Biden, Joseph R Jr

Latest story

125 Shares28 Views

U.S. Infrastructure Improves, but Cuts May Imperil Progress, Report Says

by

A report card from an engineering group found that American roads, ports and other infrastructure got better last year but could be hurt if federal funding is reduced.Increased federal spending in recent years has helped to improve U.S. ports, roads, parks, public transit and levees, according to a report released on Tuesday by the American Society of Civil Engineers.But that progress could stagnate if those investments, some of which were put on hold after President Trump took office in January, aren’t sustained.Overall, the group gave the nation’s infrastructure a C grade, a mediocre rating but the best the country has received since the group’s first report card in 1998. Most infrastructure, including aviation, waterways and schools, earned a C or D grade; ports and rail did better. The group also projected a $3.7 trillion infrastructure funding shortfall over the next decade.“The report card demonstrates the crucial need for the new administration and Congress to continue sustained investment in infrastructure,” Darren Olson, the chairman of the society’s committee on America’s infrastructure, said on a call with reporters. “Better infrastructure is an efficient investment of taxpayer dollars that results in a stronger economy and prioritizes American jobs.”The report, which is now released every four years, has long noted that the United States spends too little on infrastructure. But that started to change in 2021, the group said, thanks to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which authorized $1.2 trillion in funding under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. That investment is showing results, with grades having improved since the last report, in 2021, for nearly half the 18 categories that the group tracks.But in January, Mr. Trump froze much of the funding under that law and another aimed at addressing climate change, pending a review by his agencies. That halted a variety of programs, including those intended to help schools, farmers and small businesses.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

More stories

  • 150 Shares54 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Says a Recession Would Be Worth It, but Economists Are Skeptical

    by

    President Trump and his advisers say his policies may cause short-term pain but will produce big gains over time. Many economists are skeptical of those arguments.Presidents usually do all they can to avoid recessions, so much so that they avoid even saying the word.But President Trump and his advisers in recent weeks have offered a very different message. Yes, a recession is possible, they have said. Maybe one wouldn’t even be that bad.Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, has said Mr. Trump’s policies are “worth it” even if they cause a recession. Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, has said the economy may need a “detox period” after becoming dependent on government spending. And Mr. Trump has said there will be a “period of transition” as his policies take effect.Such comments may partly reflect an effort to align political statements with economic reality. Mr. Trump promised to end inflation “starting on Day 1” and declared, in his inaugural address, that “the golden age of America begins right now.”Instead, inflation has remained stubborn, and while Mr. Trump has been in office less than two months, economists warn that his tariffs are likely to make it worse. Measures of consumer and business confidence have plummeted and stock prices have tumbled, attributable in large part to Mr. Trump’s policies and the uncertainty they have caused.“It’s the kind of language that you use when your policy isn’t going great and you can see that it’s actively harming people,” said Sean Vanatta, a financial historian at the University of Glasgow in Scotland.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

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Clean Energy Was Lifting Manufacturing. Now Investment Is in Jeopardy.

    by

    With the Trump administration reversing support for low-carbon power, the business case for making wind, solar and electric vehicle parts gets weaker.American manufacturing has been in the doldrums for years, battered by high borrowing costs and a strong dollar, which makes exports less competitive. But there has been a bright spot: billions of dollars flowing into factory construction, signifying that a potential rebound in production and employment is around the corner.The flood of investment has been driven by two major categories of subsidies provided under the Biden administration. One offered incentives for the construction of several enormous semiconductor plants set to begin operation in the coming years. The other supercharged the production of equipment needed for renewable energy deployment.This second category is in jeopardy as the Trump administration and the Republican-led Congress seek to roll back support for low-carbon energy, including battery-powered vehicles, wind power and solar fields.One option to raise money to offset the cost of their desired tax cuts is truncating credits for renewable power generation.“If it ends up that the timeline for these credits is shortened, then the incentives to develop an onshore manufacturing facility obviously go down,” said Jeffrey Davis, a lawyer with White & Case who specializes in renewable energy incentives. “If you’re looking at the prospect of sales and revenue over a three-year period instead of an eight-year period, the manufacturing facility may not pencil out.”The Biden administration’s strategy relied on a push and a pull. First, push the supply of clean energy products through tax breaks, loans and direct grants to manufacturers. Equally important was pulling demand along: rebates for buying electric cars, tax credits for producing renewable power, and subsidies for states and individuals to install solar arrays. Companies contemplating manufacturing investments took both sides into account when planning where to build or expand a plant.Investment in Factories Has Been BoomingAmerica isn’t yet making more stuff, but it’s building more buildings to make more stuff — largely because of subsidies for clean energy and semiconductors.

