Connect with us

Business

The U.S. naval blockade of Venezuela has cost $700 million already—and is rising by $9 million daily

Published

on



The ongoing U.S. naval blockade of Venezuelan has cost an estimated $700 million and counting with two more oil tankers seized Jan. 7, as President Donald Trump aims to sell more Venezuelan crude oil to American refineries and convince U.S. oil companies to return to embattled nation.

Operating the USS Gerald R. Ford and its aircraft carrier strike group costs more than $9 million per day—adjusted for inflation—since being ordered to Latin American waters in October, according to a prior report from the Center for a New American Security. Those costs do not account for the boat strikes that began in late August—killing more than 100 people thus far—or the Jan. 4 attacks in Venezuela that resulted in the arrests of leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife.

Trump has argued the U.S. does not want a prolonged occupation so long as Maduro’s vice president and now-acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, defers to the U.S. And he is pushing for U.S. oil companies to work in Venezuela to rebuild the dilapidated industry and get oil and dollars flowing again.

The White House did not refute the financial numbers of the blockade nor provide additional information, with spokesperson Anna Kelly saying in a statement that Maduro’s arrest saves American lives, stops the flow of drugs and criminals, initiates a deterrence in the Western Hemisphere, and creates economic opportunities for Venezuelans and Americans.

 David Goldwyn, Atlantic Council fellow and State Department special envoy for international energy affairs in the Obama administration, told Fortune that Trump is operating with an “incoherent strategy.”

“A lot has been spent, and little has been gained,” Goldwyn said. “It’s really hard to see what the upside is. Maduro has been removed, but the rest of the regime are all still in place.”

“The prize he’s trying to manufacture of special access to resources for U.S. companies seems to be unwelcome by most.”

Indeed, Trump is scheduled to meet Jan. 9 with oil executives, including leaders from Chevron, Exxon Mobil, and ConocoPhillips. The companies did not respond to requests for comment.

Chevron is the only American oil company operating in Venezuela—under a special license—producing nearly 20% of the country’s oil.

Trump argued the American oil companies are “ready to go in” and spend billions of dollars to rebuild Venezuela’s energy infrastructure and dramatically increase the flow of oil to bring revenues back to Venezuela and the U.S.

But the reality is different. Once a major player churning out nearly 4 million barrels of oil daily, Venezuela’s volumes have plunged from 3.2 million barrels daily in 2000 down to fewer than 1 million barrels today from a combination of mismanagement, underinvestment, and escalating U.S. sanctions. More than doubling Venezuela’s current oil production likely would take until 2030 and cost about $110 billion, said research firm Rystad Energy.

Apart from Chevron, U.S. companies have previously expressed reservations about returning because of the political instability, high costs, and weaker oil prices. ConocoPhillips and Exxon are still owed billions of dollars from Venezuela from the 2007 expropriation of their assets resulting international tribunal rulings.

“We’ve been expropriated from Venezuela two different times. We’d have to see what the economics look like,” Exxon CEO Darren Woods told Bloomberg in November. “We have our history there.”

How Trump plans to profit from Venezuelan oil

In the meantime, Trump said on social media the U.S. will take between 30 million and 50 million barrels of Venezuelan crude over time to sell from the United States. The proceeds would be controlled by the White House, although the details remained vague.

Presumably, more oil would be sold to U.S. refineries that are configured to process the heavy grade of crude that comes from Venezuela, and Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA would receive most of the proceeds.

Depending on the number of barrels—and based on the current benchmark price for oil in the U.S.—that much oil could be worth between $1.6 billion and $2.8 billion.

PDVSA confirmed in a Jan. 7 statement that it is negotiating with the U.S. in a framework similar to those with Chevron and other international companies. “PDVSA ratifies its commitment to continue building alliances that promote national development in favor of the Venezuelan people and that contribute to global energy security.”

The effort implies the U.S. will auction the oil barrels through the U.S. Department of Energy and hold the proceeds in escrow as leverage for Venezuelan cooperation, said Matt Reed, vice president of the geopolitical and energy consultancy Foreign Reports. Most recently, about 80% of Venezuelan oil exports went to China and nearly 15% to the U.S.

“It sounds like a twist on the old, UN ‘oil for food’ program that allowed Iraq to sell oil but only tap revenue for essential goods like food and medicine. The difference this time is that Washington will decide where the oil goes. U.S. refiners will probably get priority depending on Gulf Coast demand,” Reed said. “It’s unclear how or whether the US will profit from this. Rather, Washington is counting on this leverage to twist arms in Caracas.”

As for the Trump oil summit with executives, Reed said, “Washington can offer incentives but only Caracas can convince American firms to take the plunge and invest over the long term.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump calls for one-year cap on credit card rates at 10%

Published

on



President Donald Trump on Friday called for a one-year cap on credit card interest rates at 10%, effective Jan. 20, without specifying details.

“Please be informed that we will no longer let the American Public be ‘ripped off’ by Credit Card Companies that are charging Interest Rates of 20 to 30%, and even more, which festered unimpeded during the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration. AFFORDABILITY!” he wrote on social media.

