President Donald Trump has aggressively targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion programs across a wide swath of American society. So when Trump sent a White House invitation to the 2024 World Series champion Los Angeles Dodgersthe franchise of Jackie Robinson, a team whose identity is indelibly linked to its role in dismantling racial segregation in sportsit surprised some that the Dodgers accepted. Less than a week before they did so the Defense Department removed a tribute to Robinson on its website, a move apparently linked to its DEI purge. (The page was restored following a public outcry.)
Author and retired urban policy professor Peter Dreier is among those who have criticized the Dodgers decision to celebrate their World Series victory with Trump. Dreier, who has chronicled the history of baseball and social activism in two books, co-wrote an opinion piece in the L.A. Times making the case for why the Dodgers should decline an invite from Trumpeven before one was issued. Capital & Main spoke with Dreier the weekend before the Dodgers were scheduled to visit the Oval Office.
This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Capital & Main: Dodger manager Dave Roberts says that visiting the White House isnt about the current president but about the office itself. Why do you disagree with that?
Peter Dreier: Every president likes to get his picture taken with famous athletes. This is a photo opportunity for Trump to be seen with popular athletes and to bask in the reflected glory of the Dodgers victory. So its clearly not just about the office, its about the occupant. Hes sliding in the polls right now, and I assume he thinks that being seen with Mookie Betts and Freddie Freeman and Shohei Ohtani will give him some free publicity that can help his presidency. So I think its naive and somewhat disingenuous for Dave Roberts to say that, and I doubt he believes it.
Given the Dodgers history of breaking the color barrier by making Jackie Robinson the first Black Major League Baseball player, should that history and Trumps targeting of DEI have been a factor in the Dodgers decision about going to the White House?
The Dodgers pat themselves on the back all the time for being the first team to integrate, and theyve ridden the Jackie Robinson reputation for a long time since 1947. So thats clearly something that they are proud of.
Trump has called for the largest mass deportation in U.S. history. Los Angeles is a city with a very large number of immigrants and whose economy relies in large part on immigrant labor, including that of undocumented immigrants. Should that have played a role in the teams decision?
There are quite a few players on the Dodgers who are from Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia. If they have any social conscience or awareness, which Im sure most of them do, they arent happy with the way Trumps administration is treating immigrants.
Will you stop going to Dodger games?
If I stopped going to sports events because I didnt like the politics of the players or organization, I wouldnt go to sports events. Just like if I only bought clothes made by union labor Id be naked. Itll be interesting to see whether Billie Jean King or Magic Johnson [part owners of the Dodgers] go to the White House. They explicitly campaigned for Harris.
Are you disappointed that neither Johnson nor King nor any of the more prominent Dodger players have spoken out against the teams decision to go visit Trump in the White House?
Yes. Im disappointed that they didnt have the courage to speak out. Maybe Billie Jean King and Magic will speak out at some point, but so far, they havent.
When it comes to sports and politics, where do you think individual players or teams should draw the line and either take a stand or not?
If youre a big star, you can speak out. You might lose some fans, but you might gain some fans. Trump barely got half of the votes in the United States and got very few in the L.A. area, so it would not be that harmful to the careers of Dodger players for them to speak out against the Dodgers going to meet Trump. And its very disappointing that none of them have stepped up to the plate, so to speak.
Would Jackie Robinson have gone with the Dodgers to visit Donald Trump and the White House, were he alive today?
Jackie Robinson would be outraged by the Dodgers meeting with Trump. Jackie Robinson was a liberal Republican. He went to the Republican convention [in 1964] supporting the liberal Republican Nelson Rockefeller when they nominated Barry Goldwater, and he heard people say things in that convention that so angered him that he came out of that event and said I know what it must have felt like to be at a Nazi rally. Donald Trump is a lot worse.
Robinson always had the courage of his convictions regardless of what impact it had on him. He was criticized during his playing career for speaking out, and he said Im always going to speak out against injustice and if you dont like it, its too bad.
So Im 100% sure Jackie Robinson would be upset that the Dodgers are going to the White House, and I think hed be extremely disappointed in [Black superstar] Mookie Betts in particular.
Doesnt every player and executive on a team have equal responsibility for their decision to go or not to go to visit a controversial president in the White House?
Betts was the one that I thought would be most likely to speak out first and then hed bring other players along with him. Hes sort of the moral leader of the team. After George Floyd was killed he got the team, white and Black, not [to] play for a game.
And what theyre all saying is, Im doing this for the team, but theres a bigger team called America or a bigger team called society. And theyre playing under a fascist president, and I would hope that people that have a public platform like Major League Baseball players would speak out.
Danny Feingold, Capital & Main
language at top of story: This piece was originally published by Capital & Main, which reports from California on economic, political, and social issues.
