5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Economy
‘This Is Evil’: Critics Hammer Google Plan to Shut Off Search Access for Schools That Reject Its AI
"This highlights the danger of allowing an unregulated monopolist to control an essential service," said former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan.
Nov 03, 2026
Tech giant Alphabet, the parent company of Google, is telling US schools that there's a price to be paid for restricting student access to its artificial intelligence tools.
The New York Times reported on Tuesday that, starting early next year, schools that fully disable the company's AI will also lose access to its search engine, which is by far the most used internet search tool in the world.
Chris Phillips, vice president for education at Google, justified the policy by claiming that "Search and AI are deeply integrated," adding that students attending schools where AI is banned "will not have access to Search, and they’ll see a message from their school that indicates it’s not available."
As the Times noted, Google has deeply integrated itself into US classrooms, many of which rely on its Classroom assignment platform and equip students with low-cost Chromebook laptops.
"The company’s new strategy underscores Google’s powerful role in American education," the Times explained. "If school leaders want continued student access to Search within the company’s ecosystem, they will be forced to embrace Google's AI."
Schools around the US have been banning the use of AI for young students over concerns that reliance on the technology will hinder the development of critical thinking skills and also enable mass cheating on assignments.
Morgan Polikoff, an education professor at the University of Southern California, told the Times that he expects Google's new policy linking AI and Search will only add more fuel to the backlash against the tech industry.
"This is a particularly clear example of the tech industry going out of its way to force AI on us all," said Polikoff, "even if we have said we don’t want it."
Lina Khan, former chair of the Federal Trade Commission under President Joe Biden, accused Google of "using its search monopoly to coerce schools into adopting AI," and said it was yet another reason why antitrust action should be taken against the company.
"This highlights the danger of allowing an unregulated monopolist to control an essential service," Khan wrote in a social media post. "Multiple courts have found Google liable for violating antitrust laws, and this latest move shows it remains unchastened. As the public increasingly pushes back against the use of AI in schools, Google is making clear it will punish those who don’t fall in line."
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose city earlier this year banned AI in elementary and middle schools, similarly took Google to task for trying to force its products onto students.
"No corporation should have the power to dictate how we teach our children," Mamdani wrote. "Our public schools exist to serve students, not to grow the profit margins of Big Tech."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) used news of Google's new AI school policy to take a shot at President Donald Trump, who has constantly downplayed the need for any regulation of the industry.
"President Trump claimed that AI oligarchs could regulate themselves because they 'love our country,'" Sanders wrote. "Now, Google is threatening schools: If you stop your students from using AI, we will cut off your access to Google Search. That’s not love. That’s extortion."
Cognitive scientist Gary Marcus, a longtime skeptic of the AI industry, responded to Google's move by writing, "This is evil."
Author Kashana Cauley remarked that Google's motto used to be "don't be evil," whereas today its motto appears to be, "We are now holding your kids and their schools hostage."
Cauley added that schools wouldn't be in this position if they hadn't taken up Google's offer to supply low-cost Chromebooks for students.
"The schools shouldn’t be beholden to district-wide Chromebook deals if Google is holding us hostage," she wrote. "We need to get Chromebooks and Google out of the schools."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Naomi Klein and Illana Glaser Have a Message: Tax the Billionaires and Block Big Tech IPOs
"We cannot let the billionaire class take these kinds of risks with our future."
Nov 02, 2026
Progressive author Naomi Klein and comedian Ilana Glazer on Monday warned that America's billionaire class is taking "unprecedented risks with our future," and said US policymakers must block further Big Tech initial public offerings and mergers to prevent even more damage from occurring.
In an op-ed published by The Guardian, Klein and Glazer outlined how US billionaires have used tax loopholes, corporate mergers, and IPOs to enrich themselves at an unprecedented scale, as their wealth has grown by an estimated 40% over just the last two years.
Klein and Glazer argued that the upcoming IPOs of artificial intelligence giants OpenAI and Anthropic could be particularly risky to the economy given questions about their ability to be consistently profitable.
"It’s no secret that the AI companies Anthropic and OpenAI are intending to go public in the near future," they wrote. "Both of these players also had major security flaws exposed recently, and openly acknowledge mind-bogglingly huge amounts of debt."
The risk will only grow, they added, if Nasdaq grants OpenAI and Anthropic the same exception it granted to Elon Musk's SpaceX earlier this year by allowing their shares to be immediately included in index funds without having to wait through the one-year "seasoning" period.
"June’s highly contentious SpaceX IPO already carries great risk for regular investors," they explained. "If more speculative tech companies with staggering risk profiles are allowed to follow suit, the results will become too much for the market to bear."
Klein and Glazer said that policymakers need to intervene to put a halt to new Big Tech IPOs, and also pass a wealth tax to take away billionaires' power to spend cavalierly even as they leave working people potentially holding the bag for their failed investments.
"We cannot let the billionaire class take these kinds of risks with our future," they emphasized. "To stop these reckless IPOs we must stand together, take collective action, and push for real change."
Economist Jeffrey D. Sachs last month similarly called for AI IPOs to be halted until Congress "has enacted a public system of licensing, independent safety evaluation, liability, and financial backstops for frontier AI."
Sachs noted that Anthropic executives and employees, including CEO Dario Amodei, have warned that AI could pose a threat to all human life, and he questioned why the creators of such technology should become unfathomably wealthy before such risks are understood and eliminated.