    Figures for each quarter are shown at a seasonally adjusted annual rate, in chained 2017 dollars.Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy 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

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Economy Grew 2.3 Percent in Fourth Quarter

    by

    Gross domestic product grew by 2.3 percent in the fourth quarter, capping a more robust year than expected. Policy uncertainty clouds the outlook.Growth slowed but remained resilient at the end of 2024, leaving the U.S. economy on solid footing heading into a new year — and a new presidential administration — that is full of uncertainty.U.S. gross domestic product, adjusted for inflation, grew at a 2.3 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter of last year, the Commerce Department reported on Thursday. That was down from 3.1 percent in the third quarter but nonetheless represented an encouraging end to a year in which the economy again defied expectations.Robust consumer spending, underpinned by low unemployment and steady wage growth, helped keep the economy on track despite high interest rates, stubborn inflation and political turmoil at home and abroad. For the year as a whole, measured from the end of 2023 to the end of 2024, G.D.P. increased 2.5 percent, far ahead of forecasters’ expectations when the year began.“We ended on a pretty strong note,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist for the accounting firm KPMG. “It’s stunning how resilient and strong the economy has been.”The figures are preliminary and will be revised at least twice as more data becomes available.But the economy entered the new year facing a new set of challenges. The whirlwind start to President Trump’s second term — including sweeping changes to immigration policy, a spending freeze that was announced and then rescinded and steep tariffs that could take effect as early as this weekend — has increased uncertainty for households and businesses. Economists warn that his proposals on trade and immigration, in particular, could lead to faster inflation, slower growth or both.“You really have all the right ingredients to support sustainable growth, but the question is, where will it be in 12 months’ time?” said Gregory Daco, chief economist for the consulting firm EY-Parthenon. “The risk is you break the economy.”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

  • 125 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Do DeepSeek’s A.I. Advances Mean US Tech Controls Have Failed?

    by

    DeepSeek’s A.I. models show that China is making rapid gains in the field, despite American efforts to hinder it.The United States has worked steadily over the past three years to limit China’s access to the cutting edge computer chips that power advanced artificial intelligence systems. Its aim has been to slow China’s progress in developing sophisticated A.I. models.Now a Chinese firm, DeepSeek, has created that very technology. In recent weeks, DeepSeek released multiple A.I. models and a chatbot whose performance rivals that of the best products made by American firms, all while using far fewer of the high-cost A.I. chips that companies typically need. Over the weekend, DeepSeek’s chatbot shot to the top of Apple’s App Store charts as people downloaded it around the world.The development has raised big questions about export controls built by the United States in recent years. The Biden administration set up a system of global rules and steadily expanded them to try to keep advanced A.I. technology — particularly chips made by Nvidia — out of Chinese hands. They were concerned that technology would give China an edge not just economically, but also militarily.DeepSeek’s development has provoked a fierce debate over whether U.S. technology controls have failed. Here’s what to know.DeepSeek’s innovations suggest the Biden administration may have acted too slowly to keep up with private companies sidestepping its controls.DeepSeek has said that its most recent model was trained on Nvidia H800s. This is an A.I. chip that Nvidia developed specifically for the Chinese market after export controls were first imposed, and that caused a fair amount of drama in Washington.When the United States put restrictions on Nvidia’s most advanced chips in 2022, Nvidia quickly adapted by creating slightly downgraded chips that fell just under the threshold the government had set. These chips were technically legal for Chinese companies to use, but allowed them to achieve practically the same results.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

  • 150 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    The Federal Work Force Grew Briskly Under Biden. It’s Still Historically Low.

    by

    Government agencies that shrank in President-elect Trump’s first term have mostly bounced back, and some have become even larger.When it comes to the federal payroll, two seemingly contradictory things are true.One, the Biden administration went on a hiring spree that expanded the government work force at the fastest pace since the 1980s. And two, it remains near a record low as a share of overall employment.In the four years separating President-elect Donald J. Trump’s two terms, the federal civilian head count has risen by about 4.4 percent, according to the Labor Department, to just over three million, including the Postal Service.But that’s a much slower pace than private payrolls have grown over the past four years. And it leaves the federal government at 1.9 percent of total employment, down from more than 3 percent in the 1980s.The incoming administration promises to erase whole sections of the federal bureaucracy: Vivek Ramaswamy, co-chair of what Mr. Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency, has said 75 percent of the work force could go, in pursuit of $2 trillion in cuts. But it will be a challenge to find cuts without depleting services.“When we’re looking at the numbers of the federal work force, it’s still about the same size as it was in the 1960s,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a think tank. “The narrative out there is the federal government work force is growing topsy-turvy, and the reality is that it’s actually shrinking,”Compared with the overall work force, the federal employee base has been shrinking for decadesNot including the armed forces, federal government employees as a share of all nonfarm workers are near an all-time low.