It’s not clear whether credit card companies will respond to his call, or what actions he might take to force any change.

The post comes as the Trump administration intensifies efforts to demonstrate to voters that the president is addressing concerns about costs and prices that have emerged as a central issue in the November midterm elections.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump pledged to seek limits on the interest credit card companies can charge.

Hours before his message on Friday, Senator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, said on X: “Trump promised to cap credit card interest rates at 10% and stop Wall Street from getting away with murder. Instead, he deregulated big banks charging up to 30% interest on credit cards.”

In a letter last year to Sanders and Senator Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, a group of banking trade groups painted a dire outcome for consumers if the government ever capped interest rates on credit cards at 10%, as the senators had proposed.

“Many consumers who currently rely on credit cards would be forced to turn elsewhere for short-term financing needs, including pawn shops, auto title lenders or worse — such as loan sharks, unregulated online lenders and the black market,” the group wrote.

The Bank Policy Institute said in a report last year that “while the proposed cap is a well-intentioned effort to reduce the high debt burden some households are facing, it would harm consumers’ access to card credit.” The group also said such a move could force card issuers to reduce cardholder benefits, including lucrative rewards tied to purchases. 

Responding to Trump’s post on Friday, Hawley said on X: “Fantastic idea. Can’t wait to vote for this.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Asian households still save as much as half their wealth in cash. Fintech platforms like Syfe want to change that

Published

on



Growing up in India, Dhruv Arora’s mother gave him one key piece of financial advice: Put his money in the bank. 

But Arora, now the founder of Singapore-based fintech platform Syfe, quickly realized that following his mother’s advice meant his money “did absolutely nothing.”

“We have quite a heavy culture of saving,” Arora says, citing Asia’s often unstable economic and policy history. But inflation and low interest rates end up eroding the value of household savings. “Over time, the $100 you put in the bank doesn’t become $101, but effectively $98” due to the effects of inflation.

Asian households sometimes keep as much as 50% of their net worth in cash, rather than in investments or assets. In contrast, in developed markets like the U.S. and Europe, that figure is closer to 15%. 

But that conservative attitude in Asia is starting to change. Asians are getting wealthier, pushing them to explore different investment options. Strong stock market performance is also driving a new wave of retail investors across the Asia-Pacific.

“Asian households are slowly dipping their toes into stock markets,” HSBC economists wrote in a Jan. 9 report, though noted that “overall equity investment remains quite low.” The bank predicts that a steady shift from low-yield cash to higher-yield investments will mean “more money will continue to rotate into equity markets over the next few years,” reducing a reliance on foreign investors. 

A slew of fintech apps have emerged in recent years to tap a growing interest in investing and wealth management among Asian users. These alternative finance platforms, such as Syfe, Stashaway and Endowus, often offer a range of investment options, ranging from cash management to managed portfolios and options trading. The challenge, Arora says, is how to “bridge the gap between holding money and growing wealth,” and “give more people the confidence to put their savings to work.”

Arora began his career as an investment banker for UBS in Hong Kong in 2008, soon after the Global Financial Crisis. Despite Asia’s relatively quick recovery, Arora noticed that the region’s professionals were building wealth yet didn’t know how to manage it. “These were smart people like doctors, lawyers and consultants, who were doing well professionally, but just did not know what to do with their money,” he says. 

He launched Syfe in 2019, just a few months before another global crisis: The COVID-19 pandemic. Yet the pandemic ended up being an opportunity for fintech platforms like Syfe. “It acted as a catalyst for a shift in investor behavior,” Arora explained, as people suddenly had the time to engage with financial markets.

In the U.S., for example, people stuck at home began to get involved in stock trading through platforms like Robinhood. Fueled by social media, these retail investors began to heavily trade in so-called meme stocks like Gamestop and AMC.

Syfe has since expanded from its home market of Singapore to new Asia-Pacific economies like Australia and Hong Kong. The platform continues to grow both its userbase and company revenue, and the company claimed it reached profitability in Q4 2025. It’s now a “self-sustaining organization,” Arora says. 

Syfe closed an $80 million Series C funding round last year, and is backed by major investors like NYC-based Valar Ventures and UK-based investment firm Unbound.

The platform’s users generated $2 billion worth of returns while saving $80 million in fees last year, according to the company. 

Currently, Arora wants to deepen Syfe’s presence in its existing markets. Last year, the platform began to roll out bespoke offerings for its users, like private credit for accredited investors looking to diversify their portfolios on Syfe. Syfe will launch options trading in 2026.

Arora notes that many of Syfe’s users, over time, have grown more comfortable with taking larger investment risks, moving from putting their money in Syfe-managed portfolios, to more actively trading on brokerages and income portfolios.

Yet he eventually wants to bring Syfe to new markets in North Asia and the Middle East, which boast sizable populations of what Arora terms the “mass affluent,” a population with significant investable assets and higher-than-average incomes, though still not in the high-net-worth category. 

