More stories

  • in

    G.M.’s Electric Vehicle Sales Surge as Ford Loses Billions

    Ford is struggling to make money on battery-powered models while General Motors, which started more slowly, says it is getting close to that goal.In the race to be second to Tesla in the U.S. electric vehicle market, Ford Motor leaped to an early lead four years ago over its crosstown rival, General Motors, with the Mustang Mach E, an electric sport utility vehicle with a design and a name that nodded to its classic sports car.But the contest looks much different today.Sales of G.M.’s battery-powered models are starting to surge as the company begins to reap its big investments in standardized batteries and new factories. Ford’s three electric models, including the F-150 Lightning pickup truck and a Transit van, are still selling well but are racking up billions of dollars of losses.The latest view into how Ford’s quick-start strategy has run into trouble came on Monday, when the company reported that its electric vehicle division lost $1.2 billion before interest and taxes from July to September. In the first nine months of the year, it lost $3.7 billion.Ford’s chief financial officer, John Lawler, said it was a “solid quarter,” noting that revenue had risen for the 10th quarter in a row, by 5 percent to $46.2 billion. But the company’s overall profit of $896 million in the third quarter was down 24 percent from a year earlier, largely because of problems with electric vehicles, warranty costs and other factors.“Our strategic advantages are not falling to the bottom line the way they should because of cost,” Mr. Lawler said.Ford made an early entry into the electric vehicle market compared to other established automakers with the Mustang Mach E.David Zalubowski/Associated PressWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How Elon Musk Might Use His Pull With Trump to Help Tesla

    Although Donald Trump has opposed policies that favor electric cars, if he becomes president he could ease regulatory scrutiny of Tesla or protect lucrative credits and subsidies.Former President Donald J. Trump has promised, if he is re-elected, to do away with Biden administration policies that encourage the use and production of electric cars. Yet one of his biggest supporters is Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, which makes nearly half the electric vehicles sold in the United States.Whether or not Mr. Trump would carry out his threats against battery-powered cars and trucks, a second Trump administration could still be good for Tesla and Mr. Musk, auto and political experts say.Mr. Musk has spent more than $75 million to support the Trump campaign and is running a get-out-the-vote effort on the former president’s behalf in Pennsylvania. That will almost surely earn Mr. Musk the kind of access he would need to promote Tesla.But Mr. Musk would also have to confront a big gap between his Washington wish list and Mr. Trump’s agenda.While Mr. Musk rarely acknowledges it, Tesla has collected billions of dollars from programs championed by Democrats like President Biden that Mr. Trump and other Republicans have vowed to dismantle.In Michigan, a battleground state and home to many auto factories, the Trump campaign has run ads that claim that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, wants to “end all gas-powered cars” — a position that she does not hold.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Have Paychecks Kept Up With the Cost of Living?

    On average, pay has risen faster than prices in recent years. But the overall picture is complicated — and it’s not just facts versus “vibes.”Have Americans’ paychecks kept up with the cost of living over the past several years?It is a surprisingly difficult question to answer.According to most Americans, the answer is a clear “no.” In polls and interviews ahead of the presidential election, people of virtually all ideologies and income levels say inflation has made it harder to make ends meet, eclipsing whatever raises they have managed to win from their employers.According to economic data, the answer appears, at least on the surface, to be “yes.” Income and earnings have outpaced inflation since the start of the pandemic, according to a variety of both government and private-sector sources. That is especially true for the lowest earners — a partial reversal of the rising inequality of recent decades.But this is not a simple case of facts versus “vibes.” Economic statistics are based on broad averages. Dig deeper, and the story becomes more complicated. How a given family or individual has fared over the past five years depends on a litany of factors: whether the earners own their home or rent; whether they had to buy a car or send a child to day care; whether they were able to change jobs or demand a raise.“I feel like some people are being very dismissive, saying, ‘Oh, people are wrong — there has been all this real wage growth,’ but that is a simple average,” said Stefanie Stantcheva, a Harvard economist who has studied how people experience inflation. “It’s actually very, very hard to say people are wrong — I would almost never say that.”The bottom line: Most American workers are probably making more money today, adjusted for inflation, than they were in 2019. But not all have seen their pay keep up with their own cost of living, and many — perhaps most — are lagging behind where they would be if prepandemic trends had continued unabated. Those complications may help explain why so many Americans believe they have fallen behind.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Change since end of 2019 in various earnings measures
    Notes: After-tax income is per capita and excludes government transfer payments and is adjusted for inflation by the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index. Hourly earnings are for production and nonsupervisory workers and are adjusted for inflation by the CPI-W. Median weekly earnings are for full-time workers and are adjusted for inflation using the CPI-U. Average weekly earnings are for all workers and are also adjusted using the CPI-U. All series are monthly except for median weekly earnings, which are quarterly.Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Federal Reserve Bank of New YorkBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Change in inflation-adjusted weekly earnings by wage level, 2019-2024
    Note: Change is measured in the third quarter of each year, not seasonally adjusted.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Median weekly earnings vs. prepandemic trend
    Notes: Earnings are shown in 2023 dollars and are for full-time workers. Data is seasonally adjusted. Trend line is based on 2014 to 2019 data.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s Vast Tariffs Would Rock Global Businesses and Shake Alliances

