Senator Ron Johnson Resists G.O.P. Megabill, Warning It Will Swell Debt
President Trump had some blunt advice for Senator Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin Republican who had been publicly excoriating his signature tax and spending bill as a deficit-driving debacle, at a tense White House meeting this month.
Be nice, the president told the businessman-turned-ultraconservative politician.
Mr. Johnson immediately toned down his vocal drumbeat of criticism against the plan. But he still looms as a significant obstacle to the sweeping domestic policy bill that Senate Republicans hope to push through next week. Not only does he declare himself adamantly opposed to the current version, he is simultaneously undercutting the party's message that the legislation will not pile on to federal deficits.
He is, however, trying to be nicer about it.
'I'm a pretty flexible, reasonable guy,' the sometimes disputatious, three-term Republican referred to on Capitol Hill as 'RonJohn' told reporters on Wednesday, drawing scoffs of disbelief. 'I am!'
Mr. Johnson put his accounting background to work in a dense, 30-page report he released this week that rejects claims by the administration and Republican leaders that the combination of continued tax cuts, spending reductions in the range of $1.5 trillion over 10 years and new policies will spur growth to offset lost tax revenue. Under almost any scenario, his report says, deficits will continue to soar above $2 trillion per year, for a cumulative $20 trillion or more over the 10-year life span of the bill.
That is in line with — though substantially more favorable than — estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and fiscal research groups that have found that the costs of the bill would swamp any growth it could create.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Tariffs Trigger Layoffs: Monopoly Maker Hasbro Slashes Jobs — These Companies Are Cutting Too
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. Monopoly maker Hasbro Inc. (NASDAQ:HAS) announced that it has cut 3% of jobs amid higher tariffs on imports from China. Here's a list of five other publicly traded companies that have either reduced their workforce or intend to do so due to the impact of tariffs. What Happened: After announcing 900 job cuts in December 2023, the Hasbro management told Reuters that it laid off 150 employees or 3% of its workforce in its latest cost-cutting effort on June 18, 2025. According to its fiscal 2024 annual filing, the company had roughly 4,985 employees globally. The company CEO, Chris Cocks had hinted the same during the first quarter earnings call stating that 'Ultimately, tariffs translate into higher consumer prices, potential job losses as we adjust to absorb increased costs, and reduced profits for our shareholders.' Trending: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — He had also said during the same call that the expanded rate on imports from China 'is creating volatility and introducing a range of scenarios for how the year could unfold.' Apart from Hasbro, other firms that have reduced their workforce due to tariffs include; Stellantis NV (NYSE:STLA): The automaker announced temporary layoffs of 900 workers across five U.S. facilities due to production pauses at its Canadian and Mexican plants, directly linked to tariffs announced in April 2025. Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (NYSE:CLF): The steelmaker laid off 1,230 workers, with 600 job cuts at its Dearborn, Michigan, plant and 630 at two iron ore mines in Minnesota, citing falling automotive demand due to tariffs on steel and auto imports. United Parcel Service Inc. (NYSE:UPS): UPS announced expected layoffs of approximately 20,000 workers in 2025, citing "current macro-economic uncertainty" and reduced shipping volumes due to tariffs. Volvo ADR (OTC:VLVL): The company plans to lay off 550–800 workers at three U.S. facilities over three months, citing market uncertainty and reduced demand due to tariffs. Deere & Co. (NYSE:DE): The tractor manufacturer laid off 9 workers at its Ankeny, Iowa, facility, as per a Nation of Change report. The company expressed concerns about the impact of tariffs on production It Matters: President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs are on pause till July 9 while the administration is trying to strike deals with its trading partners. Trump declared a sweeping new trade agreement with China via Truth Social following two days of negotiations in London last week, suggesting major concessions from Beijing and lighter U.S. obligations. "Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China," Trump said, adding that the U.S. would reciprocate by allowing Chinese students access to U.S. colleges. The deal includes a significant tariff shift. The U.S. will continue applying tariffs totaling 55% on selected Chinese imports, while China will impose a 10% tariff rate on U.S. goods. Read Next: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: Schedule your free call with a financial advisor to start your financial journey – no cost, no obligation. Arrived Home's Private Credit Fund's has historically paid an annualized dividend yield of 8.1%*, which provides access to a pool of short-term loans backed by residential real estate with just a $100 minimum. Photo courtesy: Kobby Dagan / This article Trump's Tariffs Trigger Layoffs: Monopoly Maker Hasbro Slashes Jobs — These Companies Are Cutting Too originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Labour policy ‘actively working against job creation', says Currys boss
