Connect with us

Business

U.S. soybean farmers demand trade deal after Argentina moves: ‘The frustration is overwhelming’

Published

on



President Donald Trump counts U.S. farmers as one of his most loyal constituencies, but the administration’s recent move to expand economic support for Argentina has drawn the ire of the agriculture industry.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on social media on Wednesday that he and Trump spoke at length with Argentina president Javier Milei about plants to financially support Argentina to assist in its stabilization. The Treasury is negotiating with Argentina for a $20 billion swap line with Argentina’s central bank, Bessent said on X.com. As part of its effort to increase the flow of capital, Argentina also suspended its export taxes this week, including on soybeans.

Amid the negotiations with the U.S., Argentina reportedly strengthened its trade partnership with China, whch ordered at least 10 cargoes of soybeans from the South American country, according to Reuters, which cited multiple traders.

The moves have dealt a blow to soybean farmers in the U.S., who are strongly dependent on exports to China, and have continued to be priced out of the global market due to tariffs hiking the cost of their crop in the midst of its busy harvest season.

“The frustration is overwhelming,” the American Soybean Association (ASA) President Caleb Ragland said in a statement on Wednesday. “U.S. soybean prices are falling, harvest is underway, and farmers read headlines not about securing a trade agreement with China, but that the U.S. government is extending $200 billion in economic support to Argentina while that country drops its soybean export taxes to sell 20 shiploads of Argentine soybeans to China in just two days.”

“The farm economy is suffering while our competitors supplant the United States in the biggest soybean import market in the world,” it concluded.

Soybeans accounted for nearly 20% of the U.S.’s cash crop receipts in 2024, raking in $46.8 billion, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. About one quarter of all soybean exports from the U.S. go to China, but retaliatory tariffs from China as a result of the ongoing trade war—which have reached 34%—have hobbled U.S. farmers, while South American countries like Brazil and Argentina have racked up market share. As of 2024, Brazil made up 71% of the Chinese soybean imports, according to the ASA, up from 2% three decades ago.

For the farmers, the changing market share dynamics isn’t personal, it’s just business, according to Ryan Loy, assistant professor and extension economist for the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture. 

“There’s a lot of politics involved, but at the end of the day, it’s a function of who is cheaper on the market,” Loy told Fortune.

Economic impact on rural America

This market squeeze has an outsized impact on rural communities, where farming can make up 20% of a county’s employment. As global demand for U.S. soybeans waver, so, too, do profits for farmers. 

In parts of the Midwest like North and South Dakota and Minnesota, the majority of soybeans get routed to ports in the Pacific Northwest to be shipped overseas. But with fewer shipments of soybeans being exported, supply is piling up, driving down the cost of soybeans. Since its 2022 peak, soybean prices have fallen about 40%.  

While some soybeans can go to crushing facilities to be repurposed as oil or used in ethanol, many soybean farms aren’t located near plants able to process and use the crop domestically, Kyle Jore, an economist and farmer in Thief River Falls in northwest Minnesota and secretary of the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, said even if a trade with with China were to be made today, transportation bookings to take the crop out of state are full because of the busy corn harvest. 

“We’re probably just going to plan to sit on the soybeans and wait,” Jore said.

Many farmers trying to cut their losses will sell their soybeans to agricultural co-ops who will buy the crops, but at a much lower price than market rate.

“In the meantime, though, the producers that sell are taking large losses,” Jore said. “And they’re going to have to feel those losses.”

Extension economist Loy warned of the “ripple effects” of strained farmers on rural America.

“If farms in those rural communities aren’t successful, if they face financial hardships, then those rural communities also suffer, too,” Loy said. “All of these rural communities rely on agriculture to some degree. In its most extreme, if farms close up and businesses no longer have the customers there—or at least the customers don’t have the money to support them—businesses close and people move out.”

Aftershocks from the 2018 trade war

Jore called this feeling of concern for the wellbeing of the agricultural economy “deja vu.” 

During Trump’s first administration, U.S. farmers lost $27 billion in agricultural exports between mid-2018 and 2019 as a result of a trade war with China, according to a 2022 report from the USDA. During that same period, the U.S. market share of Chinese soybean imports plummeted to a 30-year low of 19%, the ASA reported. Brazil’s market share reached its peach of 75%. Years later, U.S. soybean farmers have yet to fully recover, Todd Main, the director of market development at the Illinois Soybean Association, told Fortune.

“The takeaway that we have from the data of the last time we did this is that the U.S. lost about 20% of our market share, and it never came back,” Main said.

