Atlanta's $157 Million Highway Revamp at Risk From Trump Cuts
A $157 million plan to turn an Atlanta highway overpass into a park and provide 3,000 housing units is in jeopardy from President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress, Mayor Andre Dickens said.
The money for the project is part of the Neighborhood Access and Equity Grants Program under the Biden administration, which provided $3 billion to improve US communities affected by divisive infrastructure. But it's now facing repeal as the Senate considers a Trump-backed budget bill that eliminates funding for the program.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
President Trump says he'll set unilateral tariff rates within weeks
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he would send letters to trading partners in the next week or two, outlining unilateral tariff rates. 'We're going to be sending letters out in about a week and a half, two weeks, to countries, telling them what the deal is,' Trump said at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington. 'At a certain point, we're just going to send letters out. And I think you understand that, saying this is the deal, you can take it or leave it,' he added. This would put Trump ahead of his tariff deadline, as the president previously paused so-called 'reciprocal' duties for 90 days until 8 July. The higher rates are set to kick in on the 9th. Trump told reporters at the Kennedy Center that a delay to the deadline is unlikely, although US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent previously suggested there may be some flexibility. "It is highly likely that those countries - or trading blocs as is the case with the EU - who are negotiating in good faith, we will roll the date forward to continue the good-faith negotiations," Bessent told the House Ways and Means Committee. "If someone is not negotiating, then we will not." Related EU targets Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' over tax provision in tariff talks US federal appeals court rules Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals process continues The US has thus far only managed to secure a trade framework with the UK, as well as clinching a tariff deal with China. Trump was nonetheless upbeat about negotiations on Wednesday. "We're rocking in terms of deals," he said. "We're dealing with quite a few countries and they all want to make a deal with us." Following talks in London, Trump said on Wednesday that magnets and rare earths would be supplied up front by China and that the US would allow Chinese students into its colleges and universities. The president added that a 55% tariff would be applied to Chinese imports. A White House official, who was not authorised to discuss the terms publicly, said the 55% was not an increase on the previous 30% tariff on China because Trump was including other pre-existing import taxes. Specifically, the president was tallying up his 10% baseline tariff, the 20% fentanyl trafficking levy and a 25% pre-existing tariff on China. In May, the US agreed upon a trade framework with the UK, which allows US goods to be fast-tracked through customs and reduces trade barriers on a number of products. The framework lowers US duties on British steel, aluminum and cars, although there are some knots to work out, meaning the specifics of the deal could arrive later than the 9 July deadline. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Wednesday that a deal with the European Union will likely be among the final trade agreements concluded by the United States. 'I'm optimistic that we can get there with Europe. But Europe will be probably [at] the very, very end,' Lutnick told CNBC. In May, Trump threatened a 50% tariff on EU goods coming to the US, although he later said he would hold off on this threat until 9 July. The president originally placed a 20% so-called 'reciprocal' levy on EU goods, but this duty was lifted during the 90-day pause window. Sign in to access your portfolio
Wall Street Journal
15 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Oil Futures Diverge on U.S. Holiday Price Lag, Contract Expiration
Oil prices were mixed in European afternoon trade on Friday, with Brent crude down more than 2% to around $77 a barrel and West Texas Intermediate edging 0.7% higher to $74 a barrel. Brent futures fell after President Trump set a two-week deadline to decide whether the U.S. will strike Iran, easing fears of an imminent military intervention. The international oil benchmark had settled 2.8% higher on Thursday at $78.85, its highest close since January.
