[unable to retrieve full-text content]
Paranoia Written All Over S&P 500 in Struggle Back to a Record BloombergThe relentless drive into defensive stocks is a logical way to cope for investors beset all year by signs a recession is at hand. It's also a tough way to set a *fresh* ...
[unable to retrieve full-text content]
Trump’s Next Trade Feud Has Parcels From China in Its Sights BloombergSnow, rain or heat can't keep the mail from reaching its appointed address in the U.S. But what about a trade war?
opinion
In the age of instant analysis, almost any unfortunate event — a civil war, a mass shooting, a paralyzing strike or a power outage — conjures a corps of expert commenters eager to explain why it should never have happened.
The premise of these critiques is always the same: If only a few key participants had been smarter, or less greedy, or more far-sighted, we might have avoided whatever unpleasantness we are all busy deploring.
But there is more humble theory of history, one that traces great cataclysms to tidal forces mightier than the men and women tasked to contain them. According to this school of thought, some man-made events are as inevitable as the earthquake that result when one tectonic plate breaks free of another.
The UAW's ongoing strike against General Motors, which entered its fourth day Thursday, is certainly one of these.
Say what you will about the corruption at the top of the union or the oblivious greed of GM's incumbent corporate leaders: This is a strike that needed to happen, a ritualized reckoning that may or may not have come in time to avert a wider and more unpredictable confrontation between workers and employers.
Those who focus narrowly on the auto industry regard the strike as an unpleasant interruption in a period of sustained cooperation between U.S. automakers and the UAW — an unexpected and unnecessary escalation of hostilities between antagonists who haven't faced off in a national strike since before the 2008 recession.
More: Former UAW Lordstown worker does double picket duty in strike against GM
More: GM strike exposes flaws in U.S. labor laws
But this is only the latest (and potentially the most destructive) storm in a sustained season of labor unrest that began with last year's successful teacher's strike in West Virginia and inspired subsequent strikes in the hotel, grocery store and fast food industries.
The UAW's members, it seems, are not the only workers whose wages have not kept up with inflation, and theirs is not the only industry in which employment and benefits have failed to match the pace of corporate earnings.
According to the Gallup organization, popular support for unions is hovering above 60%, a 50-year high. That's more than half-again the 40% approval rating Donald Trump enjoys on a good day, and helps explain why, when workers strike in 2019, a majority of their neighbors are rooting for them.
[ Following the GM strike? Download our app for the latest news.]
The immediate objectives of GM's striking workers are specific: Persuade their employer to keep jobs in the United States, to revive the domestic factories it plans to shutter — er, that is, un-allocate — in Michigan, Ohio and Maryland, and to diminish its reliance on temporary employees who earn lower wages and enjoy fewer job benefits than their permanent counterparts.
The company says it needs flexibility to navigate the technological and economic headwinds that nearly destroyed it a decade ago. Workers counter that their sacrifices were critical to GM's recovery, and that they are determined to secure a larger share of the $35 billion profit GM has logged in the last three years.
But the laborers my Free Press newsroom colleagues talk to on the picket lines regularly expressed their desire to strike a blow in a broader struggle against income inequality, regressive taxes and anti-labor government policies.
Dominique Birdsong, who builds Chevrolet Silverados at the Flint Assembly Plant, told Free Press auto writer Phoebe Wall Howard she and her colleagues are striking on behalf of neglected workers across America.
"I'm not scared, I'm hopeful. Because we're determined," Birdsong said. "We will rally together for the middle class."
If the interests at stake transcend those of UAW members, the GM strike is taking place in the context of a federal investigation that has implicated the union's top leaders in promoting a culture of corruption. That probably made it harder for UAW leaders to sell any offer GM made before the strike as the best available.
But it's simplistic to blame the strike on the UAW leadership's diminished credibility at a time when workers have lost confidence in so many others. Chief among them: GM CEO Mary Barra, whose $22-million annual compensation is 281 times that of the median GM worker, and Donald Trump. who promised to penalize companies that move jobs abroad but has delivered only a reckless trade war that has destabilized the entire industry.
Trump surely understands that this strike is a product of employee resentment that reverberates far beyond GM's factories. His own election may be seen, in hindsight, as an earlier (and equally inevitable) consequence of that resentment.
Whether the strike precipitates a quick settlement that defuses labor's anger or a prolonged war of attrition that inflames it depends not just on GM's next moves, but also on whether corporate leaders outside the auto industry recognize that their own gated communities are also under siege.
The UAW's members aren't the only workers looking for signs their employers can read the writing on the wall.
Brian Dickerson is the Editorial Page Editor of the Free Press. Contact him at bdickerson@freepress.com.
Thomas Cook could fall into administration this weekend unless the travel company finds £200m in extra funds needed to secure its future.
Banks, including RBS and Lloyds, insist the firm comes up with the new contingency funds in case it needs extra money during the winter months.
A collapse would leave 150,000 holidaymakers stranded and require a huge repatriation effort.