The boss of one of Britain's biggest electricals retailers has criticised government policy for 'actively working against job creation' amid a raft of tax increases and looming worker rights reforms. Writing in The Telegraph, Alex Baldock, the chief executive of Currys, said Labour risked making it 'harder, riskier and more expensive to hire people' as Angela Rayner prepares to implement the Employment Rights Bill, which is making its way through the House of Lords. Mr Baldock said the retailer had already faced a 13pc overnight increase in the cost of employing part-time workers from Rachel Reeves's £25bn National Insurance raid, while its property tax bill also rose. He said Currys was now facing 'new and counter-productive red tape in the shape of employment law changes'. Mr Baldock added: 'Smart people know that changing your mind in the face of compelling evidence is a sign of strength, not weakness. 'It's not too late for the Government to change its mind on employment law changes that would lead to less employment.' It comes amid growing warnings from bosses that the Government risks derailing its growth ambitions by piling higher taxes and more red tape on businesses. In a recent poll by the Institute of Directors, a quarter of business leaders said the Employment Rights Bill made it likely that they would make redundancies. Under the planned reforms, workers will be entitled to contracts with a minimum number of weekly hours baked in, giving them the same number of hours as they have worked in the recent past. However, retail and hospitality chiefs have called for a rethink of the plans amid concerns that the changes risk stopping them from hiring extra people during crucial trading periods such as Christmas. Bosses have said they cannot afford to offer everyone more shifts all year round when stores are quieter. Mr Baldock said businesses including Currys were 'ready to play our part in getting Britain back to work', adding: 'Enlist us in this cause, don't hammer us.' In a House of Lords debate in April, Lord Wolfson, the boss of Next, said the employment rights reforms risked making it 'almost impossible for businesses to offer additional voluntary hours to workers' because they could then end up overstaffed at some times of the year. Lord Wolfson said: 'There is a world of difference between tackling potentially abusive zero-hours contracts and eliminating the flexibility that legitimate part-time contracts provide to those who need and want them.' The Government did not immediately respond to requests for comment. However, a spokesman previously said: 'We've consulted extensively with business on our proposals, and we will continue to work closely with employers to ensure new laws work for them while putting money back into the pockets of working people.' By Alex Baldock, the chief executive of Currys The Government talks a lot about growth and jobs, with plenty of warm words and encouragement for growth drivers such as high-tech manufacturing, life sciences and the creative industries. Next week, no doubt, these will be at the heart of theGovernment's new industrial strategy. And more power to such exciting sectors, where the UK enjoys a real competitive edge. Yet the engine room of the British economy lies elsewhere. The likes of retail, leisure and hospitality may be less glamorous. But they employ 6m people – nearly a quarter of the private sector workforce – bringing prosperity and prospects to everycorner of the country. They're no less innovative, either. Retailer productivity is growing at twice the national rate, as we deploy AI and other technology to improve customer service and empower colleagues. And boosting Britain's moribund productivity, as every economist will tell you, is essential for growth. Nor are these retail and hospitality jobs just any jobs. They're great introductions (or re-introductions) to work. Once we've given colleagues this leg up, and as they gain in confidence and experience, we often find they progress rapidly, taking on more hours, moving into management or moving on to other work with our good wishes. My first job as a spotty teenager was in a high street retailer (Waterstones in Newbury, as it happens), and I'm far from alone. Flexible and entry-level as they often are, retail jobs help people break into the world of work. They help those coming back after having children or caring for their elders – and, crucially, to those seeking a way off benefits. It's crucial because of the UK's biggest domestic challenge today: the human and economic crisis of worklessness. The UK now has almost 1m 16-24 year olds not in employment, education or training, out of fully 3m people not in work because of physical or mental ill health. This is much more than pre-pandemic, and much higher than in other countries. These 3m are exactly the people the Government wants to help off welfare and into work. This is the only way to reduce Britain's ballooning benefits bill, and so avoid further adding to an already punishing and growth-sapping tax burden. It's the only way to help millions of people find the fulfilment (and mental health benefits) of work. Research shows that the vast majority of them want to work – they just need the right opportunities and the right support. 'Everyone who can work, should work', says the prime minister. Where better for them to work than retail and hospitality? If not there, where? It's not hard to connect the dots here. The country needs more growth and millions of new jobs. Retail and hospitality are where these are to be found. So, as well as lavishing goodies on the sexy growth industries, surely Government must be looking to help such big, high-employing, high-productivity sectors as retail and hospitality? If only. In fact, government policy is actively working against job creation. Promised business rates 'relief' actually increased many bills. Punitive increases in National Insurance disproportionately hit employers who have many part-time workers. For example, the cost to Currys of employing such workers increased by 13pc overnight. Now, and despite promised deregulation, we face new and counter-productive red tape in the shape of employment