While some soybean producers have been able to make up revenues through different export markets like the European Union (which generates only $2.45 billion in U.S. export revenues compared to China’s $12.64 billion, per the USDA), the big difference between Trump’s first trade war versus this one is the price of tools and equipment—in part due to the steep tariffs. according to August data from the North Dakota State University Agricultural Trade Monitor, self-propelled machines like tractors have been hit with a more than 15% tariff rate. Tariffs on herbicides and some pesticides have propelled prices up 25%, partially because of trade disputes with Canada.

“Even though in 2018 we were seeing similar revenues, this time around, we have significantly higher [input], so our margins are much more negative,” Jore said.

What comes next?

Soybean producers have gotten creative to try to build a profitable infrastructure outside of exports to China. The Illinois Soybean Association created the Soy Innovation Center to develop sustainable uses for processed soy, such as oil, that can be used domestically. 

The White House, for its part, has floated developing an agricultural subsidy program using revenue from tariffs, according to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. The first Trump administration provided farmers with a $28 billion bailout. But while the aid was able to nearly completely replace lost revenues, making up for lost global market share is a slower—and not guaranteed—recovery. A similar bailout today would yield similar results, Wendong Zhang, an associate professor of applied economics and policy at Cornell University’s SC Johnson School of Business, told Fortune.

“It will compensate for the immediate economic losses due to tariffs, but it doesn’t necessarily improve the long-term competitiveness of agriculture on the global stage,” Zhang said.

Farmers aren’t banking on a bailout, either. They’re looking for a trade deal—or at least stable enough ground to grow their businesses, Illinois Soybean Association’s Main said.

“We can grow anything. What we really want is good relations with our trading partners,” he said. “We want markets. We don’t want bailouts.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Jensen Huang says AI bubble fears are dwarfed by ‘largest infrastructure buildout in human history’

Published

on



Pushing back against growing skepticism regarding the sustainability of artificial intelligence spending, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang argued against the mountain backdrop of Davos, Switzerland, that high capital expenditures are not a sign of a financial bubble, but rather evidence of “the largest infrastructure buildout in human history.”

Speaking in conversation with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, the interim co-chair of the World Economic Forum, Huang detailed an industrial transformation that extends far beyond software code, reshaping global labor markets and driving unprecedented demand for skilled tradespeople. While much of the public debate focuses on the potential for AI to replace white-collar jobs, Huang pointed to an immediate boom in blue-collar employment required to physically construct the new computing economy.

“It’s wonderful that the jobs are related to tradecraft, and we’re going to have plumbers and electricians and construction and steel workers,” Huang said. He noted the urgency to erect “AI factories,” chip plants, and data centers has radically altered the wage landscape for manual labor. “Salaries have gone up, nearly doubled, and so we’re talking about six-figure salaries for people who are building chip factories or computer factories,” Huang said, emphasizing the industry is currently facing a “great shortage” of these workers.

Ford CEO Jim Farley has been warning for months about the labor shortage in what he calls the “essential economy,” exactly the type of jobs mentioned by Huang in Davos. Earlier this month, Farley told Fortune these 95 million jobs are the “backbone of our country,” and he was partnering with local retailer Carhartt to boost workforce development, community building, and “the tools required by the men and women who keep the American Dream alive.” 

It’s time we all reinvest in the people who make our world work with their hands,” Farley said.

In October, at Ford’s Pro Accelerate conference, Farley shared that his own son was wrestling with whether to go to college or pursue a career in the trades. The Ford CEO has estimated the shortage at 600,000 in factories and nearly the same in construction.

Huang dismisses bubble fears

Fink brought up the bubble talk for a good reason: Fear of a popping bubble gripped markets for much of the back half of 2025, with luminaries such as Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, and, just the previous day in Davos, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, warning about the potential for pain. Much of this originated in the underwhelming release of OpenAI’s GPT-5 in August, but also the MIT study that found 95% of generative AI pilots were failing to generate a return on investment. “Permabears” such as Albert Edwards, global strategist at Société Générale, have talked about how there’s likely a bubble brewing—but then again, they always think that.

Huang, whose company became the face of the AI revolution when it blew past $4 trillion in market capitalization (a bar recently reached by Alphabet on the positive release of its Gemini update), tackled these fears in conversation with Fink, arguing the term misdiagnoses the situation. Critics often point to the massive sums being spent by hyperscalers and corporations as unsustainable, but Huang countered the appearance of a bubble happens because “the investments are large … and the investments are large because we have to build the infrastructure necessary for all of the layers of AI above it.”

Huang went deeper on his food metaphor, describing the AI industry as a “five-layer cake” requiring total industrial reinvention, with Nvidia’s chips a particularly crunchy part of the recipe. The bottom layer is energy, followed by chips, cloud infrastructure, and models, with applications sitting at the top. The current wave of spending is focused on the foundational layers—energy and chips—which creates tangible assets rather than speculative vapor. Far from a bubble, he described a new industry being built from the ground up.