    Economists said Donald Trump’s plan to return trade barriers to levels not seen in generations would be “a grenade thrown in the heart” of the international system.At a rally in Latrobe, Pa., earlier this month, former President Donald J. Trump paused in front of a crowd holding signs that read “Save Our Steel” to pay homage to one of his favorite concepts.Tariff, he said, “is the most beautiful word in the dictionary. More beautiful than love, more beautiful than respect.”Mr. Trump demonstrated a deep affinity for tariffs during his presidency, using them as a cudgel to punish both allies and rivals as he tried to force companies to make their products in the United States.If he wins again in November, he is promising a much more aggressive approach, a full-scale upending of the trading system in which the United States is no longer a partner in the global flow of goods, but a mercantilist nation intent on walling itself off from the world.The former president, who has described himself as a “Tariff Man,” has talked about tariffs as the solution to an array of problems, from making the country rich to funding tax cuts and paying for child care. But most central to his vision is the ability of tariffs to reverse decades of globalization and force factories to move back to the United States.Mr. Trump has threatened to slap steep tariffs on every country — the most punishing levies reserved for China — to raise the cost of foreign products and try to reorder global supply chains. His tariffs would hit almost all U.S. imports, more than $3 trillion of goods.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Can Harris’s Economic Plans Sway Small Business Owners to Vote Democratic?

    Kamala Harris has leaned in with promises to aid start-ups, but proprietors are often more focused on taxes and regulations.Presidential campaigns often use the backdrop of small businesses — record stores, diners, machine shops — to emphasize their candidates’ authenticity and hometown values. But this election cycle has taken those businesses a bit more seriously.In speeches and ads, Vice President Kamala Harris has sought to infuse entrepreneurship into her brand — an avowed capitalist, but for the little guy. Her economic policy platform mentions “small business” 77 times, including a section aimed at addressing owners’ needs, such as easing licensing requirements and funneling more federal contracts their way.It’s not hard to see why a candidate might lean in on Main Street: Small businesses are collectively the most respected institution in American life, according to research from Gallup and Pew. Ms. Harris’s messaging might also help counter former President Donald J. Trump’s reputation as a successful business owner, which continues to bolster his economic credentials among voters despite his many bankruptcies and sometimes fraudulent practices.Ms. Harris’s focus on small business isn’t completely new. She also took on the issue as vice president, visiting businesses to hand out billions of dollars in loans funded by the American Rescue Plan Act. She often talks about her “second mother,” Regina Shelton — who ran a nursery school in Berkeley, Calif. — as a small-business owner and an integral part of the community.“Kamala’s economic plans are designed to help people like Mrs. Shelton, so that they have enough in the bank to start a business or pass something on to their kids,” said Felicia Wong, who runs Roosevelt Forward, a progressive advocacy group.Ms. Harris has sought to portray herself as an avowed capitalist, but for the little guy.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Foreign investors flock to flagship Saudi economic conference — but face less free-flowing cash

    Thousands of financiers, founders and investors are set to descend on the Saudi capital of Riyadh for the eighth edition of the kingdom’s Future Investment Initiative.
    As Saudi Arabia moves full steam ahead with its focus on domestic investment, it’s introduced more stringent conditions for foreigners coming to the kingdom to take capital elsewhere.
    The kingdom is taking clear steps to scale back spending, as oil prices fall well below its fiscal breakeven figure and it continues with crude production cuts agreed upon by OPEC+.