"A company should not disclose a risk of catastrophe to humanity and then sell its shares to the public before any public authority has the power to evaluate that risk or to stop deployment," argued Sachs. "In fact, to proceed rapidly in the face of such dire warnings is beyond folly."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Not Just Food and Fuel—Inflation Numbers Show 'Worrying Trends' as Midterms Loom
With inflation climbing to 3.6%, "instead of focusing on delivering lower prices, Trump is touting Big Oil's Iran War windfall."
Oct 29, 2026
Less than a week before the US midterm elections in which voters may end Republican control of Congress, the Bureau of Economic Analysis on Thursday released inflation data highlighting the nation's persistent affordability crisis under GOP leaders, including President Donald Trump.
In September, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index rose 3.6% from a year ago, up from 3.4% in August, according to the BEA. Core PCE strips out food and energy prices, the latter of which has soared as Trump has waged an illegal war on Iran. That increased 3.1%, up from 3% the previous month.
The "bottom line," said Navy Federal Credit Union chief economist Heather Long, is that "inflation is back near a three-year high."
"It's largely due to war in Iran, but there's legitimate concern that inflation is spreading beyond energy," the economist explained. Referencing the "core" figure, she noted some "worrying trends."
Long pointed to a "big rise in goods prices" that "is largely driven by Trump's tariffs (big move up since 2025) and now war."
The expert also noted that "service sector inflation is picking up again."
She further observed that "rent prices are no longer improving" and housing inflation is "moving sideways."
The inflation update comes just days after the University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers announced last week that its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 48 this month, nearing the record low of 44.8 from this past May, and Trump celebrated fossil fuel industry profits from his war during a weekend campaign rally in Georgia.
Trump told the crowd he was advised against highlighting how the industry—which helped him get elected two years ago and in which he is significantly invested—is "making hundreds of billions of dollars," given that "people are paying a little higher" for gasoline and diesel.
"I can just see the fake headlines," he said. "President Trump is talking about all the money they're making while people are suffering at the pump. That will be the headline. But I said, I don't give a damn, I'm going to say it: We're making a freaking fortune."
As of Thursday, the national average for a gallon of gasoline was $4.23 and $6.33 for diesel. The Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University estimates US residents have paid at least $81.1 billion more for gas and $65.9 billion for diesel, or a total of $147 billion. That's over $619 per household, for just gas.
Some estimates are even higher. A Monday report from Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee states that US households "have now spent an additional $101 billion on gasoline since the start of the Iran War, or an average of $856 in gas costs per family."
Meanwhile, oil giants Shell and TotalEnergies announced their sizable third-quarter profits on Thursday, and companies such as BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil are expected to follow suit on Friday.
"Inflation remains high, working families are paying $4.23 at the pump, and meager pay raises aren’t keeping up with rising prices," Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, said in a statement.
"Instead of focusing on delivering lower prices, Trump is touting Big Oil's Iran War windfall," Jacquez stressed. "Skyrocketing prices and economic growth largely driven by AI spending do not add up to an economy that works for working families."
Democrats in Congress have seized on cost-of-living concerns ahead of the midterms, including Sen. Ed Markey, who is up for reelection in Massachusetts. He said Thursday that "inflation is up. Margins are tighter."
"Prices are skyrocketing—and small business owners are on the frontlines of Trump's war on Main Street," Markey added. "Small businesses and workers should not have to bear the costs of Trump's reckless economic policies."
This article has been updated to credit the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University for its fuel cost tracker.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'We Cannot Let History Repeat Itself': Progressive US Lawmakers Oppose AI Bailouts
"The House Progressive Caucus is ready for the collapse of the AI bubble. The rest of us should be also," said one economist.
Oct 28, 2026
As a progressive US senator warned Wednesday that Anthropic going public could leave "Americans holding the bag" if the artificial intelligence bubble bursts, The American Prospect revealed that key Democrats in the House of Representatives have crafted a resolution opposing federal bailouts for AI giants like the ones "too-big-to-fail banks" got nearly two decades ago.
The seven-page resolution obtained by Prospect executive editor David Dayen frames the 2008 global financial crisis as a result of "profit-driven financial risk-taking, fueled by Wall Street's speculative fervor and unleashed by years of zealous deregulation," as well as an example of what not to do when it comes to the booming AI sector.
"The economic harm of a multitrillion-dollar housing bubble caused by predatory lending, reckless financialization and securitization, and off-balance-sheet lending led to a massive surge in layoffs, with the unemployment rate hitting almost 10% at the trough of the Great Recession in 2009," the seven-page measure recalls. "The weak labor market persisted for nearly a decade."
Now, AI firms "hold trillions of dollars in debt, much of which is raised in opaque and unregulated private credit markets," the resolution continues. Financing terms of many "data centers as well as the costs and revenues of major artificial intelligence firms are not publicly available and... corporate borrowing to fund data center investments are multiples higher than projected revenues."
AI-related stock prices "have inflated even more than the tech giants of the 1990s," the measure notes, warning that "a collapse of an artificial intelligence bubble could have serious consequences for the economy, similar if not more significant than the end of the 1990s tech bubble or the 2008 global financial crisis."
Thus, it argues, "Congress must refuse to provide any additional funds or exceptional regulatory support to companies or financial institutions facing insolvency or financial collapse due to exposures to acute stress within the artificial intelligence market and must provide support to all harmed Americans instead."
While politicians from both parties have been ripped for their ties to Big Tech and AI specifically, the resolution explicitly calls out related failures under Republican President Donald Trump, who recently gathered industry leaders at the White House to sign a "self-policing" accord that critics said was "as dangerous as it is absurd."