law changes. Retailers are busier at some times than others, as Saturday or Christmas, as shoppers will have noticed. So retailers need to flex up and down the number of colleagues on the shopfloor accordingly. That works for colleagues looking for flexible work, for customers to get good service and for retailers to make an honest profit. But the Government's so-called 'guaranteed hours' proposals will force retailers to offer all colleagues the same number of hours as they've worked in the recent past – and pay for hours we don't need. Even successful retailers such as Currys work on fine margins – we make £1.60 profit for every £100 we sell. We simply can't afford to pay for hours we don't need, especially now those hours cost more. The result will be that retailers have to hire fewer people. It's no wonder that the Retail Jobs Alliance expects over 300,000 retail jobs to be lost in the next three years – and those job losses have already started. Thus government policy threatens the viability of the very jobs it sets out to protect, and this when the country desperately needs us to hire more people, not fewer. Where's the joining of dots here? The frustrating part? Nobody doubts the Government's good intentions. There's much to praise in its long-overdue planning reforms and investment in decaying infrastructure, both essential for growth. The Government has shown it can listen to business when presented with reasoned arguments. For example, it withdrew ill-thought-through recycling proposals inherited from the previous government which would have had the perverse impact of reducing recycling. We welcomed that warmly. Smart people know that changing your mind in the face of compelling evidence is a sign of strength, not weakness. It's not too late for the Government to change its mind on employment law changes that would lead to less employment. It's not too late to address the broken business rates system. It's not too late, instead of making it harder, riskier and more expensive to hire people, to do the reverse. We all want more growth and jobs. Businesses like Currys stand ready to play our part in getting Britain back to work. Enlist us in this cause, don't hammer us. We could be doing so much more to help. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 growth stocks I've bought for the ‘AI agent' revolution
As a long-term investor, I tend to focus on big, powerful investment themes. And one theme I'm really excited about today is the emergence of 'AI agents' – software that can perform business tasks autonomously. I believe the investment potential here is enormous. With that in mind, here are three growth stocks I've bought for the agentic AI revolution. My number one play on AI agents today is software company Salesforce (NYSE: CRM). It has a product called Agentforce and it's having a lot of success with it. Indeed, since its launch in October last year, the company has signed over 8,000 customers. Of these, around half are now paying for the service. The main reason I'm bullish here is that Agentforce integrates really well with Salesforce's apps and data services (Data Cloud and Tableau Next). This is important – without the right data, agents are likely to be useless. I'll point out that ServiceNow's agentic AI offering also integrates well with data and apps. So, competition from this firm is a risk. However, I like the risk-reward proposition here at today's share price and valuation. Salesforce trades on a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of just 23. I believe the stock offers value at present and is worth considering. Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) is well known for its generative AI capabilities (it's a part-owner of ChatGPT-owner OpenAI). What a lot of investors don't realise, however, is that this company is also a major player in the agentic AI space. Today, it offers a range of services designed to help developers/organisations build and deploy agents to increase business productivity. For example, Azure AI Foundry Agent Service allows professional developers to build specialised agents to handle complex business tasks. I was buying this growth stock a few months ago when it was near $350. It's now at $480, so doesn't look as attractive as it did back then. That said, I think it's still worth considering for the long term (especially on a 5%-10% pullback). While competition from other cloud computing giants such as Amazon and Alphabet is a risk, I believe this stock has bags of potential. Finally, I think CrowdStrike (NASDAQ: CRWD) could be a major player in the agentic AI revolution. It's one of the world's leading cybersecurity companies. It offers a solution called Charlotte AI, which CEO George Kurtz refers to as the company's agentic security analyst. This is designed to transform threat detection and response by bringing automation and autonomous reasoning to cybersecurity operations. CrowdStrike should also benefit from other companies' rollout of AI agents. Given that they typically have access to massive amounts of data, they are going to significantly increase the surface area of IT that needs to be protected. Now, this stock is the riskiest of the three. That's because it's a much younger company (meaning it's a little more unproven) and doesn't have a lot of profits at this stage. It has also had a huge run this year, rising over 40%. I still believe it's worth considering, but I think investors are better off waiting for a pullback before buying. The post 3 growth stocks I've bought for the 'AI agent' revolution appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool Edward Sheldon has positions in Alphabet, Amazon, CrowdStrike, Microsoft, and Salesforce. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Alphabet, Amazon, CrowdStrike, Microsoft, ServiceNow, and Salesforce. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