Sources insisted there were still "reasonable prospects" of a deal.
But they added that the coming 24 hours were crucial to the travel group's survival.
The troubled operator hoped to seal a rescue led by China's Fosun this week. But the creditor banks issued a last-minute demand that the travel company find an extra £200m.
Sources have confirmed that the Civil Aviation Authority is on standby with a repatriation contingency plan called Operation Matterhorn. The potential cost of bringing home passengers is put at about £600m.
Worried Thomas Cook customers have been contacting the tour operator to check whether flights and package deals are still going ahead, and it has been reassuring customers over social media.
The firm employs 22,000 staff, 9,000 of those in the UK. It serves 19 million customers a year in 16 different countries.
But Thomas Cook's financial difficulties have mounted over the past year, culminating with the agreement in August of a rescue deal led by its biggest shareholder Fosun, that would see the Chinese firm back refinancing of the 179-year-old British firm.
In July, Thomas Cook produced a business plan saying that it needed £900m in refinancing, up from a previous estimate of £150m. The £900m would come from Fosun, the group of creditors and some other investors.
The group of lenders then commissioned an independent investigation. Its financial advisers said Thomas Cook would require an additional £200m on top of the £900m already required, which would bring the total refinancing needed up to £1.1bn.
If you are on a package holiday you are covered by the Air Travel Organiser's Licence scheme (ATOL).
The scheme will pay for your accommodation abroad, although you may have to move to a different hotel or apartment.
ATOL will also pay to have you brought home if the airline is no longer operating.
If you have holiday booked in the future you will also be refunded by the scheme.
If you have booked a flight-only deal you will need to apply to your travel insurance company or credit card and debit card provider to seek a refund.
When Monarch Airlines collapsed in 2017, the government organised to bring home all the stranded passengers, whether they were covered by ATOL or not.
Here is more information on Atol protection.
Thomas Cook succeeded in finding a backer to provide the additional £200m, but the BBC understands that the backer has now pulled out and the group of creditors will not come back to the table unless that additional funding is found.
A final vote on that deal was due to take place this week, but it has been delayed until next Friday in the face of the latest demand for extra standby funding.
Earlier this week, Thomas Cook said it was "focused on completing" the deal. It is believed to be negotiating with its banks, bondholders and Fosun in an attempt to keep the rescue on track.
In May, the operator reported a £1.5bn loss for the first half of the year. It has also issued three profit warnings over the past year and is struggling to reduce its debts.
It has blamed a series of problems for its profit warnings, including political unrest in holiday destinations such as Turkey, last summer's prolonged heatwave and customers delaying booking holidays because of Brexit.
It has also suffered from competition from online travel agents and low-cost airlines.
The winter months can put a strain on travel companies' finances as typically there is less revenue coming in, while suppliers need to be paid for services provided over the high summer season.
Mark Burgess, chief investment officer of Columbia Threadneedle Investments, told the BBC that Thomas Cook's creditors were "being very careful" about extending lines of credit, because the firm was "in a precarious financial position".
"Companies don't go bust because they have too much debt - they go bust because they run out of cash," he added.
"Banks are managing their exposure very carefully, because the last thing they want to do is to have to write off loans to the company."
RBS said: "As one of a number of lenders, RBS has provided considerable support to Thomas Cook over many years and continues to work with all parties in order to try and find a resolution to the funding and liquidity shortfall at Thomas Cook."
Thomas Cook is one of the world's largest travel companies. It was founded in 1841 to operate temperance day trips. It now has annual sales of £9bn.
If the rescue deal goes ahead, it would be majority owned by Fosun, which is also a majority shareholder in Wolverhampton Wanderers Football Club and French resort operator Club Med.
Are you a Thomas Cook customer? If you've been affected by the issues raised here, you can get in touch by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also contact us in the following ways:
The Impossible Burger, a meat-free burger that’s previously only been available in restaurants, will be available to buy in grocery stores for the first time this week. Starting tomorrow, September 20th, you’ll be able to buy the plant-based burger in 27 Gelson’s Markets stores in Southern California. Impossible Foods says it will bring the burger to more grocery stores — including some on the East Coast — later this month, and it plans to reach every region of the US by the middle of next year.
The launch brings Impossible Foods into even closer competition with Beyond Meat, which already sells its own meat-free burger in grocery stores in addition to restaurants. When it announced its latest burger back in June, Beyond Meat said that it was available to purchase in stores, including Whole Foods, Kroger, Safeway, Publix, Wegmans, Target, and Sprouts. Compared to this list of chains, Impossible Foods is lagging behind in selling its burgers directly to home cooks.
Impossible Foods has been teasing the retail release of its Impossible Burger for the past week, encouraging its followers to guess which city the burgers will debut in. It inadvertently spoiled the surprise on Tuesday, however, when it announced that its in-store launch would be taking place in Westfield Century City in Los Angeles.