House progressives' measure points out that "federal regulators have avoided applying robust scrutiny and oversight regarding enormously complicated debt and equity schemes used by artificial intelligence firms or the circular financing mechanisms involved" in the AI data center build-out.
Additionally, "the White House's artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency czar was personally invested in at least 449
companies" tied to AI "while pushing to eliminate government obstacles," the resolution says, "reflecting the administration's broad deregulatory focus and conflicts of interest" when it comes to this industry.
The House Progressive Caucus is ready for the collapse of the AI bubble. The rest of us should be also. No bailouts for the AI billionaires prospect.org/2026/10/28/h...
[image or embed]
— Dean Baker (@deanbaker13.bsky.social) October 28, 2026 at 7:53 AM
Though the resolution has not yet been introduced, Dayen reported on it less than a week before the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress for the remainder of Trump's second term. It's spearheaded by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).
"Big Tech and Wall Street are taking enormous risks with billions in borrowed money to fuel the AI boom, despite growing warning signs of a dangerous bubble," Waters told him. "We cannot let history repeat itself. The American people should never again be forced to foot the bill for billionaires' reckless bets."
Casar, a 37-year-old former labor organizer, highlighted that "many of us, myself included, came into political life watching as many people who caused the crisis in 2008 or cheered it on weren't held accountable."
"We know that the American people were appalled at these Wall Street executives nearly two decades ago, and they're even more pissed off at these tech oligarchs today. We shouldn't be trying to make them whole," said the congressman, who also leads the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Polling released this past summer by Data for Progress found that among the "bad actors" Americans blame for the country’s concerning conditions, billionaires rank No. 1, but AI companies and social media giants are in the top 10.
The progressives' proposal "is a nonbinding 'sense of the House' measure," Dayen explained. "But it sets a marker that no bailout funds should be made available to AI companies. Casar wants the measure to be voted on early in the next Congress if Democrats take power, if not sooner, to get everyone on the record about an AI bailout."
Welcoming the resolution on social media, economist Leslie Ehrlich called it "both correct and good politics," adding, "Let the Republicans vote against it and be pro-bailouts."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Ahead of Anthropic IPO, Warren Warns AI Giant Could Leave 'Americans Holding the Bag'
"Anthropic is saying that AI models could pose catastrophic or existential risks to humanity. At the same time, Anthropic is planning the largest IPO in history."
Oct 28, 2026
As the artificial intelligence company Anthropic moves toward a historic initial public offering, the top Democrat on the US Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee sounded the alarm about both public safety and financial concerns in a Tuesday letter to CEO Dario Amodei.
"I write with concern following your company's disclosure that Anthropic's advanced AI models could 'pose catastrophic or existential risks to humanity' at the same time that it seeks to register as a public company and sell shares in November," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
"Anthropic disclosed extensive public safety and financial risks to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as part of its registration process for an initial public offering (IPO)," she noted. "An IPO would provide Anthropic with broader access to the largest capital markets in the world, allowing it to raise more funding from a larger pool of investors to fuel its rapid growth."
"It will also mean that millions of Americans with retirement accounts invested in index funds will quickly become Anthropic shareholders," stressed the former Harvard University bankruptcy professor. "Public pensions are already heavily exposed to Anthropic and have expressed their concerns about Anthropic's societal risks ahead of its IPO."
According to the SEC paperwork, Anthropic plans to list on the Nasdaq under ticker symbol "ANT." Reports have suggested the company—known for its Claude models—could be valued at between $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion. As NPR noted: "That would put it in league with Elon Musk's rocketry and AI company SpaceX, which was valued at around $1.8 trillion when it listed in June."
Warren pointed out to Amodei that "this massive influx of public capital is likely to catapult the development and deployment of your technology during a time of intense public debate and concern about the risks of your frontier intelligence models."
The senator argued that "the risks presented by this technology demand greater scrutiny before they become intertwined with the public capital markets, which could further escalate both public safety and systemic financial risks."
The "growing public safety concerns" section of Warren's letter cites details from the Form S-1 that Anthropic submitted to the SEC, as well as the CEO's public statements "calling for the need to slow down the development of frontier AI models."
"You warned that 'we still only understand a tiny fraction of what goes on inside these models' and highlighted the 'risk of losing control of AI systems, misuse of AI for cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and serious economic disruption,'" she reminded Amodei. "You further warned that a 'race to the bottom, spurred by commercial incentives, can make these risks more acute.'"
"It is also difficult to trust existing safety tests and evaluations of model test environments in the wake of recent incidents in which models built by frontier AI companies, including Anthropic, have broken through security controls and hacked external systems autonomously," the senator emphasized.
Such incidents have intensified AI experts' warnings and spurred calls for government action, leading to a range of legislative proposals, including in the US Congress—the future control of which will be decided in next week's midterm elections.
Warren highlighted that "in addition to the potentially catastrophic safety risks posed by Anthropic's technology, the company's launch into the public markets could inject extreme volatility and risk into the financial system, which threatens to undermine Americans' economic security."
"Anthropic is projected to be the largest IPO in history," she wrote. "Given its unprecedented size, swings in Anthropic's share price have the potential to roil the broader markets on day one, particularly for companies in the technology sector, and even more acutely for megacap companies with direct financial entanglement with Anthropic."
"Beyond the threats to the financial system that Anthropic's IPO may pose, the company's registration statement disclosures include astronomical projections supported by aggressive assumptions that require further review and due diligence," she added, digging into the company's disclosures.