Four space tourists who orbited the north and south poles returned to Earth on Friday, splashing down in the Pacific to end their privately funded polar tour.Bitcoin investor Chun Wang chartered a SpaceX flight for himself and three others in a Dragon capsule that was outfitted with a domed window that provided 360-degree views of the polar caps and everything in between. Wang declined to say how much he paid for the 3 1/2-day trip.The quartet, who rocketed from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center on Monday night, returned off the Southern California coast. It was the first human spaceflight to circle the globe above the poles and the first Pacific splashdown for a space crew in 50 years.The Chinese-born Wang, now a citizen of Malta, invited Norwegian filmmaker Jannicke Mikkelsen, German robotics researcher Rabea Rogge and Australian polar guide Eric Philips, all of whom shared stunning vistas during their voyage.“It is so epic because it is another kind of desert, so it just goes on and on and on all the way,” Rogge said in a video posted by Wang on X while gazing down from orbit.Mikkelsen packed the capsule with camera equipment and spent much of her time behind the lens.All four suffered from space motion sickness after reaching orbit, according to Wang. But by the time they woke up on day two, they felt fine and cranked open the window cover right above the South Pole, he said via X.Besides documenting the poles from 270 miles (430 kilometers) up, Wang and his crew took the first medical X-rays in space as part of a test and conducted two dozen other science experiments. They named their trip Fram2 after the Norwegian sailing ship that carried explorers to the poles more than a century ago. A bit of the original ship’s wooden deck accompanied the crew to space.Their medical tests continued at splashdown. All four got out of the capsule on their own, heaving bags of equipment so researchers could see how steady returning space crews are on their feet. They pumped their fists in jubilation.SpaceX said its decision to switch splashdown sites from Florida beginning with this flight was based on safety. The company said Pacific splashdowns will ensure that any surviving pieces of the trunkjettisoned near flight’s endfalls into the ocean.The last people to return from space to the Pacific were the three NASA astronauts assigned to the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz mission.
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Marcia Dunn, AP Aerospace Writer
Oil company Chevron must pay $744.6 million to restore damage it caused to southeast Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, a jury ruled on Friday following a landmark trial more than a decade in the making.The case was the first of dozens of pending lawsuits to reach trial in Louisiana against the world’s leading oil companies for their role in accelerating land loss along the state’s rapidly disappearing coast. The verdictwhich Chevron says it will appealcould set a precedent leaving other oil and gas firms on the hook for billions of dollars in damages tied to land loss and environmental degradation.
What did Chevron do wrong?
Jurors found that energy giant Texaco, acquired by Chevron in 2001, had for decades violated Louisiana regulations governing coastal resources by failing to restore wetlands impacted by dredging canals, drilling wells, and billions of gallons of wastewater dumped into the marsh.“No company is big enough to ignore the law, no company is big enough to walk away scot-free,” the plaintiff’s lead attorney John Carmouche told jurors during closing arguments.A 1978 Louisiana coastal management law mandated that sites used by oil companies “be cleared, revegetated, detoxified, and otherwise restored as near as practicable to their original condition” after operations ended. Older operations sites that continued to be used were not exempt and companies were required to apply for permits.But the oil company did not obtain proper permits and failed to clean up its mess, leading to contamination from wastewater stored unsafely or dumped directly into the marsh, the lawsuit said.The company also failed to follow known best practices for decades since it began operating in the area in the 1940s, expert witnesses for the plaintiff’s testified. The company “chose profits over the marsh” and allowed the environmental degradation caused by its operations to fester and spread, Carmouche said.The jury awarded $575 million to compensate for land loss, $161 million to compensate for contamination and $8.6 million for abandoned equipment. The amount earmarked for restoration exceeds $1.1 billion when including interest, according to attorneys for Talbot, Carmouche & Marcello, the firm behind the lawsuit.Plaquemines Parish, the southeast Louisiana district which brought the lawsuit, had asked for $2.6 billion in damages.Chevron’s lead trial attorney Mike Phillips said in a statement following the verdict that “Chevron is not the cause of the land loss occurring” in Plaquemines Parish and that the law does not apply to “conduct that occurred decades before the law was enacted.”Phillips called the ruling “unjust” and said there were “numerous legal errors.”Houston-headquartered Chevron reported more than $3 billion in earnings for the fourth quarter of 2024.
How are oil companies contributing to Louisiana’s land loss?
The lawsuit against Chevron was filed in 2013 by Plaquemines Parish, a rural district in Louisiana straddling the final leg of the Mississippi River heading into the Gulf of Mexico, also referred to as the Gulf of America as declared by President Donald Trump.Louisiana’s coastal parishes have lost more than 2,000 square miles (5,180 square kilometers) of land over the past century, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, which has also identified oil and gas infrastructure as a significant cause. The state could lose another 3,000 square miles (7,770 square kilometers) in the coming decades, its coastal protection agency has warned.Thousands of miles of canals cut through the wetlands by oil companies weakens them and exacerbates the impacts of sea level rise. Industrial wastewater from oil production degrades the surrounding soil and vegetation. The torn up wetlands leave South Louisianahome to some of the nation’s biggest ports and key energy sector infrastructuremore vulnerable to flooding and destruction from extreme weather events like hurricanes.Phillips, Chevron’s attorney, said the company had operated lawfully and blamed land loss in Louisiana on other factors, namely the extensive levee system that blocks the Mississippi River from depositing land regenerating sedimenta widely acknowledged cause of coastal erosion.The way to solve the land loss problem is “not suing oil companies, it’s reconnecting the Mississippi River with the delta,” Phillips said during closing arguments.Yet the lawsuit held the company responsible for exacerbating and accelerating land loss in Louisiana, rather than being its sole cause.Chevron also challenged the costly wetlands restoration project proposed by the parish, which involved removing large amounts of contaminated soil and filling in the swaths fragmented wetlands eroded over the past century. The company said the plan was impractical and designed to inflate the damages rather than lead to real world implementation.Attorney Jimmy Faircloth, Jr., who represented the state of Louisiana, which has backed Plaquemines and other local governments in their lawsuits against oil companies, told jurors from the parish that Chevron was telling them their community was not worth preserving.“Our communities are built on coast, our families raised on coast, our children go to school on coast,” Faircloth said. “The state of Louisiana will not surrender the coast, it’s for the good of the state that the coast be maintained.”
