Connect with us

Business

A French politician wants the U.S. to return the Statue of Liberty after 140 years. But it can’t actually do that

Published

on



Hey, America: Give the Statue of Liberty back to France.

So says a French politician who is making headlines in his country for suggesting that the U.S. is no longer worthy of the monument that was a gift from France nearly 140 years ago.

As a member of the European Parliament and co-president of a small left-wing party in France, Raphaël Glucksmann cannot claim to speak for all of his compatriots.

But his assertion in a speech this weekend that some Americans “have chosen to switch to the side of the tyrants” reflects the broad shockwaves that U.S. President Donald Trump’s seismic shifts in foreign and domestic policy are triggering in France and elsewhere in Europe.

“Give us back the Statue of Liberty,” Glucksmann said, speaking Sunday to supporters of his Public Place party, who applauded and whistled.

“It was our gift to you. But apparently you despise her. So she will be happy here with us,” Glucksmann said.

The White House brushed back on the comments Monday, saying France instead should still be “grateful” for U.S. support during World War I and World War II.

Can France claim it back?

Dream on.

UNESCO, the United Nations’ cultural arm that has the statue on its list of World Heritage treasures, notes that the iconic monument is U.S. government property.

It was initially envisaged as a monumental gesture of French-American friendship to mark the 100th anniversary of the July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence.

But a war that erupted in 1870 between France and German states led by Prussia diverted the energies of the monument’s designer, French sculptor Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi.

The gift also took time to be funded, with a decision taken that the French would pay for the statue and Americans would cover the costs of its pedestal.

Transported in 350 pieces from France, the statue was officially unveiled Oct. 28, 1886.

Is France’s government offering asylum to Lady Liberty?

No. French-U.S. relations would have to drop off a cliff before Glucksmann found support from French President Emmanuel Macron’s government.

For the moment, the French president is treading a fine line — trying to work with Trump and temper some of his policy shifts on the one hand but also pushing back hard against some White House decisions, notably Trump’s tariff hikes.

Macron has let his prime minister, François Bayrou, play the role of being a more critical voice. Bayrou tore into the “brutality” that was shown to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during his White House visit and suggested that Trump’s administration risked handing victory to Russia when it paused military aid to Ukraine.

Glucksmann’s party has been even more critical, posting accusations on its website that Trump is wielding power in an “authoritarian” manner and is “preparing to deliver Ukraine on a silver platter” to Russia.

In his speech, Glucksmann referenced New York poet Emma Lazarus’ words about the statue, the “mighty woman with a torch” who promised a home for the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

“Today, this land is ceasing to be what it was,” Glucksmann said.

What is the White House saying?

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked Monday about Glucksmann’s comments, and responded that the U.S. would “absolutely not” be parting with the iconic statue.

“My advice to that unnamed low-level French politician would be to remind them that it’s only because of the United States of America that the French are not speaking German right now,” Leavitt said, apparently referencing the U.S. fight with allied powers to free France from Nazi occupation in World War II and alongside France during World War I. “They should be very grateful.”

But the debt of gratitude runs both ways. Leavitt skipped past France’s key role in supporting the future United States during its war for independence from the United Kingdom.

Leavitt is one of three administration officials who face a lawsuit from The Associated Press on First- and Fifth-Amendment grounds. The AP says the three are punishing the news agency for editorial decisions they oppose. The White House says the AP is not following an executive order to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Cathie Wood says most memecoins will end up ‘worthless’

Published

on

Most of the so-called memecoins that are flooding the $2.6 trillion cryptocurrency space will probably end up “worthless,” according to Cathie Wood. 

The combination of blockchain technology and artificial intelligence is creating “millions” of meme cryptocurrencies that “are not going to be worth very much,” the ARK Investment Managment LLC founder and CEO told Bloomberg Television on Tuesday, adding that her private funds are not putting money into these coins. 

Memecoins are a type of digital asset often inspired by jokes, current events or trends in popular culture. In February, the US Securities and Exchange Commission said memecoins are not considered securities so they will remain unregulated.

“If I have one message for those listening who are buying memecoins: buyer beware,” said Wood. “There’s nothing like losing money for people to learn, and they’ll learn that the SEC and regulators are not taking responsibility for these memecoins.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

JPMorgan stock traders score windfall as Trump jolts market

Published

on

A chaotic run in stock markets is unleashing a windfall for banks’ equities traders.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. is on track to boost revenue from equities trading by more than 30% this quarter from a year earlier, according to people with knowledge of the matter. If the trajectory holds, the firm would surpass its $3.3 billion record set four years ago.

Such a trend could spell even bigger bounties at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, which typically vie for the industry’s stock-trading crown. While JPMorgan’s increase is particularly steep, Goldman’s equities unit is also running ahead of its pace last year, when it reaped $3.3 billion in the first three months, the people said, asking not to be named because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly.