Warren also sent Amodei a detailed list of questions she wants answered by November 3—before the company goes public.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Sanders: Billionaires Fighting Prop 40 Would 'Rather Poor Kids With Cancer Die Than Pay a Little More in Taxes'
The senator noted that "billionaires in California are spending $333 million to wage a war" on the proposed one-time tax.
Oct 27, 2026
As one Golden State tech billionaire suggested he wouldn't move away even if voters passed the California Billionaire Tax Act that he opposes, progressive US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday took aim at the wealthy taxpayers working to defeat Proposition 40.
"Billionaires in California are spending $333 million to wage a war," Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media. "Against what? Homelessness? No. Cancer? No. Child poverty? No. They're waging war against a 5% billionaire wealth tax. They'd rather poor kids with cancer die than pay a little more in taxes. That is obscene."
Sanders, a former Democratic presidential candidate who has campaigned in California for the ballot measure that would impose a one-time 5% tax on the state's billionaires to offset healthcare funding cuts, was citing contributions to Building a Better California, a group created in January.
"Eighty or so donors have provided more than $333 million to Building a Better California, state records show, making it among the best-funded political efforts in California history," The New York Times reported Tuesday. "The donor list is a who's who of tech celebrities: the Google co-founder Sergey Brin; the former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt; the Stripe chief executive Patrick Collison; the legendary investor John Doerr."
Abby Lunardini, a spokesperson for the group, told the Times that "our supporters have created companies, entirely new industries, and hundreds of thousands of jobs here in California, and they want our state to remain the place where the future is built and where people can still afford to live, dream big, and succeed."
Lunardini claimed the wealth tax would "permanently damage the state's budget, tax base, and economy," though dozens of multimillionaire Californians have signed an open letter supporting the one-time wealth tax, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg—one of the richest men in the world—is preparing to potentially pay it, and Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey said Monday that he won't leave the state.
TechCrunch reported on his latest comments, in which Luckey—whose defense company won key US military contracts after he was announced as one of the leaders of a new Pentagon project on the "future of warfare"—made clear that he opposes Prop 40:
"I think that this tax act, if you can call it a tax, is going to cause a lot of problems. It’s causing a lot of people to run who I don’t want to be running. It’s going to cause companies that I work with to leave the state, which is a problem for me. As of right now, though, I’m not running. I am staying. I think California is something special. I want to fight for California," Luckey said during an invite-only press conference on Monday.
He added that he's felt pressure from other billionaires to declare his intention to leave.
"This has been a point of friction between me and some of my other billionaire friends," he said. "They've said things like: 'Palmer, you have to have solidarity for us. You can't enable these really bad policies. If you stay and if you don't leave, it's going to show them that there's no consequences.' I empathize with that argument, but it's not one that I'm going to participate in right now because I still believe that we can fix things."
Luckey has publicly sparred with US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)—who, like Sanders, supports Prop 40. Leading political opponents in the state include term-limited Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who's expected to run for president in 2028, and former US Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat running to replace the governor.
Estimates vary on how much the tax—which would apply to any billionaire residing in the state as of January 1, 2026—could cost the richest Californians, if approved by voters in next week's midterm elections.
Forbes pointed to one of them on Tuesday: "$104 billion. That's how much economists Jasper Boll, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman estimate California's billionaires would owe if Proposition 40 is enacted, according to an analysis by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Saez and Zucman helped draft the tax proposal."
Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review editor and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, noted in a Tuesday column at The Washington Post—owned by Jeff Bezos, another one of the world's richest men—that "a new study by Benjamin Jaros and Joshua Rauh, two economists affiliated with the Hoover Institution, challenges that projection."
After trying to "account for the uncertainty over whether taxes can be collected from other billionaires, such as the ones who have left since the beginning of the year and may thus have a legal case for escaping the tax," Ponnuru summarized, those economists estimated Prop 40 would generate around $30 billion. The columnist also acknowledged that Zucman "has issued a barrage of attacks on that paper."
Specifically, Zucman called it "spectacularly misleading" and explained "its crucial flaw," which is that "they assume that billionaires will leave permanently, frightened by the prospects of an annual wealth tax."
"Let's be clear: This is a highly inappropriate way to model the effect of Prop 40 on taxpayer behavior. For one, it's a basic violation of rational expectations, a cornerstone of modern economics," Zucman said.
In Jaros and Rauh's world, "the billionaires act irrationally: They respond to a policy that does not exist and will never exist," he added. "Economics students around the world are taught this is not an appropriate way to model behavior—but apparently in this context (fighting Prop 40) it's OK."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Doesn't 'Give a Damn' About Iran War Price Hikes—His Oil and Gas Holdings Are Up to $81.6 Million
"Trump's Iran War has forced Americans to pay much more at the pump while Big Oil rakes in profits and the president's own stock wealth in the oil and gas industry continues to balloon."
Oct 26, 2026
After US President Donald Trump spent the weekend reminding midterm campaign rally attendees that he doesn't "give a damn" about soaring gasoline prices from his illegal Iran War, congressional Democrats on Monday released a report showing that his oil and gas stock holdings could now top $80 million.
During a Saturday rally in Georgia, Trump highlighted that due to his war of choice, the US fossil fuel industry is "making hundreds of billions of dollars," and predicted his comments will be turned into "fake headlines," but he added: "I don't give a damn, I'm going to say it: We're making a freaking fortune."
Just how much extra is the public paying at the pump because of the eight-month conflict? As of Monday, the national average was $4.29 a gallon for gasoline and $6.35 for diesel, according to the American Automobile Association.