What does this mean for future litigation against oil companies?
Carmouche, a well-connected attorney, and his firm have been responsible for bringing many of the lawsuits against oil companies in the state. Industry groups have accused the firm of seeking big paydays, not coastal restoration.Louisiana’s economy has long been heavily dependent on the oil and gas industry and the industry holds significant political power. Even so, Louisiana’s staunchly pro-industry Gov. Jeff Landry has supported the lawsuits, including bringing the state on board during his tenure as Attorney General.Oil companies have fought tooth and nail to quash the litigation, including unsuccessfully lobbying Louisiana’s Legislature to pass a law to invalidate the claims. Chevron and other firms also repeatedly tried to move the lawsuits into federal court where they believed they would find a more sympathetic audience.But the heavy price Chevron is set to pay could hasten other firms to seek settlements in the dozens of other lawsuits across Louisiana. Plaquemines alone has 20 other cases pending against oil companies.The state is running out of money to support its ambitious coastal restoration plans, which have been fueled by soon-expiring settlement funds from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and supporters of the litigation say payouts could provide a much-needed injection of funds.Tommy Faucheux, president of the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association, said the verdict against Chevron “undermines Louisiana’s position as an energy leader” and “threatens our country’s trajectory to America-first energy dominance across the globe.” He warned that “businesses here are at risk of beingsued retroactively tomorrow for following the laws of today.”Attorneys for the parish said they hope that big payout will prompt more oil companies to come to the table to negotiate and channel more funding towards coastal restoration.“Our energy is focused on securing appropriate verdicts and awards for every parish involved in these actions,” Carmouche said in a statement. “If we continue to be successful in our efforts, these parishes, and Louisiana, will have sent a clear message that Louisiana’s future must be built around a new balance between our energy industry and environmental necessities.”
Jack Brook, Associated Press/Report for America
President Donald Trump’s administration has decided not to cover expensive, high-demand obesity treatments under the federal government’s Medicare program.The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said late Friday that it would not cover the medications under Medicare’s Part D prescription drug coverage. Medicare covers health care expenses mainly for people age 65 and older.Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, proposed a rule in late November after Trump won reelection that would have extended coverage of drugs like Zepbound and Wegovy. The rule was not expected to be finalized until Trump took office.Trump returned to office in January. The Senate confirmed Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on Thursday.CMS did not offer an explanation Friday for its decision, and federal spokespeople did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Trump’s Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has been an outspoken opponent of the injectable drugs, which have exploded in popularity due to the potentially life-changing weight loss that some patients experience.Polls show Americans favor having Medicaid and Medicare cover the costs. But many insurers, employers and other bill payers have been reluctant to pay for the drugs, which can be used by a wide swath of the population and can cost hundreds of dollars a month.Biden’s proposal was expensive: It would have included coverage for all state- and federally funded Medicaid programs for people with low incomes, costing taxpayers as much as $35 billion over next decade.Proponents of the coverage have argued that treating obesity can actually reduce longer-term costs by cutting down on heart attacks and other expensive health complications that can arise from the disease.The benefits consultant Mercer has said that 44% of U.S. companies with 500 or more employees covered obesity drugs last year.Medicare does pay for drugs like Wegovy for patients who have heart disease and need to reduce their risk of future heart attacks, strokes and other serious problems. The federal program also covers versions of the drugs that treat diabetes.More than a dozen state Medicaid programs already cover the drugs for obesity.
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Tom Murphy, AP Health Writer
Days of unrelenting heavy rain and storms that killed at least 18 people worsened flooding as some rivers rose to near-record levels and inundated towns across an already saturated U.S. South and parts of the Midwest.Cities ordered evacuations and rescue crews in inflatable boats checked on residents in Kentucky and Tennessee, while utilities shut off power and gas in a region stretching from Texas to Ohio.“As long as I’ve been aliveand I’m 52this is the worst I’ve ever seen it,” said Wendy Quire, the general manager at the Brown Barrel restaurant in downtown Frankfort, Kentucky, the state capital built around the swollen Kentucky River.“The rain just won’t stop,” Quire said Sunday. “It’s been nonstop for days and days.”Officials diverted traffic and turned off utilities to businesses in the city as the river was expected to crest above 49 feet Monday to a record-setting level, said Frankfort Mayor Layne Wilkerson. The city’s flood wall system is designed to withstand 51 feet of water.For many, there was a sense of dread that the worst was still to come.“This flooding is an act of God,” said Kevin Gordon, a front desk clerk at the Ashbrook Hotel in downtown Frankfort. The hotel was offering discounted stays to affected locals.