Market swoons set off by President Donald Trump’s abrupt policy announcements are — for banks, at least — creating a rare bright spot amid signs of economic trouble. But the gyrations have tripped up hedge funds, stalled dealmakers’ talks on prospective mergers and shaken consumer confidence.

The resilience of equities desks is a nod to their evolution since the 2008 financial crisis. Their earnings hinge less on taking risks with their balance sheets and more on facilitating surges in client trading in response to price swings. Individual stock moves have unleashed bursts of derivatives trading, driving up banks’ gains.

Representatives for JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs declined to comment.

The boon for banks contrasts with the impact on multistrategy hedge funds — the big, all-weather investing platforms geared toward eking out gains irrespective of market conditions. The two largest, Ken Griffin’s Citadel and Izzy Englander’s Millennium Management, posted rare losses in February and slumped further in early March.

There’s pain in other corners of investment banks. Some dealmakers are ruing predictions that Trump’s return to the White House would unleash a wave of activity. Instead, they’re grousing about the uncertainty created by sudden tariff proclamations. The volume of new transactions announced globally this year is lower than at the start of 2024.  

Morgan Stanley Co-President Dan Simkowitz said as much on Tuesday. Merger and acquisition announcements and new equity issuance are “certainly on pause” as clients assess Trump’s policies, he said at a conference hosted by his bank.

Before 2008, big US banks made proprietary bets on stocks to reap billions of dollars a year, rather than confining themselves to just passively fielding client orders. But as new regulations reined in risk-taking, banks leaned on other aspects of their businesses, such as providing financing to clients interested in levering up bets to juice returns.

Three banks have dominated the stock-trading business over the past decade. Morgan Stanley held the top spot for seven years starting in 2014 before ceding it to Goldman. 

Along with JPMorgan, the trio raked in almost $36 billion from their equities businesses last year, pulling further ahead of competitors.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

How to watch the First Four of the 2025 NCAA Tournament for free—and without cable

Published

on



  • The First Four games of the NCAA Tournament are being held Tuesday and Wednesday, March 18 and 19. They’re an appetizer, of sorts, for the first round of March Madness, one of the most anticipated basketball tournaments of the year.

Selection Sunday is behind us. Now it’s time for March Madness to get underway. (Sorry, HR directors!)

The NCAA Tournament is one of the highlights of spring and while the Round of 64 will get underway later this week, fans will get an appetizer starting tonight with the First Four games.

This matchup sees the four lowest-seeded automatic qualifiers and the four lowest-seeded at-large teams face off in an attempt to make it to the official tournament. It’s where Cinderella stories are born and where longshot bets can pay off (though rarely do).

Here’s a look at who’s playing in the First Four—and some options to watch them.

What is the schedule for the NCAA Tournament’s First Four games?

Here’s who’s playing in the First Four.

Tuesday, March 19

St. Francis vs. Alabama State, 6:40 p.m. ET on TruTV

UNC vs. San Diego State, 9:10 p.m. ET on TruTV

Wednesday, March 20

Mt. St. Mary’s vs. American, 6:40 p.m. ET on TruTV

Xavier vs. Texas, 9:10 p.m. ET on TruTV

How can I watch the First Four games for free?

Ok, here’s the bad news. None of the First Four games will be broadcast over the air, meaning you’ll need either a cable subscription or a streaming service to watch. Many streaming services have done away with free trials, but a few remain. See below for details.

Can I watch the 2025 First Four games online?

Yep! Here are a few other options.

Max

The one-time HBO Max doesn’t have a free trial, unfortunately. Subscriptions start at $9.99 per month.

Disney+

Disney’s bundle of Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+ no longer has a free trial, so you’ll have to pay $17 per month for all three combined (or $30 per month for no ads on Hulu).

Including Live TV in the bundle bumps the price to $77 per month ($90 with no ads).

Hulu with Live TV

The free trial on this service lasts three days. Afterward, it will cost you $77 per month.

YouTubeTV

After a free trial, you can expect monthly charges of $73.

Sling TV

Dish Network’s Sling lower-tiered “Orange” plan will run you $40 per month. Adding the more comprehensive “Blue” plan bumps the cost to $55 per month. The seven-day free trial has disappeared, unfortunately.

DirecTV Stream

Formerly known as DirecTV Now, AT&T TVNow and AT&T TV, this oft-renamed streaming service will run you $80 per month and up after the free trial option.

Fubo TV

This sports-focused cord-cutting service carries broadcast networks in most markets. There’s a seven-day free trial, followed by monthly charges of $80 and up, depending on the channels you choose.

Can I watch any March Madness games on Amazon Prime Video?

No. March Madness do not stream on Amazon, unless you purchase a subscription to a streaming service.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.