    A delegate arrives at the King Abdulaziz Conference Centre in Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh to attend the Future Investment Initiative (FII) forum.
    Fayez Nureldine | Afp | Getty Images

    Thousands of financiers, founders and investors are set to descend on the Saudi capital of Riyadh for the eighth edition of the kingdom’s Future Investment Initiative, the flagship economic conference at the heart of Vision 2030 — the multi-trillion dollar plan to modernize and diversify Saudi Arabia’s economy.
    Described in past years by some attendees as a bonanza for Saudi cash, fund managers who spoke to CNBC this year draw a distinctly different picture as the kingdom simultaneously upholds more requirements for prospective fundraisers and investors, while also facing a revenue crunch amid lower oil prices and production.

    “Without question, it’s gotten way more competitive to attract money from the kingdom,” Omar Yacoub, a partner at U.S.-based investment firm ABS Global, which manages nearly $8 billion in assets, told CNBC. “Everyone and anyone has been going to ‘kiss the rings,’ so to speak, in Riyadh.”
    “Competition for capital has heated up, combined with other factors such as Saudis always having a ‘home bias’ towards investing, plus the broader dynamic of a tighter budget throughout the kingdom due to lower oil prices,” Yacoub said. “This has meant that investing internationally has become much more selective.”
    As Saudi Arabia moves full steam ahead with its focus on domestic investment, it’s introduced more stringent conditions for foreigners coming to the kingdom to take capital elsewhere. The kingdom’s $925 billion sovereign wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund, saw its assets jump 29% to 2.87 trillion Saudi riyals ($765.2 billion) in 2023 — and local investment was a major driver.

    Saudi Arabia’s recently-updated Investment Law seeks to attract more foreign investment as well — and it’s set itself a lofty target of $100 billion in annual foreign direct investment by 2030. Currently, that figure is still a long way from that goal as foreign investment has averaged around $12 billion per year since Vision 2030 was announced in 2017.
    “It’s no longer about ‘take our money and leave’ — it’s about adding value,” said Fadi Arbid, founding partner and chief investment officer of Dubai-based investment manager Amwal Capital Partners. “Value meaning hiring, developing the asset management ecosystem, creating new products, bringing in talent, and investing in Saudi capital markets also. So it’s multi-faceted investment, not only a pure financial transaction. It’s beyond that.”

    ‘More disciplined, more rational’

    At the same time, the kingdom is taking clear steps to scale back spending, as oil prices fall well below its fiscal breakeven figure and it continues with crude production cuts agreed upon by OPEC+.
    That fiscal breakeven oil price — what the kingdom needs a barrel of crude to cost in order to balance its government budget — has risen sharply as Saudi Arabia pours trillions of dollars into giga-project NEOM.
    The IMF’s latest forecast in April, put that breakeven figure at $96.20 for 2024; a roughly 19% increase on the year before, and about 28% higher than the current price of a barrel of Brent crude, which was trading at around $72.75 as of Monday morning.
    “I don’t think Saudi has the same means that they had literally two years ago,” one regional investor, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely, said. Nonetheless, they added, the kingdom “remains one of the very few countries that still have money to give. It might be somewhat on pause today, but … now it’s more disciplined, more rational.”

    Some fund managers with years of experience in the Gulf suggested it may be too little too late for many of the investors making their first forays to the kingdom.
    “You should have started that process two, three, four years ago,” Arbid said. However, he added, “For those that are coming in queue now, that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t position — because it’s a cycle, right? But now, I think they’re more deliberate about it — they say you need to commit to the country.”
    One example is the kingdom’s headquarters law, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2024, and requires foreign companies operating in the Gulf to base their Middle Eastern HQ offices in Riyadh if they want contracts with the Saudi government.