Storms leaving devastating impact
The 18 reported deaths since the storms began on Wednesday included 10 in Tennessee. A 9-year-old boy in Kentucky was caught up in floodwaters while walking to catch his school bus. A 5-year-old boy in Arkansas died after a tree fell on his family’s home, police said. A 16-year-old volunteer Missouri firefighter died in a crash while seeking to rescue people caught in the storm.The National Weather Service warned Sunday that dozens of locations in multiple states were expected to reach a “major flood stage,” with extensive flooding of structures, roads, bridges and other critical infrastructure possible.In north-central Kentucky, emergency officials ordered a mandatory evacuation for Falmouth and Butler, towns near the bend of the rising Licking River. Thirty years ago, the river reached a record 50 feet (15 meters), resulting in five deaths and 1,000 homes destroyed.The storms come after the Trump administration cut jobs at NWS forecast offices, leaving half of them with vacancy rates of about 20%, or double the level of a decade ago.
Why so much nasty weather?
Forecasters attributed the violent weather to warm temperatures, an unstable atmosphere, strong winds and abundant moisture streaming from the Gulf.The NWS said 5.06 inches (nearly 13 centimeters) of rain fell Saturday in Jonesboro, Arkansasmaking it the wettest day ever recorded in April in the city. Memphis, Tennessee, received 14 inches (35 centimeters) of rain from Wednesday to Sunday, the NWS said.Rives, a northwestern Tennessee town of about 200 people, was almost entirely underwater after the Obion River overflowed.Domanic Scott went to check on his father in Rives after not hearing from him in a house where water reached the doorstep.“It’s the first house we’ve ever paid off. The insurance companies around here won’t give flood insurance to anyone who lives in Rives because we’re too close to the river and the levees. So if we lose it, we’re kind of screwed without a house,” Scott said.In Dyersburg, Tennessee, dozens of people arrived over the weekend at a storm shelter near a public school clutching blankets, pillows, and other necessities. Just days earlier the city was hit by a tornado that caused millions of dollars in damage.Among them was George Manns, 77, who said he was in his apartment when he heard a tornado warning and decided to head to the shelter. Just days earlier the city was hit by a tornado that caused millions of dollars in damage.“I grabbed all my stuff and came here,” said Mann, who brought a folding chair, two bags of toiletries, laptops, iPads and medications: “I don’t leave them in my apartment in case my apartment is destroyed.”For others, grabbing the essentials also meant taking a closer look at the liquor cabinet.In Frankfort, with water rising up to his window sills, resident Bill Jones fled his home in a boat, which he loaded with several boxes of bottles of bourbon.
Izaguirre reported from New York. Kruesi reported from Nashville. Associated Press writers Bruce Schreiner in Shelbyville, Kentucky; Andrew DeMillo in Little Rock, Arkansas; Adrian Sainz in Memphis; Tennessee; Sarah Raza in Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Obed Lamy in Rives, Tennessee; and Sophia Tareen in Chicago contributed to this report.
Jon Cherry, Kimberlee Kruesi and Anthony Izaguirre, Associated Press
Sending children back to school in new sneakers, jeans, and T-shirts is likely to cost U.S. families significantly more this fall if the bespoke tariffs President Donald Trump put on leading exporters take effect as planned, American industry groups warn.About 97% of the clothes and shoes purchased in the U.S. are imported, predominantly from Asia, the American Apparel & Footwear Association said, citing its most recent data. Walmart, Gap Inc., Lululemon, and Nike are a few of the companies that have a majority of their clothing made in Asian countries.Those same garment-making hubs took a big hit under the president’s plan to punish individual countries for trade imbalances. For all Chinese goods, that meant tariffs of at least 54%. He set the import tax rates for Vietnam and neighboring Cambodia at 46% and 49%, and products from Bangladesh and Indonesia at 37% and 32%.Working with foreign factories has kept labor costs down for U.S. companies in the fashion trade, but neither they nor their overseas suppliers are likely to absorb new costs that high. India, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka also got slapped with high tariffs so aren’t immediate sourcing alternatives.“If these tariffs are allowed to persist, ultimately it’s going to make its way to the consumer,” said Steve Lamar, president and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association.Another trade group, Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, provided estimates of the price increases that could be in store for shoes, noting 99% of the pairs sold in the U.S. are imports. Work boots made in China that now retail for $77 would go up to $115, while customers would pay $220 for running shoes made in Vietnam currently priced at $155, the group said.FDRA President Matt Priest predicted lower-income families and the places they shop would feel the impact most. He said a pair of Chinese-made children’s shoes that cost $26 today will likely carry a $41 price tag by the back-to-school shopping season, according to his group’s calculations.