“There are trillions of dollars of infrastructure that needs to be built out,” Huang said, noting that the world is currently only “a few 100 billion dollars into it.”

To prove the market is driven by real demand rather than speculation, Huang offered a practical “test” for the bubble theory: the rental price of computing power as seen in the price of Nvidia’s GPU chips.

“If you try to rent an Nvidia GPU these days, it’s so incredibly hard, and the spot price of GPU rentals is going up, not just the latest generation, but two-generation-old GPUs,” he said. This scarcity indicates established companies are shifting their research and development budgets—such as pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly moving funds from wet labs to AI supercomputing—rather than simply burning venture capital.

Beyond construction and infrastructure, Huang addressed the broader anxiety regarding AI’s impact on human employment. He argued AI ultimately changes the “task” of a job rather than eliminating the “purpose” of the job. Citing radiology as an example, he noted that despite AI diffusing into every aspect of the field over the last decade, the number of radiologists has actually increased. Because AI handles the task of studying scans infinitely faster, doctors can focus on their core purpose: patient diagnosis and care, leading to higher hospital throughput and increased hiring.

Fink reframed the issue, based on Huang’s pushback. “So what I’m hearing is, we’re far from an AI bubble. The question is, are we investing enough?” Fink asked, positing that current spending levels might actually be insufficient to broaden the global economy.

Huang appeared to say: not really. “I think the the opportunity is really quite extraordinary, and everybody ought to get involved. Everybody ought to get engaged. We need more energy,” he said, adding the industry needs more land, power, trade, scale and workers. Huang said the U.S. has lost its workforce population in many ways over the last 20-30 years, “but it’s still incredibly strong,” and in Europe, pointing around him in Switzerland, he saw “an extraordinary opportunity to take advantage of.” He noted 2025 was the largest investment year in venture capital history, with $100 billion invested around the world, mostly on AI natives.”

Huang concluded by emphasizing this infrastructure buildout is global, urging developing nations and Europe to engage in “sovereign AI” by building their own domestic infrastructure. For Europe specifically, he highlighted a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to leverage its strong industrial base to lead in “physical AI” and robotics, effectively merging the new digital intelligence with traditional manufacturing. Far from a bubble, he seemed to be saying, this is just the beginning.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Nearly 400 millionaires and billionaires are demanding Davos leaders to tax them more: ‘Tax us. Tax the super rich.’

Published

on



While the wealthiest business leaders from U.S. president Donald Trump to Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang touch down in the Swiss town of Davos to discuss the state of the world, a cohort of the ultra-rich are already sounding the alarm. Hundreds of millionaires and billionaires released an open letter in time for the World Economic Forum, calling on leaders attending the conference to fight raging wealth inequality with taxes. 

“Millionaires like us refuse to be silent. It is time to be counted. Tax us and make sure the next fifty years meet the promise of progress for everyone,” the letter stated

“Extreme wealth has led to extreme control for those who gamble with our safe future for their obscene gains. Now is the time to end that control and win back our future.”

So far, nearly 400 millionaires and billionaires across 24 countries have signed the letter condemning extreme wealth, including the likes of Hollywood actor Mark Ruffalo, Disney heirs Abby and Tim Disney, and real estate developer Jeffrey Gural.

The open letter is part of a “Time to Win” campaign, led by wealth redistribution organizations including Patriotic Millionaires, Millionaires for Humanity, and Oxfam. It criticized global oligarchs with riches who have “bought up” democracies, exacerbated poverty, stifled tech innovation, dampened press freedom, and overall, “accelerated the breakdown of our planet.” After all, 77% of millionaires from G20 nations think extremely wealthy individuals buy political influence, and 71% believe those with riches can significantly influence elections, according to a poll conducted for Patriotic Millionaires.

The Time to Win wealthy signatories offer a simple solution: “Tax us. Tax the super rich.”

“As millionaires who stand shoulder to shoulder with all people, we demand it,” the open letter continued. “And as our elected representatives—whether it’s those of you at Davos, local councillors, city mayors, or regional leaders—it’s your duty to deliver it.

Stars and billionaires are calling out the super-rich for being ungenerous 

As the world mints hundreds of thousands of millionaires yearly and billionaire wealth soars to record highs, some leaders can’t stand to stay quiet. Celebrities and the ultra-rich haven’t just sent a message to money-hoarders with the Time to Win letter—some have even called out billionaires in person, questioning their existence. 