An online tracker from the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University estimates US residents have paid at least $144.6 billion more for fuel—$79.8 billion for gasoline and $64.79 billion for diesel. That's over $609 per household, just for gasoline.
Data from the congressional Joint Economic Committee suggest the impact could be even worse. As JEC Democrats' Monday report notes, the panel found that US households "have now spent an additional $101 billion on gasoline since the start of the Iran War, or an average of $856 in gas costs per family."
A state-by-state breakdown in the report—released just days ahead of the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress for the remainder of Trump's second term—reveals that price increases for gasoline have hit some areas particularly hard. Wyoming, a Republican stronghold, has had the highest hike per household, at $1,454.
Rounding out the top 10 are Utah ($1,240), Alabama ($1,232), Montana ($1,180), Mississippi ($1,141), South Dakota ($1,122), Idaho at ($1,108), North Dakota ($1,087), New Hampshire ($1,029), and Iowa ($1,010). Trump won all of those states but New Hampshire in 2024—when he campaigned on a promise to serve the interests of the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry if its executives dumped $1 billion into his run, while also claiming he would lower costs for working people.
Meanwhile, the report stresses, Trump's oil and gas holdings could have nearly doubled this year, growing by as much as $35.8 million, for a total of up to $81.6 million—and 94% of his 2026 industry stock purchases occurred after he went to war with Iran, which has restricted ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
The document details Trump's holdings—which are reported in ranges—in Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Marathon Petroleum, Occidental Petroleum, Phillips 66, Valero Energy, and Williams Companies. It also warns that "the true value may in fact be higher given that Trump has yet to report stock transactions for September or October, and because he has a history of filing his transactions much later than the law requires."
The graph published by the congressional Joint Economic Committee on October 26, 2026 shows US President Donald Trump's stock holdings in oil and gas companies.
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), the JEC's ranking member, declared that "Trump's Iran War has forced Americans to pay much more at the pump while Big Oil rakes in profits and the president's own stock wealth in the oil and gas industry continues to balloon."
Trump has faced scrutiny and criticism for cashing in on the conflict he created, which the White House has tried to dismiss by pointing out that the president's "stock and bond portfolio is independently managed by third-party financial institutions."
Such comments have not appeased critics, including Hassan, who said that "as Trump—the country's highest-ranking public employee—continues to own and trade stocks in companies that stand to benefit from his decisions, his actions raise major concerns about conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, this is nothing new from this administration and only reinforces that the president puts his own financial interests above the American people."
This article has been updated to credit the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University for its fuel cost tracker.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Thousands March Across Europe Against Inequality and 'for Young People’s Future'
“Looking at countries like the United States, we don’t want to end up like them, where part of the population has everything and the others have nothing,” one French protester said.
Oct 24, 2026
Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets across Europe on Saturday as anger continues to build over the rising cost of living and deteriorating social services.
While demonstrators emphasized different demands in different countries, the protest wave reflects a sense that the status quo has ceased to work for ordinary people, especially the young.
“I see so many more similarities than differences,” Alice de Brito, the vice president of French student union UNEF, told CNN of the protests. “We are all talking about the need for investments in education, in the universities, in youth in general. But we are also talking about the cost of living, about housing.”
France
Across France, between 410,000 and 800,000 people turned out in the continuation of protests that erupted in September when students began to mobilize against underfunding, teacher shortages, and other poor conditions in their schools. Adult workers have joined with the students, criticizing widespread inequality and the rising cost of living, leading to mass demonstrations on October 17 and again a week later.
“Looking at countries like the United States, we don’t want to end up like them, where part of the population has everything and the others have nothing,” Paris protester Louis Ledoux--Xatard told The Associated Press.
“Too many billionaires; we are preparing the revolution," one group of protesters chanted, according to Al Jazeera.
There were 289 protests in France, including in Marseilles, Nantes, Nice, Lyon, Bordeaux, and Orleans. Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said that almost 1,000 people were arrested, though the number was expected to grow. Two people sustained significant injuries.
"Behind every police officer, a compliant camera."
The protest in Paris had originally been scheduled to run through the center of the city, but authorities relocated it to outskirts and banned marches organized by groups other than unions.
"It won’t stop the movement. It won’t stop students from demanding better conditions in schools,” nurse Soumaya Abed told AP of the changes.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who leads the left-wing France Unbowed party, criticized the government of President Emmanuel Macron for changing the route, but also praised the marchers for carrying on.
"Total victory for the social movement," Mélenchon wrote on social media. "The march gathered at the new authorized point and is now flowing calmly over more than four kilometers. The provocations for disorder by the Paris police prefect and [French Prime Minister Sébastien] Lecornu are a total failure. For the authorities, it is time to give in, or soon they will have only the exit door left."
Victoire totale du mouvement social. La marche s'est rassemblée au nouveau point autorisé et déferle dans le calme sur plus de quatre kilomètres. Les provocations aux désordres du préfet de police et de Lecornu sont un échec total. Pour les autorités, il est temps de céder, sinon il ne leur restera bientôt que la porte de sortie.
— Jean-Luc Mélenchon (@JLMelenchon) October 24, 2026
Media reported that the Parisian demonstration was largely peaceful until the end, when police released tear gas and fired water cannons and some black-clad protesters threw projectiles.
Reporters with Agence France-Presse said they saw:
police charge several times and vigorously use tear gas and batons against some, mostly young, protesters.
"The police started moving towards everyone, telling them to get down and back off. They were just taking people down, you know, beating protesters," one demonstrator bleeding from a baton blow to his face, who gave his first name as David, told AFP.