Preparing for a moving target
The tariffs on the top producers of not only finished fashion but many of the materials used to make footwear and apparel shocked U.S. retailers and brands. Before Trump’s first term, U.S. companies had started to diversify away from China in response to trade tensions as well as human rights and environmental concerns.They accelerated the pace when he ordered tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018, shifting more production to other countries in Asia. Lululemon said in its latest annual filing that 40% of its sportswear last year was manufactured in Vietnam, 17% in Cambodia, 11% in Sri Lanka, 11% in Indonesia, and 7% in Bangladesh.Nike, Levi-Strauss, Ralph Lauren, Gap. Inc., Abercrombie & Fitch, and VF Corporation, which owns Vans, The North Face, and Timberland, also reported a greatly reduced reliance on garment-makers and suppliers in China.Shoe brand Steve Madden said in November it would reduce imports from China by as much as 45% this year due to Trump’s campaign pledge to impose a 60% tariff on all Chinese products. The brand said it already had spent several years developing a factory network in Cambodia, Vietnam, Mexico, and Brazil.Industry experts say reviving the American garment industry would be hugely expensive and take years if it were feasible. The number of people working in apparel manufacturing in January 2015 stood at 139,000 and had dwindled to 85,000 by January of this year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Sri Lanka employs four times as many despite having a population less than one-seventh the size of the U.S.Along with lacking a skilled and willing workforce, the U.S. does not have domestic sources for the more than 70 materials that go into making a typical shoe, the Footwear Distributors & Retailers of America said in written comments to Trump’s trade representative.Shoe companies would need to find or set up factories to make cotton laces, eyelets, textile uppers, and other components to make finished footwear in the U.S. on a large scale, the group wrote.“These materials simply do not exist here, and many of these materials have never existed in the U.S,” the organization said.
Price increases may come as a shock
The expected barrage of apparel price increases would follow three decades of stability. Clothes cost U.S. consumers essentially the same in 2024 as they did in 1994, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data.Economists and industry analysts have attributed the trend to free trade agreements, offshoring to foreign countries where workers are paid much less and heated competition for shoppers among discount retailers and fast-fashion brands like H&M, Zara and Forever 21.But customers unaccustomed to inflation in the apparel sector and coming off several years of steep rise in the costs of groceries and housing may be extra sensitive to any big jumps in clothing prices. Priest, of the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, said he has observed shoppers pulling back on buying shoes since Trump’s return to the White House.“They’re nervous,” he said. “They’ve obviously been playing the long game as it relates to inflation for a number of years now. And they just don’t have the endurance to absorb higher prices, particularly as they’re inflicted by the U.S. government.”
Winners and losers in a garment trade war
According to a report by British bank Barclays published Friday, the winners in the tariff wars are retailers that have at least one of these attributes: big negotiating power with their suppliers, a strong brand name and limited sourcing in Asia.In clothing and footwear, that includes off-price retailers Burlington, Ross Stores Inc. and TJX Companies, which operates T.J. Maxx and Marshalls, as well as Ralph Lauren and Dick’s Sporting Goods, according to the report.The companies in for a tougher time are those with limited negotiating power, limited pricing power and high product exposure in Asia, a list including Gap Inc., Urban Outfitters and American Eagle Outfitters, according to the report.Secondhand clothing resale site ThredUp cheered a related action Trump took with his latest round of tariffs: eliminating a widely used tax exemption that has allowed millions of low-cost goods most of them originating in China to enter the U.S. every day duty-free.“This policy change will increase the cost of cheaply produced, disposable clothing imported from China, directly impacting the business model that fuels overproduction and environmental degradation,” ThredUp said.Several industry analysts and economists said they think tariffs will end up being a consumer sales tax that widens the yawning gap between America’s wealthiest residents and those in the middle and lower end of the incme spectrum.“So where will the U.S. be buying its apparel now that the tariff rates on Bangladesh, Vietnam and China are astronomical?” Mary E. Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said of the schedule set to take effect Wednesday. “Will the new ‘Golden Age’ involve knitting our own knickers as well as snapping together our cellphones?”
Anne D’Innocenzio, AP Retail Writer
Those hoping that the stock market pain from President Donald Trumps tariff announcements last week was over are in for a rude awakening this morning. As of the time of this writing, stock markets across the world have gotten hammered, adding to fears of a new so-called economic nuclear war. Heres what you need to know about the latest developments in Trumps tariff trade war and how the markets are reacting.
Bill Ackman: Trump tariffs are economic nuclear war
One of the most headline-grabbing pieces of news related to the ongoing stock market crash is comments from billionaire hedge fund manager and Trump supporter Bill Ackman. Yesterday, Ackman took to X to warn that Trumps tariffs, the worst of which are scheduled to go into effect this Wednesday, April 9, are equivalent to economic nuclear war.
In a post on X, Ackman said that the tariffs on America’s allies and enemies across the globe mean America is in the process of destroying confidence in our country as a trading partner, as a place to do business, and as a market to invest capital.
Ackman suggested that Trump should call a 90-day time out on the tariffs so the administration can negotiate with its trading partners.
However, Ackman warned, If, on the other hand, on April 9th we launch economic nuclear war on every country in the world, business investment will grind to a halt, consumers will close their wallets and pocket books, and we will severely damage our reputation with the rest of the world that will take years and potentially decades to rehabilitate.
Will Trump and his administration heed Ackmans advice? Thats unknown. But they certainly didnt seem to have similar thoughts over the weekend, when Trumps administration spent much of the time doubling down on the tariffs that are currently sinking Americans retirement savings and already raising the prices American consumers pay for goods.
In a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, President Trump boasted that many of the tariffs are already in effect, and a beautiful thing to behold. Trump went on to proclaim that Some day people will realize that Tariffs, for the United States of America, are a very beautiful thing!
Markets plunge around the worldagain
However, outside of Trump and his administration, its unlikely that many Americans feel that the tariffs are a beautiful thing to beholdat least if they have a 401(k) pension or other retirement plans. Thats because, as of the time of this writing, stock markets around the world are crashing yet again, following major crashes on Thursday and Friday of last weekthe two trading days after Trump announced his tariffs on April 2.