    Federal employment includes the Postal Service.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesHow Big Are Agencies, and Have They Grown or Shrunk? The number of people who work in the federal government’s largest departments, and how they’ve changed in size since 2020.

    Note: Total work force numbers are as of March 2024.Source: Office of Personnel ManagementBy 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

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Remote Work for Civil Servants Faces a Challenge Under Trump

    by

    Federal employees and others in the capital have grown attached to work-from-home arrangements. But hybrid work may disappear in the second Trump era.When the Social Security Administration agreed to a five-year extension of work-from-home arrangements for tens of thousands of employees in early December, many at the agency expressed relief.But the reprieve may be short-lived. At a news conference two weeks later, President-elect Donald J. Trump railed against the deal and said he would go to court to undo it. “If people don’t come back to work, come back into the office,” he said, “they’re going to be dismissed.”The back-and-forth previewed what is likely to be one of the earliest points of contention of Mr. Trump’s second administration. Over the past few years, many federal workers have organized their lives around hybrid arrangements that help them juggle work and family responsibilities, and have gone so far as to demand that the Biden administration preserve the status quo. Some have rushed to join the roughly one-quarter to one-third of federal workers who are unionized, so that telework policies will be negotiable.But to the president-elect and his allies, the work-from-home arrangements are not only a glaring example of liberal permissiveness run amok — “a gift to a union,” Mr. Trump said — but also a tantalizing opportunity to clear the federal government of obstructionist workers and to vastly shrink its reach.In a Wall Street Journal column in November, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the businessmen tapped to lead Mr. Trump’s government efficiency commission, said they would welcome “a wave of voluntary terminations” triggered by forcing federal employees to work from an office five days a week.Many private-sector employers have recently announced such policies, arguing that in-person work improves communication, mentoring and collaboration.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

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Cleveland-Cliffs Signals a Possible New Bid for U.S. Steel

    by

    The company’s renewed interest comes after the Biden administration blocked Nippon Steel from acquiring the onetime American powerhouse.A possible new takeover bid for U.S. Steel emerged on Monday, teeing up more turmoil over the once-dominant company’s future after President Biden’s decision to block its acquisition by a Japanese company.Lourenco Goncalves, the chief executive of an American competitor, Cleveland-Cliffs, said his company had “an All-American solution to save the United States Steel Corporation,” stressing that acquiring U.S. Steel was a matter of “when,” not “if.” But he offered no details of the bidding plans.The renewed expression of interest from Cleveland-Cliffs comes less than two weeks after Mr. Biden blocked a $14 billion takeover of U.S. Steel by Nippon Steel, arguing that the sale posed a threat to national security. Cleveland-Cliffs tried to buy U.S. Steel in 2023, an offer that was rejected in favor of Nippon’s higher bid.CNBC reported on Monday morning that Cleveland-Cliffs would seek to take over U.S. Steel and sell off its subsidiary, Big River Steel, to Nucor, another American producer. But Mr. Goncalves, at a news conference later in the day, would not confirm any partnership with Nucor on a bid.U.S. Steel and Nucor did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Investors seemed pleased by the potential bid, sending shares of U.S. Steel up as much as 10 percent on Monday when CNBC reported the potential offer. Shares of U.S. Steel finished about 6 percent higher on Monday but are down 23 percent over the past year, including Monday’s spike.But the fate of Nippon’s proposed takeover remains in limbo. U.S. Steel and Nippon sued the United States government last week in the hopes of reviving their merger, accusing Mr. Biden and other senior administration officials of corrupting the review process for political gain and blocking the deal under false pretenses.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

  • 163 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Banks Are Racking Up Wins Even Before Trump Is Back in White House

    by

    Banks are on a winning streak, one that’s poised to intensify as President-elect Donald J. Trump takes office.Biden-appointed regulators at the Federal Reserve and other agencies presided over a relatively fruitless era of bank oversight. They tried to enact stricter rules for the nation’s biggest banks, hoping to create a stronger safety net for the financial system even if it cut into bank profits.But the rules were considered so onerous — including by some top Fed officials — that they died of their own ambitions.As proposals stalled, the foundation for existing bank oversight became increasingly shaky thanks to bank-friendly courts. During his first term, Mr. Trump appointed a slate of conservative judges who then slowly but significantly shifted the legal environment against strict federal oversight.The result? Big banks have been notching major victories that could allow them to avoid regulatory checks that were drawn up after the 2008 financial crisis, when weaknesses at the world’s largest lenders nearly toppled the global economy.And with Mr. Trump once again poised to run the White House, analysts predict that the regulations and supervisory practices that are supposed to prevent America’s biggest and most interconnected financial institutions from making risky bets could be further chipped away in the months ahead.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