Other witnesses also described a repressive police response to The Guardian:
Mike, a 23-year-old student who also declined to give his surname, said: “Look around, they’re just teenagers. Is it normal for teenagers to be teargassed and beaten with batons?”
For Jessica, a 24-year-old student, said: “I just don’t understand why there’s so much violence. I feel like our right to protest is being trampled on.”
Mélenchon lambasted the police and the media for working together to discredit the movement.
"In Paris, to ruin the day and unwind, the so-called forces of law and order gas and fire into the crowd at the back of the procession, all in a bid to get footage for the domestic news channels that spent the whole week airing the images that spurred the Trappes killer," he wrote on social media, referring to a racially motivated shooting west of Paris on Friday that killed one and wounded five.
In a second post, he added: "It continues with the policing of minds through the televisions of power. Tonight, staging of the « tails of the procession » to spew hatred against the popular movement. Without a single image of the masses in peaceful action. Behind every police officer, a compliant camera."
He encouraged readers to "turn off the televisions! Form your own opinion without a guardian. Journey through social networks. Stay free to think for yourselves."
Belgium
In neighboring Belgium, hundreds of people marched in Brussels in a continuation of demonstrations for improvements in the education system.
“We are here for young people’s future, for better work," rally speaker Celia Ponce told the crowd, as The Brussels Times reported.
She also accused governments of wanting to "destroy public services."
Protesters build barricades with bikes and scooters in Brussels, Belgium.Follow Press TV on Telegram: https://t.co/1ymjeeywxb https://t.co/TtQNj1BQYU
— PressTV Extra (@PresstvExtra) October 24, 2026
Police used tear gas to disperse some protesters and, in an incident reported by Reuters, kicked and hit one demonstrator after they fell during a chase.
Spain
Approximately 25,000 people marched in Madrid to support Spain's pension system and demand that it keep pace with inflation and that a gender gap be eliminated, according to Al Jazeera.
"How beautiful Madrid is when it defends its rights," Emilio Delgado, deputy spokesperson for left party Mas Madrid, wrote on social media. "We propose that no pension should be below the minimum wage. A lifetime of work deserves a dignified retirement."
Un aviso a @NunezFeijoo: No vamos a permitir que recortéis las pensiones. https://t.co/lQ7V0cQomZ
— Emilio Delgado (@EmilioDelgadoOr) October 24, 2026
The protests come a month ahead of Spain's general election, in which current Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's Spanish Socialist Workers' Party will face off against the right-wing Popular Party. Popular Party leader Alberto Nunez Feijoo has promised to adjust pensions according to inflation if his party wins, but demonstrators are still concerned about what a right-wing victory would mean for the pension system.
Portugal
In Portugal, meanwhile, the main demand was affordable housing.
People marched in Lisbon, continuing a movement that began October 10 in the city of Porto calling on the government to address the country's housing crisis, according to The Resident.
Palco dos protestos promovidos pelo movimento Acampada de Lisboa, o Rossio voltou a acolher "um mar de gente" que reivindica soluções do Governo para a atual crise da habitação.Veja a reportagem em direto no local: https://t.co/gpSIyl2mLr#agitacaosocial #europa #protestos #manifestacoes #lisboa #rossio #pais #portugal #habitacao #custodevida #noticias #sicnoticias
— SIC Notícias (@SICNoticias) October 24, 2026
"We have no home, so we set up tents!” read the slogan of the March, organized by the Acampada de Lisboa movement.
The protesters also opposed new policies from Prime Minister Luis Montenegro that would weaken a limit on annual rent increases and make it easier to evict people who are unable to make rent payments, according to AP.
Italy
Thousands of people joined demonstrations across Italy to protest the affordability crisis as well as the right-wing government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. Protests were called for eight cities including Milan, Turin, and Rome, with 10,000 attending the Milan demonstration alone.
“We are here because of the rising prices and because I believe that our government has no respect for its citizens,” a 17-year-old student participant, who did not give a name, told Al Jazeera. “There are four people in my family. My mother works in a factory, but my father is about to lose his job. It’s hard to make ends meet on just one salary."
Thousands of protesters took to the streets across Italy to demonstrate against Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing government and the rising cost of living, as hundreds of soldiers were deployed to Milan as protests continue.🔗: https://t.co/JquqwnAyhj https://t.co/B97TnZaY9L
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) October 24, 2026
The Italian protests were a continuation of demonstrations that have taken place throughout October. There were fewer clashes between police and demonstrators on Saturday compared with earlier marches, though some protesters tried to enter the Colosseum before being pushed back.
Albania
In Albania, outrage over plans by US President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner to build a luxury resort near a protected wildlife area—which is widely seen as an example of government corruption—has dovetailed with demands by students for less corruption in the education system specifically as well as lower tuition fees and more funding.
A demonstration in the capital of Tirana on Saturday marked the 12th day of anti-government protests this month following a summer of mobilizations against the luxury hotel.
Some protesters lit fires and threw projectiles, while police used tear gas, rubber bullets, and water cannons.
Protesters in Albania have fought running battles with police, on a 12th day of anti-government protests. Police in the capital, Tirana, used water cannon, tear gas and rubber bullets after Prime Minister Edi Rama warned he would take strong action to quell unrest. https://t.co/6oZMYPU7Ei
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) October 24, 2026
One demonstrator, the 28-year-old Daniel Tahiri, told Reuters that the Albanian government was a "dictatorship with the clothes of democracy."