Today, the third trading day after Trumps tariff announcement, markets in Asia and Europe have already plummeted, according to data from Yahoo Finance. In Japan, the country’s Nikkei 225 stock market fell 7.83% on Monday, and Hong Kongs Hang Seng Index fell a staggering 13.22%. Shanghais SSE Composite Index fell 7.34%.
European markets are currently in the middle of their trading day and are also getting hit hard. The United Kingdom’s FTSE 100 is currently down 3.62% as of the time of this writing. Frances CAC 40 is down 3.92%, and Germanys DAX Performance Index is down 3.66%.
American stock markets are also down in premarket trading, suggesting that U.S. markets are in for another rough session when they open at 9:30 a.m. ET.
S&P 500 Futures: down 1.79%
Dow Futures: down 1.93%
Nasdaq Futures: down 1.95%
Big Tech and Big Retail sinkagain
Given that S&P, Dow, and Nasdaq futures are all down as of the time of this writing, it should come as little surprise that major U.S. tech companies and retailers are also seeing their shares sink for the third trading day in a row after Trumps tariffs were announced.
Many U.S. tech companies and most U.S. retailers rely on products, parts, or components that come from Asia, which is the region of the world hit hardest by Trumps tariffs. Here is how major tech companies are currently trading as of the time of this writing in premarket trading:
Alphabet Inc. (Nasdaq: GOOG): down 1.48%
Amazon.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: AMZN): down 2.09%
Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL): down 2.75%
Meta Platforms, Inc. (Nasdaq: META): down 2.24%
Microsoft Corporation (Nasdaq: MSFT): down 1.61%
NVIDIA Corporation (Nasdaq: NVDA): down 3.39%
Shopify Inc. (Nasdaq: SHOP): down 5.55%
Tesla, Inc. (Nasdaq: TSLA): down 4.84%
And here is how major U.S. retailers are currently trading in premarket:
RH (NYSE: RH): down 0.47%
V.F. Corporation (NYSE: VFC): down 4.93%
Five Below, Inc. (Nasdaq: FIVE): down 2.11%
Wayfair Inc. (NYSE: W): down 4.91%
SharkNinja, Inc. (NYSE: SN): down 1.56%
Walmart Inc. (NYSE: WMT): down 1.02%
Costco Wholesale Corporation (Nasdaq: COST): down 0.96%
Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT): down 2.21%
While many of these stocks are seeing low double-digit drops in premarket this morning, keep in mind that most were hammered much, much harder last Thursday and Friday.
Now cryptocurrencies are crashing, too
But its not just stock markets and individual stocks that are falling today. Now cryptocurrencies are being hit fairly hard, too. As of the time of this writing, major digital assets are down, including:
Bitcoin: down 6.79% to $77,141.06
Ethereum: down 16.28% to $1,495.82
Solana: down 15.12% to $100.89
Dogecoin: down 14.85% to $0.1398
Official Trump: down 14.4% to $7.69
Banks say the odds of a global recession are increasing
Finally, it should be noted that now a second major investment bank has come out to say that, due to Trumps tariffs, the odds of a new global recession are increasing.
Last week, J.P.Morgan upped the odds of a global recession due to Trumps tariffs to 60% (up from 40% before the tariffs were announced).
Now, Goldman Sachs has also raised its odds. Pre-Trump tariffs, Goldman Sachs said that there was a 35% chance of a recession. Now Goldman Sachs says that the chance has jumped to 45%, notes Reuters.
Its no secret: Landing a job in todays economy can feel overwhelmingly difficult. Qualified candidates regularly apply to hundredssometimes even thousandsof positions before receiving that one coveted offer. In fact, over half of unemployed job seekers have been searching for four months or longer, highlighting how competitive the market has become.
And its not just the job market itself thats challenging. Were living through one of the most turbulent periods in modern history:
The U.S. unemployment rate rose to 4.1%, the highest in over two years.
23,000+ tech layoffs occurred in the first three months of 2025 alone.
Nearly 50% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.
Consumer debt hit an all-time high of $18.04 trillion, with credit card delinquencies increasing sharply.
University degrees are no longer a guarantee of success. Even government jobs, once considered safe, are under threat. Its no wonder many job seekers feel anxious or fearful about asking for more.
Negotiation expert and career coach Ted Leonhardt notes that the fear of asking for higher pay has always been an obstacle. And in todays volatile environment, that fear can feel even more paralyzing. But he emphasizes: Workers at any level are more vulnerable today than any time in memory, perhaps since the Great Depression. This makes knowing your worth and advocating for yourself all the more essential.
Here are six essential tips for confidently negotiating your salary in todays tough economy.
1.Hide your desperation
A Pew Research Center survey found that most U.S. workers did not ask for higher pay the last time they were hired, with men slightly more likely than women to negotiate (32% vs. 28%).
Even if youre surviving on ramen and desperately need the job, dont let it show. Employers often interpret eagerness as desperation, leading to lower initial offers. Take your time to respondusually 24 to 48 hoursand subtly indicate youre considering multiple opportunities. This helps maintain your negotiating power.Leonhard further advises: Always be developing a new opportunity for yourself. A side gig. A better job elsewhere. Having other options in progress or appearing to can drastically reduce that sense of desperation.