“If you’re a billionaire, why are you a billionaire? No hate, but yeah, give your money away, shorties,” Eilish said onstage last year at the WSJ Magazine Innovator Awards with Meta mogul Mark Zuckerberg, worth $214 billion, in attendance. 

Even the most philanthropic members of the ultra-rich club are wary of their peers’ lack of charity. Billionaires have started their own initiatives like Warren Buffett, Melinda French Gates, and Bill Gates’ The Giving Pledge, which attracted more than 250 billionaires who pledged to donate at least half of their wealth during their lifetimes, or in their wills. But efforts have largely fallen short. Last year, French Gates admitted that the signatories haven’t given enough; And in a letter to shareholders, Buffett fessed up to the fact that billionaires aren’t following through. 

“Early on, I contemplated various grand philanthropic plans. Though I was stubborn, these did not prove feasible,” Buffett wrote. “During my many years, I’ve also watched ill-conceived wealth transfers by political hacks, dynastic choices, and, yes, inept or quirky philanthropists.”

Billionaire and millionaire wealth is on the rise 

There’s more people rolling in riches than ever before, and it’s fueling an equity crisis at the bottom of the economic ladder. 

In 2024 alone, the U.S. minted 379,000 new millionaires—over 1,000 millionaires every day—as the proportion of Americans in the ultrawealthy club swelled by 1.5%, according to a 2025 report from investment bank UBS. This cohort held about $107 trillion in total wealth at the end of that year: more than four times the amount they owned at the turn of the millennium. 

In 2000, there were only 13.27 million everyday millionaires, but by the end of 2024, the group swelled to 52 million people worldwide. 

While it might appear that eye-watering riches are spreading out to a larger number of individuals, it’s mainly concentrating at the top. America’s top 20% household earners—averaging a net worth of $4.3 million—accounted for about 71% of the U.S.’s total wealth at the end of 2024, according to 2025 data from the Federal Reserve. 

Meanwhile, the bottom half of American households, averaging about $60,000 in wealth, owned just 2.5% of the country’s wealth. For the vast majority of U.S. citizens, joining the millionaire club—and even more so, the billionaire club—is a total pipe dream.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump fast tracks ‘three-week’ nuclear approval for big tech to fuel AI race

Published

on



President Donald Trump offered Silicon Valley an extraordinary deal on Wednesday: Build your own nuclear power plants to fuel AI, and his administration will approve them in just three weeks.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump addressed a room of tech executives struggling with an aging U.S. electrical grid.

“I came up with the idea,” Trump said. “You people are brilliant. You have a lot of money. You can build your own electric generating plants.”

Trump talked for about 10 minutes about energy in his speech, making it clear Trump views a straining electric grid as a central economic risk of 2026. As artificial intelligence pushes electricity demand to record highs, the administration is framing power shortages as an existential threat to growth and national security. Slashing approval timelines, Trump argued, is a necessary response to an energy system he said he believes is fundamentally unprepared for the AI era.

“We needed more than double the energy currently in the country just to take care of the AI plants,” Trump said. 

The proposal marks a radical departure from the traditional Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) process, which historically requires four to five years for environmental and design approvals as well as rigorous site selection. Trump claimed that while tech leaders initially “didn’t believe him,” he assured them the government would deliver approvals for oil and gas plants in just two weeks, with nuclear projects following in three.

Trump said he wasn’t “a big fan” of nuclear power before, but now sees it as a newly viable solution due to safety improvements. 

“The progress they’ve made with nuclear is unbelievable,” he said. “We’re very much into the world of nuclear energy, and we can have it now at good prices and very, very safe.” 

While the potential upcoming wave of small modular nuclear reactors (SMR) could receive regulatory approvals in less than two years, there is little basis for going through an approval process with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in closer to three weeks, and such an expedited process would trigger widespread concerns about safety and environmental risks.

Trump also touted a new energy alliance with Venezuela, noting the U.S. secured 50 million barrels of oil last week following the “end of an attack” on the nation that led to the deposition of President Nicolás Maduro. He said the new cooperation between the two nations would make Venezuela “fantastically well” while driving U.S. gasoline prices toward $2.00 a gallon.

Gasoline prices are the main inflationary measure by which costs have fallen during the first year of the new Trump administration. But they’re nowhere close to $2.00 per gallon. The national average for a gallon of regular unleaded is $2.76 per gallon this week, down 32 cents from a year ago, primarily because of rising OPEC oil production.

But Trump drew a sharp contrast with Europe’s energy landscape. Trump mocked the “Green New Scam,” citing a 64% spike in German electricity prices and the “catastrophic” decline of energy production in the United Kingdom. He targeted the North Sea and the proliferation of wind farms, which he labeled “losers” that “kill the birds.”

“Stupid people buy” wind farms, Trump laughed.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.