    In the shadow of regional war

    The glitzy conference, held in the opulent Ritz-Carlton Riyadh, also takes place against the backdrop of regional war and just over a year after Israel launched its war on Hamas in Gaza.
    In that time, attacks between Israel and Iranian proxies including Hezbollah and Yemen’s Houthis have soared, with the Jewish state invading Lebanon in September. The region has been on tenterhooks awaiting Israel’s avowed revenge against Iran for its missile barrage over Tel Aviv and other parts of the country on Oct. 1.
    Early on Saturday, Israel struck military sites in Iran targeting missile manufacturing factories. Israel’s military later said it had completed “targeted” attacks in Iran, adding that it was ready to “conduct defensive and offensive action.”
    Oil prices and the Saudi economy appear to so far have stayed largely unscathed, dropping 4% early Monday after Israel’s weekend strike on Iran. A key reason for that may be the rapprochement deal the kingdom signed with Iran, brokered by China, in March 2023.

    “Saudi has done a phenomenal job recently of shielding itself from geopolitical events,” Arbid said.
    That is also aided by the fact that local investors make up the majority of market participants, and local investor confidence is strong. The Tadawul All Shares Index, Saudi Arabia’s leading stock market index, is up 16.48% in the last year.
    Still, some analysts in the region warn that the expanding crises in the Middle East have the potential to cause further instability.
    “The war has gradually escalated to the point where there is a de-facto regional war,” Aziz Alghashian, director of research at the Observer Research Foundation Middle East, told CNBC. “The ongoing war is not only a geopolitical crisis, but the continuation of it has potential to create more radicalization in and around the region.”
    “Attracting FDI and tourism, while maintaining oil prices at a desired level, are key for keeping Saudi Arabia’s mega projects and diversification plans on track,” Alghashian said.
    “This of course is complicated by regional war, and so economy and security go very much hand in hand.” More

  • in

    Global Economic Leaders Confront a New Era of Industrial Policy

    Policymakers brace for more protectionism and the demise of “neoliberalism” if Donald J. Trump is re-elected in the U.S.At the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank this week, Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the I.M.F., expressed a mix of relief and trepidation about the state of the world economy.Policymakers had tamed rapid inflation without causing a global recession. Yet another big economic problem loomed. Rising protectionism and thousands of new industrial policy measures enacted by countries around the world over the last year are threatening future growth prospects.“Trade, for the first time, is not the engine of growth,” Ms. Georgieva said at an event sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee.Economic policymakers who convened in Washington showed little indication that they might heed the warnings.Eighty years after the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were created to stabilize the global economy in the wake of World War II, the role of those organizations and the guiding principles behind their creation has largely fallen out of fashion. The I.M.F. and World Bank were designed to embrace a new system of economic order and international cooperation, one that would stitch the world economy together and allow rich nations to help poorer ones through trade and investment.But today, those who espouse such “neoliberal” notions of open markets are increasingly lonely voices.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Alabama Prison Labor Program Faces Legal Challenges

    In the back of a nondescript industrial park on the outskirts of Montgomery, Ala., past the corner of Eastern Boulevard and Plantation Way, there is a manufacturing plant run by Ju-Young, a car-part supplier for Hyundai. On a Tuesday in May, about half of the workers there — roughly 20 — were prisoners.Listen to this article with reporter commentaryThey were contracted to the company by the Alabama Department of Corrections as part of a “work-release” day labor program for inmates who, according to the state, have shown enough trustworthiness to work outside prison walls, alongside free citizens.The inmates bused there by the state make up just one crop of the thousands of imprisoned people sent to work for private businesses — who risk disciplinary action if they refuse.Sitting against a chain-link fence under the shade of a tree in the company parking lot, commiserating over small talk and cigarettes with fellow assembly workers, one of the imprisoned men, Carlos Anderson, argued that his predicament was simple. He could work a 40-hour week, at $12 an hour — and keep a small fraction of that after the state charges transportation and laundry fees, and takes a 40 percent cut of pretax wages — or he could face working for nothing at the prison.Under Alabama prison rules, there are thin lines between work incentives, forced labor and “involuntary servitude” — which reforms to the Alabama Constitution in 2022 banned. From the viewpoint of Mr. Anderson and more than a dozen other Alabama inmates interviewed by The New York Times, the ultimate message, in practice, is straightforward: Do this, or else.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More