2. Know your worth and back it up with data
Before negotiating, gather salary benchmarks from sites like Glassdoor, Payscale, and LinkedIn Salary. Present clear, data-backed reasons for your requested salary based on your experience, skills, and current market rates.
Leonhardt succinctly puts it: Know your value and use it as leverage. Leverage is always your superpower. Staying true to your worth can provide dividends. Annie Papp, executive vice president at Career Group Companies, advises that: In any job market, applicants should be prepared to come right out and ask for a raise or negotiate higher compensation. While it may seem obvious, most people dont do this, assuming their employer will offer a raise without promptingwhich is rarely the case.
3. Quantify your value
Make a detailed list of your accomplishments and quantify your impact whenever possible. For example: Increased sales by 300% within one year or Managed projects that increased revenue by $X amount. Even before the negotiation, review this to remind yourself of your accomplishments and the value you bring, boosting your confidence.
4. Bet on yourself and plan for the future
If the job offer isnt quite where you want it to be, focus on creating a clear path to get there over the next year. Jason Giagrande, CEO of Hospitality Farm, suggests: Bet on yourself. Propose a lucrative bonus structure with aggressive milestones or KPIs that your boss would be happy to pay if accomplished. Everyone wins, and it will motivate your growth individually as well as help your company grow. Not only does this show initiative, but it also aligns your compensation with company goals, making it easier for employers to say yes.
5. Be willing to walk away (if you truly are)
One key to negotiation success is the willingness to walk away. Listen carefully, remain composed, and always take time to consider the offer before responding.
6. Consider negotiating benefits, not just salary
If salary negotiations stall, consider other forms of compensation. Diversify your requests to reach a deal that satisfies both sides. Signing bonuses, professional development funds, flexible work arrangements, or extra vacation days can all hold significant value.This market is different because employers are being more cautious when it comes to hiring and budgeting. A few years ago, on the heels of the pandemic, applicants could negotiate higher salaries much more easily because every employer was in a desperate race to retain talent. Now, thats not the case. The frenzy has slowed, and employers are taking their time.
While inflated salary increases may no longer be the norm, advocating for growth is still crucial. Losing strong talent can ultimately have a far greater cost than providing a reasonable raise, Papp says. If higher compensation isnt immediately feasible, ask for a timeline to revisit the conversation.
Finally, Leonhardt offers a lasting piece of advice: Always be developing your connections and community both online and off. Connections with those you help are always the best opportunity for your continuously evolving future.
Negotiation can feel intimidating, especially in a fragile, uncertain world. But by advocating for yourself thoughtfully and strategically, youre not just setting yourself up for immediate successyoure safeguarding your long-term career stability.
Hello and welcome to Modern CEO! Im Stephanie Mehta, CEO and chief content officer of Mansueto Ventures. Each week this newsletter explores inclusive approaches to leadership drawn from conversations with executives and entrepreneurs, and from the pages of Inc. and Fast Company. If you received this newsletter from a friend, you can sign up to get it yourself every Monday morning.
Interim leadership is on the rise in the U.S. Nearly a quarter of new CEOs named in the first two months of 2025 were hired on an interim basis, versus 8% in the same period last year, according to a recent report from Challenger, Gray & Christmas.
The surge in interim leadership coincides with significant tumult in the C-suite. The Challenger report shows that 247 U.S. companies named new CEOs in February, the second-highest total for any month since the firm started tracking CEO changes in 2002. A lot of times when a company brings in an interim CEO its when theyve been caught off guard by the CEOs departure, says Andy Challenger, senior vice president of the outplacement firm. Its not part of a structured succession plan. An interim CEO can buy a board time to conduct a thoughtful search for the right executive, especially if it feels the company needs skills that the existing leadership team lacks.
Management experts say theyre also seeing companiesparticularly mid-market and investor-backed businesseshire temporary CEOs during changes such as restructuring, merger integration, or executing a new strategy. Their expertise can be crucial to navigating complex changes that require seasoned leadershipeven temporary solutions can be transformative for an organization, says Sunny Ackerman, global managing partner of on-demand talent at Heidrick & Struggles, the executive search firm.
The Temp-to-perm CEO
Interim roles also can serve as a tryout for prospective CEO candidates. And companies can engage an interim executive while they figure out what they need in a leader. Ackerman recalls working with her team on an early-stage medical technology company that sought to replace its founder with a full-time CEO. Heidrick & Struggles brought in a life sciences consultant who had been a CEO to create a plan for market entry. The board then hired that consultant as interim CEO to execute the plan. Once they saw his operational skills and market expertise in practice, the board eventually decided to convert him to permanent CEO. Other temp-to-perm CEOs include Chipotles Scott Boatwright, who went from interim in August 2024 to permanent status three months later, and Lance Tucker, who last month was named CEO of Jack in the Box after a 36-day stint as interim CEO of the restaurant company.
Avoid leadership limbo
Companies need to be careful not to let interim leadership linger. If [an] interim is in place too long, it may communicate the wrong message to the market and employees and create uncertainty about the future leadership of the organization and its strategy, says Janice Ellig, CEO of executive search firm Ellig Group. Employees and the market like certainty. They want to know who is at the helm and what direction they are headed. And in the absence of clear guidance from the board, some interim chiefs may act like caretakers instead of leaders, causing the company to lose ground during the search for a permanent CEO.