“This demographic has historically been ‘stuck in the middle’: too large for basic retail banking, yet often underserved by traditional private banks,” he explains.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Lawmakers and victims criticize new limits on Grok’s AI image as ‘insulting’ and ‘not effective’

Published

on



Elon Musk’s xAI has restricted its AI chatbot Grok’s image generation capabilities to paying subscribers only, following widespread condemnation over its use to create non-consensual sexualized images of real women and children.

“Image generation and editing are currently limited to paying subscribers,” Grok announced via X on Friday. The restriction means the vast majority of users can no longer access the feature. Paying, verified subscribers with credit card details on file can still do so, but theoretically they can be identified more easily if the function is misused.

However, experts, regulators, and victims say that the new restrictions aren’t a solution to the now widespread problem.

“The argument that providing user details and payment methods will help identify perpetrators also isn’t convincing, given how easy it is to provide false info and use temporary payment methods,” Henry Ajder, a UK-based deepfakes expert, told Fortune. “The logic here is also reactive: it is supposed to help identify offenders after content has been generated, but it doesn’t represent any alignment or meaningful limitations to the model itself.”

The UK government has called the move “insulting” to victims, in remarks reported by the BBC. The UK’s prime minister’s spokesperson told reporters on Friday that the change “simply turns an AI feature that allows the creation of unlawful images into a premium service.

“It is time for X to grip this issue; if another media company had billboards in town centers showing unlawful images, it would act immediately to take them down or face public backlash,” they said.

A representative for X said they were “looking into” the new restrictions. xAI responded with the automated message: “Legacy Media Lies.”

Over the past week real women have been targeted at scale with users manipulating photos to remove clothing, place subjects in bikinis, or position them in sexually explicit scenarios without their consent. Some victims reported feeling violated and disturbed by the trend, with many saying their reports to X went unanswered and images remained live on the platform.

Researchers said the scale at which Grok was producing and sharing images was unprecedented as, unlike other AI bots, Grok essentially has a built-in distribution system in the X platform. 

One researcher, whose analysis was published by Bloomberg, estimated that X has become the most prolific site for deepfakes over the last week. Genevieve Oh, a social media and deepfake researcher who conducted a 24-hour analysis of images the @Grok account posted to X, found that the chatbot was producing roughly 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudifying images per hour. By comparison, the five other leading websites for sexualized deepfakes averaged 79 new AI undressing images hourly during the same period. Oh’s research also found that sexualized content dominated Grok’s output, accounting for 85% of all images the chatbot generated.

Ashley St. Clair, a conservative commentator and mother of one of Musk’s children, was among those affected by the images. St. Clair told Fortune that users were turning images on her X profile into explicit AI-generated photos of her, including some she said depicted her as a minor. After speaking out against the images and raising concerns about deepfakes on minors, St Clair also said X took away her verified, paying subscribers status without notifying her or refunding her for the $8 per month fee.

“Restricting it to the paid-only user shows that they’re going to double down on this, placing an undue burden on the victims to report to law enforcement and law enforcement to use their resources to track these people down,” Ashley St Clair said of the recent restrictions. “It’s also a money grab.”

St Clair told Fortune that many of the accounts targeting her were already verified users: “It’s not effective at all,” she said. “This is just in anticipation of more law enforcement inquiries regarding Grok image generation.”

Regulatory pressure

The move to limit Grok’s capabilities comes amid mounting pressure from regulators worldwide. In the U.K., Prime Minister Keir Starmer has indicated he is open to banning the platform entirely, describing the content as “disgraceful” and “disgusting.” Regulators in India, Malaysia, and France have also launched investigations or probes.

The European Commission on Thursday ordered X to preserve all internal documents and data related to Grok, stepping up its investigation into the platform’s content moderation practices after describing the spread of nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfakes as “illegal,” “appalling,” and “disgusting.”

Experts say the new restrictions may not satisfy regulators’ concerns: “This approach is a blunt instrument that doesn’t address the root of the problem with Grok’s alignment and likely won’t cut it with regulators,” Ajder said. “Limiting functionality to paying users will not stop the generation of this content; a month’s subscription is not a robust solution.”

In the U.S., the situation is also likely to test existing laws, like Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online providers from liability for content created by users. U.S. Senators Ron Wyden, Edward J. Markey, and Ben Ray Luján have issued a statement urging Apple and Google to “immediately remove the X and Grok apps from their app stores” following Grok’s alleged use for generating “nonconsensual sexualized images of women and children at scale.” The lawmakers called the images “disturbing and likely illegal,” and said the apps should remain unavailable until Musk addresses the concerns.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has also called for Grok to be blocked from generating “sexually explicit images of children and women, including prominent Muslim women.”

Riana Pfefferkorn of Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence previously told Fortune that liability surrounding AI-generated images is murky. “We have this situation where for the first time, it is the platform itself that is at scale generating non-consensual pornography of adults and minors alike,” she said. “From a liability perspective as well as a PR perspective, the CSAM laws pose the biggest potential liability risk here.”

Musk has previously stated that “anyone using Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.” However, it remains unclear how accounts will be held accountable.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.