"Albanians have woken up," Tahiri said.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Consumer Sentiment Data Another Sign Trump 'Affordability Crisis Is Getting Worse, Not Better'
"High prices and borrowing costs are making it harder for people to afford everyday necessities, and inflation expectations are rising again."
Oct 23, 2026
With early voting underway for the midterm elections and Democrats campaigning on how prices have soared under a Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump, data released Friday show US consumer sentiment nearing an all-time low.
The University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers announced that its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 48 this month, down from 48.1 in September and 53.6 last October. The record low was 44.8, this past May.
Surveys of Consumers director Joanne Hsu noted Friday that "increases in sentiment among Republicans and Democrats were balanced by declines among independents," and also highlighted some of the survey's other findings.
UMich consumer sentiment... 48.0... 2nd-worst in history
[image or embed]
— Mike Zaccardi, CFA, CMT (@mikezaccardi.bsky.social) October 23, 2026 at 10:02 AM
"While year-ahead business conditions improved about 14%, they stand 16% less than last October's read," she continued. "This month's decline in the Current Conditions subindex was driven entirely by buying conditions for durables, which plunged 18% on the basis of higher interest rates and rising concerns about the affordability of such purchases. Purchasing power continues to dominate consumer views of the economy. Sentiment is now 10% below a year ago and 15% less than February, just prior to the Iran conflict."
"Year-ahead inflation expectations ticked up from 4.6% last month to 4.7% this month," said Hsu, who also put out a related report on inflation. "The current reading substantially exceeds the 3.4% seen in February before the Iran conflict began, along with all 2024 readings. Long-run inflation expectations also stepped up from 3.4% in September to 3.5%, notably higher than their 2024 range of 2.8% to 3.2%. Inflation expectations over both time horizons increased for the second straight month to their highest readings since May."
Data released last week by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics show inflation grew faster than expected in September, partly due to Trump's illegal Iran War, and an online tracker published earlier this month by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, highlights how costs have jumped for childcare, electricity, gasoline, groceries, healthcare, and rent.
Tonantzin Carmona, a former Biden administration adviser who now directs economic policy at The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, called the University of Michigan's new consumer sentiment numbers "another sign that the affordability crisis is getting worse, not better."
"High prices and borrowing costs are making it harder for people to afford everyday necessities, and inflation expectations are rising again," she said. "What's more, our research shows that debt payments are eating up more than half of every dollar of real income growth, with debt payments rising more than eight times as fast as take-home income since the end of 2022."
"As inflation outpaces wage gains," she added, "workers are being squeezed from every direction—and October's consumer sentiment numbers, which are the second-lowest on record, reflect just how little families have left after paying their bills."
In 1980, inflation was 14% and unemployment was 8%. Consumer sentiment: 52.In 2026: still 52.Turns out Americans aren't just worried about the economy https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com/p/its-not-the-economy-its-whos-running
[image or embed]
— Justin Wolfers (@justinwolfers.bsky.social) October 21, 2026 at 10:04 AM
In the lead-up to his colleagues updating consumer sentiment figures, University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers published a Wednesday blog post noting that "every couple of weeks, someone on cable TV sits me down, points a camera at me, and asks the exact same thing. Our economic statistics look pretty good, so why are Americans so gloomy?"
"My prime suspect: An overwhelming majority of Americans rate economic policy under Trump as poor—the worst it has ever been—and they worry what this means for their economic futures," Wolfers wrote. He took "the share of people who say the government is doing a poor job" and subtracted "the share who say it's doing a good job," with a higher figure signaling a "harsher verdict."
"In late 2024, the verdict stood at +14. That means 14 percentage points more Americans thought the government was doing a poor job than a good one," he explained. By last May, when the consumer sentiment was the worst on record, "it had hit +66."
Based on his examination of the survey results over the years, Wolfers decided that "the next time someone points a camera at me and asks why Americans are so gloomy when the numbers look fine, here's my answer. They're not misreading the economy. They're reading the people running it. And their verdict today is the harshest on record."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Pause AI Now!' Sanders Says as US Banks Let Agents Operate in Customer Accounts
“Left unchecked, AI could endanger the entire global financial system—including your bank account.”
Oct 22, 2026
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday renewed calls to pause development of artificial intelligence following reporting that unauthorized AI agents are operating inside the systems of major US banks.
Axios' Madison Mills revealed that Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and other financial institutions are "racing to contain agent risks," including "situations when an agent or AI assistant accesses a human's account with the user's permission and login credentials," which "goes against the guidelines of most banks requiring that humans log in to their own accounts."
In AI, an agent is a system that can take actions to complete an assigned task, rather than simply responding to queries or generating text.
According to Mills' reporting—which cites people familiar with the matter—some agents have contacted bank call centers or appeared to take actions independently of users' instructions.
Banking executives interviewed by Mills described the problem as “horrifying," with one official warning of potentially serious consequences for customers' finances.
The stakes are particularly high, the executives said, when AI agents have permission to make purchases or transfer funds. Banks are also struggling to determine whether activity is actually authorized by customers or whether an agent has gone rogue.
"This is insane," Sanders (I-Vt.) posted on social media in response to Mills' report. "We cannot allow AI agents to go into your bank account and act independently without your authorization."
"But that is what’s happening right now," he continued. "Left unchecked, AI could endanger the entire global financial system—including your bank account."
The senator added, "Pause AI NOW!"
Sanders has repeatedly warned that the race to create increasingly powerful AI systems is outpacing efforts to ensure their safety. Such concerns are mounting as profit- and ego-driven tech oligarchs race toward the "holy grail" of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—an advanced AI that can understand, learn, and apply knowledge of any subject as well as or better than a typical human.