One things for sure: Interim CEOs arent going away. Ackerman notes that many of the CEOs exiting business right now are baby boomer and Gen X retirees who are eager to remain active by taking on interim roles, generating a larger pool of independent talent than weve ever seen before, she says.
Are you a temp-to-perm leader?
Are you a CEO or leader who turned a temporary or interim role into a permanent one? How did you win your role? Send your stories to me at stephaniemehta@mansueto.com. Id love to share your experiences in a future newsletter.
Read more: temps in the C-suite
The great fractionalization may be coming to your leadership team
How to step in as an interim manager
Interim CEO posts: intense and eye-opening
According to the latest Gallup State of the Workplace report, employees are seeking new jobs at thehighest levelsince 2015. This trend has been coined The Great Detachment.
A key reason for this is increasing employee dissatisfaction with management. For instance, Gallups research shows that those who work in companies withbad management practicesare nearly 60% more likely to be stressed, and stress is the second most-cited factor influencing employees’ decisions to quit.
Peoples values have also changed post-COVID-19. Employees prioritize well-being. They expect their contribution to be recognized, and if they arent valued or supported, they arent prepared to tolerate it.
The rise of Gen Z in the workplace also needs to be considered. They now make up 27% of the workforce across the 38 high-income countries that make up the OECD. This generation wants to be coached, not directed, and if they dont feel that theyre progressing or that their employer wants to cultivate them, theyll simply leave.
Yet, management practice has remained unchanged, with managers still using outdated and clunky methods unsuited to todays workplace. Managers are ill-equipped to give feedback and handle challenging conversations in this rapidly changing work environment and consequently default to directing employees rather than enabling them.
Companies need to upskill their middle managers urgently to keep employees engaged and stop hemorrhaging talent. After all, talent is critical for successcompanies in the top quartile of employee engagement achieve23% higher profitabilitythan those in the bottom quartile.
If youre losing your top talent to your competitors and suspect poor management may be a cause, here are three things to do:
1. Shift the prevailing management mindset from managing to enabling
Managers are often high-performing employees promoted for their technical strengths rather than their people skills. Their management style is typically command and controlsimply directing and providing solutions for employees’ problems without engaging their capabilities.
This can be incredibly demotivating for employees, signalling their ideas arent valued or welcomed. Over time, they lose autonomy over their work and wait for direction from their managers before following their instructions, leading to increased disengagement.
Managers urgently need to change their mindset from perceiving themselves as the manager and solver of all problems to becoming the enabler of other people’s talents and capabilities. Affording team members the space to contribute creates opportunities for them to grow and advance. To do this, managers need to adopt an enquiry-led approach by learning to ask powerful and insightful questions that encourage reflection at the point that would be most helpful to someones thinking.
Instead of asking why questions such as Why did this happen? shift to asking what questions. For instance, What are the reasons behind this outcome? or What could have gone better? What questions remove the personal sting from a why question and promote reflection without triggering defensiveness. This simple change signals a shift from being the all-knowing manager to being a supportive enabler, which is beneficial not only for employee growth but also for building an inclusive and collaborative team culture.
2. Give better feedback to stimulate high performance
Giving feedback is often associated with challenging conversations, as managers try to share something they want people to change or improve upon. Moving to more intentional, appreciative and developmental feedback can support employee development.
Instead of constantly identifying problems or behaviors that need fixing, managers should seek out moments when someone has excelled in a particular situation. Visibly pointing out the skills or behaviors that made a positive difference to outcomes is a great way to build trust and an openness to constructive feedback. It also creates an environment where employees look forward to coming to work and are motivated to build on their strengths and contribute at their best, increasing job satisfaction.
3. Encourage more collaboration within teams
Rather than defaulting to a command and control style of fixing everyones problems, managers must develop their awareness and tune in to coachable moments throughout the day. For example, instead of stepping in to solve every issue brought to them, managers learn to recognise the potential for a better outcome by engaging team members to explore their problem-solving capabilities, giving them the space to suggest ideas and talk them through. They might ask what ideas theyve thought of themselves that could offer a way forward and explore the steps they would need to take to progress those options.
Using a more purposeful approach to asking questions intended to stimulate other peoples thinking in the flow of work has been recognised as an advance in management practice known as Operational Coaching. Practitioners learning this new approach stop firefighting and instead adapt their management style to engage their team, acknowledge their capabilities, and invite greater collaboration. This demonstrates that employees thinking and contributions are valued, increasing employee satisfaction, and managers win back valuable time from not stepping in to every problem.
Why these strategies help retain top talent
As a result of the behavioral work we were engaged in, we developed the STAR model to help managers apply these skills in their daily lives. STAR consists of four steps:
STOP Step back and change state
THINK Is this a coachable moment?
ASK Powerful questions and actively listen
RESULT Agree on next steps and an outcome from the conversation
By applying this model, managers can learn to adopt new coaching-style “behaviors” in the moment, enabling them to challenge, support, and grow the capabilities of their team members in ways that measurably benefit both the individual and the organization. When employees feel valued for their contributions, have autonomy in their work, and sense their managers care for their development and advancement, their relationship with work improves.
As workplaces evolve, businesses must recognize the need to shift managers from their task-focused mindset to a people-focused mindset. This simple but vital step will help foster an environment that values every employee and ensures that top talent is appeciated, nurtured, and retained.