Both Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat already sell their burgers to restaurants. Impossible Foods says its burger is now available in over 17,000 restaurants, including more than 7,000 Burger King locations. Meanwhile, Beyond Meat provides Carl’s Jr. with veggie burgers, Subway with meatballs, and it’s also working with KFC on a new plant-based “chicken” recipe.
The Impossible Burger will be available in 12-ounce packages for $8.99 each, and Gelson’s Markets is limiting customers to purchasing 10 packages per visit. The limitation may be disappointing for the most die-hard Impossible fans, but given the reports of meat-free burger shortages that The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year, it’s not entirely unexpected.
The Federal Reserve announced Wednesday that its Open Market Committee had voted to cut the federal funds rate by 25 basis points to a range of 1.75% to 2%.
The federal funds rate is the benchmark interest rate that banks use when lending to one another. Interest rates on loans and deposits are typically influenced by the Federal Reserve’s decisions vis-à-vis the federal funds rate.
“Banks have to lower the deposit rates now in response to the Fed rate cut,” said Dan Geller, founder of consulting firm Analyticom. Here’s what not to do now that the Fed has cut rates:
Rates on certificates of deposit have been falling for months now — the first time that has happened across the board in five years.
As a result, people will earn less substantial returns when they take out a CD these days than they would have at the start of 2019. But that doesn’t mean they should shift away from this savings tool.
In fact, CDs may be a better bet, Geller said. “If you can get a good high-yield now and you’re guaranteed to receive this rate for the next three to five years, you’re going to ride the next recession with a relatively high rate,” he said.
Read more: Trump blasts Jerome Powell after Fed rate cut: ‘No “guts,” no sense, no vision!’
Many people make the mistake of moving their cash into liquid accounts, such as high-yield money-market and savings accounts, particularly as the threat of a recession looms, Geller said.
The yield on those accounts isn’t guaranteed like it is with a CD. He estimates that Americans lost billions of dollars in interest by giving into this money anxiety during the last recession.
“Resist the temptation to think that if you put it in a money-market account that it’s more accessible to you in a time of need,” Geller said. “Even if you have to pay a small penalty at some point to break the CD, it’s worth it.”
Geller’s simple rule of thumb for approaching CDs today: Find the highest rate for the longest term.
A recent survey from Bankrate found that nearly 70% of Americans had savings accounts that paid less than 2% interest. At a time when interest rates are falling, that can be an especially costly mistake.
“Do not let your money sit fallow in a bank paying an uncompetitive return,” said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate. He added, “Be prepared to move their money to a bank paying a better return.”
Also see: Millennials share their retirement plans on Twitter — let’s just say it’s not good
Many online banks offer upwards of 2% interest on their savings accounts — even in the current climate. Those banks will continue to compete on interest despite rates falling overall in order to score more customers.
The Fed’s interest-rate decision initially sent stocks falling — both the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.13% and S&P 500 SPX, +0.03% both dropped in afternoon trading before recovering — largely because the central bank did not clarify whether it will cut rates yet again later this year.
Markets have been volatile in recent months, thanks to monetary policy, an increasingly volatile stock market and President Trump’s ongoing trade dispute with China.
As such, this isn’t the time to pull money out of the market or make significant changes to your retirement planning. Instead, experts suggest seeking out healthy distractions like hanging out with friends or hitting up the gym.
The Tesla Model 3 has joined the Audi E-Tron as one of the safest cars on the road, earning a Top Safety Pick+ award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). The organization said that the Model 3 earned "good" ratings across the board for tricky accidents like driver- and passenger-side "small overlap front" crashes (below). It also did well to avoid collisions in the first place during 12 mph and 25 mph track tests.
Last month, Audi's flagship E-Tron also garnered a 2019 Top Safety Pick+ award, becoming the first EV to do so, according to the organization. That vehicle also impressed the IIHC with its crash ratings, collision avoidance systems and headlights that automatically dim thanks to a high-beam assist feature.
Along with the two EVs, another alternative fuel vehicle, the hydrogen fuel cell powered Hyundai Nexo, also qualified for a Top Safety Pick+. Chevy's Bolt, meanwhile, earned "good" ratings in most crash tests, but failed to receive a Top Safety Pick award because its headlights gave off too much glare to oncoming drivers.
Tesla's Model 3 has previously received a five-star safety rating from the NHTSA. However, it got into trouble with the organization for making certain safety claims about the Model 3 in its marketing materials. The NHTSA issued a cease and desist letter and referred the matter to the FTC.
The IIHS awards buttress the argument that EVs are safer than internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in a crash. Without a large, heavy gasoline engine in the front, the theory goes, manufacturers are better able to design the structure to absorb impacts and protect the occupants. "The fact that the battery can be placed in in a variety of places, maybe with more flexibility than a gas tank, [also] provides the potential to make electric vehicles safer," chief IIHS research officer David Zuby told CNBC.
The IIHS hedged that a bit, though, saying that EVs aren't "inherently" safer than ICE cars. However, Zuby noted that the vehicles seem to be at least on an equal footing. "There's no need to trade away safety for a lower carbon footprint when choosing a vehicle," he said.