Fast Company
15 minutes ago
- Fast Company
The hidden cost of RTO: Why forcing choice is detrimental to your business
Like most CEOs, I've been watching the return-to-office (RTO) trend closely. It's yet another wrinkle for the talent acquisition function, which is difficult to begin with. After all, the quest to hire and retain qualified talent is discussed at every board meeting, every leadership team offsite, and every yearly planning event. Entire books, magazines, podcasts, and conferences focus on this topic. Whether called a talent gap, the war for talent, or skills-based hiring, the essence remains the same: It's a struggle for every organization. So, why have I been struck by the most recent exodus back to offices? Because when you force choices, the results don't always land in your favor. Don't get me wrong—here at Employ, we have a great headquarters facility in Denver. Employees enjoy coming to work and collaborating in person. But there's a line between RTO as a productivity gain and it being the reason you lose qualified talent. According to 2025 research by Lightcast, remote job postings are down over 27%, hybrid postings are down 20%, and in-person postings are up over 17%. At the same time, companies that have publicly committed to a five-day in-office workweek are losing talent to employers supporting remote and hybrid working arrangements. It's a double-edged sword. The cost of an open role has direct financial implications on an organization, as well as less apparent indirect consequences. Estimates place the average cost of replacing an employee to be six to nine months of their salary. Other financial costs range from the expense of recruiting qualified candidates to onboarding and training. If temporary workers are needed to backfill open roles, the financial loss escalates. And the longer roles go unfilled, business objectives are derailed and productivity falters. Unfilled positions wreak havoc on the existing workforce. Critical projects might be delayed, and workforce planning questioned. Employee morale and engagement stand to decline, especially if employees are overworked. When the topic of it being time to hire qualified talent becomes water-cooler conversation, rest assured that unfilled roles are being noticed. YOUR CURRENT (AND FUTURE) EMPLOYEES EXPECT YOUR TRUST Clearly, some jobs cannot be done remotely. A job candidate applying as a labor and delivery nurse knows they will work onsite in a hospital setting. A hospitality worker seeking flexible hours at a quick-serve restaurant understands it's in person. The job location is well defined in the job description, and the candidate chooses to work on site. For other roles, workplace flexibility isn't an optional perk—it's brand equity. Forcing a one-size-fits-all policy not only damages internal trust but dilutes the company's external talent brand, which is particularly damaging in an already tight labor market. In the case of roles that do not require an in-office presence, pressuring a return to an office can have cataclysmic effects. When teams have operated remotely with success, especially when a robust employment brand has been built on a work-from-anywhere culture, confidence in leadership erodes when a change is decreed versus suggested. The move from remote or hybrid working arrangements to return to office is perceived punitively. Researchers at Gartner have observed that high-performing employees react to a return-to-office mandate as a trust issue, resulting in a 16% lower intent to stay. 'High-performing employees are more easily able to pursue opportunities at organizations that offer hybrid or fully remote policies,' said Caitlin Duffy, a director in the Gartner HR Practice. 'Losing high performers to attrition costs organizations in terms of productivity, difficulty in backfilling the role, and the overall loss of high-quality talent available to fill critical positions.' THE REALITY OF THE WORKPLACE Speaking of losing valuable talent, the return-to-office mandate can be a deal-breaker for those balancing childcare, eldercare, or other requirements with their career. In many cases, this falls on women in the workplace; however, it can affect any worker at some stage in their career journey. Upwork's research said that nearly two-thirds (63%) of C-suite leaders whose companies have mandated an office return of some sort say the policy has led a disproportionate number of women to quit. Gartner's research also showed women's intent to stay at 11% lower with strict RTO mandates. It's a fact that retaining an employee is less costly and disruptive than losing them. Having flexible working policies can help counterbalance care responsibilities and ensure that valuable skills remain in the workforce. QUALITY OF LIFE, QUALITY OF HIRE Apart from those roles where being in person is required, hard-and-fast rules about returning to the office make it harder to recruit. From a technology standpoint, talent leaders are continually seeking to source new candidates and drive efficiencies in their hiring systems, such as using AI-powered interview intelligence to speed up time to hire. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, labor force participation is off by two million people from the February 2020 levels, impacting industries in every state. And, if you compel people to choose between their family and their career, the former will win every time. To be an employer of choice, offer choice. If you can't offer remote and hybrid work arrangements, offer flexibility. It will be the difference between engaged employees and those planning to leave.