Earlier this month, Sanders renewed his call for a congressional ban on the development of advanced AI, citing Big Tech oligarchs’ secret preparations for a “catastrophic AI event.”
The senator has repeatedly cited pioneers like Geoffrey Hinton who have warned that superintelligent AI—a development that experts believe could come after AGI—might wipe out humanity, as well as less existential but still potentially devastating outcomes like xAI CEO Elon Musk's prediction that AI and robots could “replace all jobs."
Last month, Sanders and Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced legislation to pause advanced AI development and ban the creation or deployment of artificial superintelligence. Sanders also wants a moratorium on the construction of new AI data centers.
The banking story underscores the growing challenge of deploying autonomous AI systems in consequential settings before their behavior can be reliably controlled or monitored.
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon last week announced a ban on outside AI agents from accessing customer accounts.
Sanders wasn't the only elected official who responded with alarm to the new Axios report.
"This is the exact thing we’ve been warning about for years," Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said on social media. "AI agents with unrestrained access to your bank account and protected information. When consumer AI agents are accessing YOUR bank account or using YOUR credit card, they must be subject to fiduciary-like duties of care."
"We need to pass my AI AGENT Act to get some basic guardrails in place," Warner added, referring to legislation that would establish federal rules for artificial intelligence agents that act on people's behalf.
Congressman Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) also weighed in on the report, writing on social media that "the Trump administration and GOP leadership made the deliberate decision to let the AI industry run wild."
"That was a bad political decision," he added. "And now it’s become a potentially catastrophic policy decision."
On the other side of the political aisle, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis—who has opposed the Trump administration's efforts to prevent states from regulating AI—said on X, "Imagine a rogue AI agent liquidating your bank account and investment portfolio."
"If you are the only victim, I suppose you could get made whole by the AI company responsible," he added. "If rogue agents liquidate hundreds of billions across millions of accounts, the AI company would go bankrupt and you wouldn’t get made whole."
The new Axios report comes two days after nationwide “Freeze AI Now” walkout protests by students, workers, academics, and others demanding an immediate halt to further AI development until the public has a meaningful say in how the technology is built and regulated.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Largest US Corporations Paid Lowest-Ever Tax Rate in 2025 Thanks to Trump and GOP: Study
"At a time when lawmakers claim the country cannot afford investments in families and communities, some of the most profitable corporations in American history are paying little or nothing in federal income taxes."
Oct 22, 2026
Some of the biggest US corporations paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 10.4% last year as Republican legislation passed by President Donald Trump disproportionately benefited businesses and the superrich while eviscerating key social programs, a study published Thursday revealed.
The 706 corporations examined by the Washington, DC-based Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) reported a combined $1.88 trillion in US profits in 2025, yet paid less than half the statutory federal corporate income tax rate of 21%. Of those companies, the study found that 114 paid no federal income taxes at all.
Those 706 companies collectively paid current federal corporate income taxes equal to just 10.4% of that $1.88 trillion, "the lowest effective rate that ITEP has uncovered in over 40 years of analyzing corporate income taxes," according to the analysis.
The study attributes this to two major tax laws enacted under Trump: The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—derided at the time as the "GOP Tax Scam"—slashed the statutory corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, while the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by the president last year expanded and made permanent the 2017 cuts.
NEW: U.S. corporations are paying the lowest tax rate seen in decades.706 major corporations collectively paid a federal income tax rate of just 10.4%, less than half the statutory rate.114 corporations paid zero.itep.org/corporate-ta...
[image or embed]
— ITEP (@itep.org) October 22, 2026 at 8:30 AM
"These findings show just how dramatically the corporate tax system has been tilted in favor of the nation’s wealthiest and most powerful companies,” ITEP senior fellow Matt Gardner, who co-authored the report, said in a statement.
“At a time when lawmakers claim the country cannot afford investments in families and communities, some of the most profitable corporations in American history are paying little or nothing in federal income taxes," he added. "This is not an accident. It is the predictable outcome of deliberate policy choices that have steadily eroded the corporate tax base."
Among the report's key findings:
- The 114 companies that paid no current federal income tax last year include Tesla, Walt Disney, CVS, Citigroup, United Airlines, and DoorDash;
- 258 corporations paid effective tax rates below 7%, or less than one-third of the statutory rate;
- Those 258 companies reported $683 billion in US profits but paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 1.7%;
- The 706 corporations studied received $198 billion in federal tax subsidies by paying less than the statutory 21% rate;
- They also benefited from an additional $263 billion in tax savings attributable to the 2017 reduction of the statutory rate from 35% to 21%; and
- Just 25 corporations accounted for more than half of the 2025 tax subsidies, with Alphabet ($18.9 billion), Microsoft ($18.7 billion), Amazon ($17.4 billion), and Meta ($13.9 billion) among the largest beneficiaries.
While proponents of subsidies claim they are necessary to encourage investment, the new study raises questions about why some of the nation's most profitable corporations should receive billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies while vital social programs upon which tens of millions of Americans rely, like Medicaid and food stamps, suffer historic cuts under Republican legislation.
“Congress has repeatedly chosen to expand tax breaks for corporations that are already extraordinarily profitable,” said Steve Wamhoff, ITEP's federal policy director and co-author of the report. “Rather than continuing to subsidize corporate investments and reward aggressive tax avoidance, lawmakers should close these loopholes and ensure that large corporations pay a meaningful share of their profits in taxes.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy