quiz takers and their contacts without their expressed permission.
Mrs Burbidge said there may need to be new regulation over political campaigning "which really hasn't kept up with social media".
What will Facebook users do?
Technology writer Kate Bevan said the week's events have woken Facebook's users up to the fact that the platform's games, quizzes and apps could harvest their data for more serious intents.
"This week feels to me like a real light bulb moment where people are understanding that it's not just clicking 'like' on Facebook, it's giving your data away".
The sentiment was echoed by the European Union's commissioner for justice, consumers and gender equality Vera Jourova said the Cambridge Analytica allegations had been "a huge wake-up call" for Facebook users about the demand for their data.
"The tiger has gotten out of the cage".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
