free credit slot Cryptocurrencies Pose High Risk to 401(k) Portfolios, Government Watchdog WarnsFormer President Bill Clinton and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., don’t agree on much. Yet, recently the ideological adversaries found some common ground on a political question that has quietly endured over nearly two decades. Yes, a woman can win the White House, they agree. But she’s probably going to be conservative. “Are there women out there, governors, Republican, Democrat, that can be the next president of the United States? Absolutely,” Graham said in an interview on Capitol Hill this month. “If you have a Republican female nominee, they would have a good shot of being the first woman president.” A few days earlier and several hundred miles north, Clinton — whose wife tried and failed twice to win the White House — made a similar argument. “Ideologically, the people who are most likely to be against women are most likely to be conservative, so when people agree with you, it’s easier to be for them,” he said in an appearance at the DealBook Summit hosted by The New York Times. “But I think a woman can be elected president. I do.” Their similar predictions are the latest in a conversation that has frustrated and foiled two generations of female candidates. For Democrats still scarred by Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump in 2016, Vice President Kamala Harris’ defeat at the hands of the same man in November has only deepened anxieties over gender bias and prompted a fresh round of debate over the electability of women to the nation’s highest office. While few will say so aloud, some Democrats are already quietly hoping their party doesn’t nominate a woman in 2028, fearing she could not overcome an enduring hold of sexism on the American electorate. Many others anticipate another — perhaps even more aggressive — round of questions and doubts about female presidential candidates that have plagued the party for the better part of two decades. “People feel pretty stung by what happened,” said Liz Shuler, the first woman elected to lead the AFL-CIO, the largest federation of unions in the country, who supported Harris and believes she made no significant missteps in the race. “She totally over-performed and yet fell short. So it does feel like that sucker punch of, like, ‘Wow, even when you do everything right, that glass ceiling is still elusive.’” For decades, advocates for female political leaders argued that if more women ran for president, their presence in American politics would become normalized and one would eventually win the White House. Since Clinton’s first attempt to break what she called “that highest, hardest glass ceiling” in 2008, nine other women have vied for a major party’s nomination. Those candidates have been conservative and liberal, racially diverse, and from big cities, small towns and across the country. Some campaigned on an economic message, others focused on social issues. Only two — Clinton and Harris, both Democrats — captured their party’s nomination. As they process the second defeat of a female nominee, Democrats are divided over the question of how much Harris’ gender actually contributed to her loss, making it hard to divine what exactly that could mean for their party in 2028. Two weeks before Election Day, Harris openly dismissed concerns that sexism could hurt her chances, saying in an interview with NBC News that the country was “absolutely” ready to elect a female president. She rarely mentioned her gender or her race during her brief campaign, a choice that reflected both her personal approach to barrier-breaking opportunities and the long-running Democratic anxieties about female nominees. Now, after her defeat, few Democrats dispute that sexism was a factor in a race against a man who had been found liable for sexual abuse — a verdict Trump called a “disgrace” — and has long made hypermasculinity part of his political brand. “I do not think that this race swung solely on her being a woman or a woman of color. But I think that you cannot look at a woman and a woman of color and not think that didn’t have an impact on this race,” Jen O’Malley Dillon, Harris’ campaign chair, told a group of strategists, journalists and academics gathered for a campaign post-mortem at Harvard University this month. “We are fooling ourselves if we don’t think that there is an element of her being a woman or a woman of color that was harder for people to see as comfortably, perhaps.” Yet to chalk Harris’ loss up to sexism alone — and to the idea that women are held to a higher standard when seeking the White House — could also be a way of minimizing campaign missteps. “Kamala Harris made a very bad decision in her choice of vice president. So that was her first big decision to make, and in my judgment, she did not choose well,” Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said of the selection of Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, a relatively untested national figure, as her running mate. Behind Harris and Clinton’s losses, she added, “there were circumstances in the campaign that were unrelated to gender.” Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., who won a tough reelection race against a male candidate in November, said she saw more traditional political factors playing a larger role in Harris’ defeat, noting that she heard “very little focus” on her gender or the barrier-breaking potential of her candidacy. “This was a change election. People — if people are expressing that they’re concerned about the direction of the country, they’re not going to vote for the incumbent party,” she said. “It has much more to do with that than I think the fact that Kamala Harris is a woman.” The results indicate that, yet again, voters were not particularly motivated by a desire for greater female representation. Despite the liberal hope that women would flock to her candidacy over issues like abortion rights, Harris won the lowest level of support from female voters of any Democratic nominee since 2004, according to an analysis by the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. A majority of white women continued to support Trump, a result that is consistent with their support for the Republican nominee in every race since 2004. Yet, Harris also made few, if any, inroads among key blocs of female voters: A smaller percentage of Latino and young women backed Harris than backed any other Democratic nominee since Barack Obama first ran in 2008. “Voters were more worried about issues like the economy or immigration and less concerned with the vice president’s gender and race,” said Amanda Hunter, the executive director of the Barbara Lee Family Foundation, which promotes women in politics. She added, “This was not the same glass-ceiling candidacy that we saw in 2016.” Still, other members of the Senate, where women make up a quarter of the body, said they believed Harris’ gender more significantly affected her support. “Some people think that a woman can’t run a country, and so there are those kinds of views that we need to address among them,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, a close ally of Harris. “There are a lot of cultural issues involved in electing a woman.” Some elected officials say they believe that only a female candidate with a strong and uncompromising political brand will be able to overcome such gender bias. Both Bill Clinton and Graham cited what the South Carolina senator called the “Margaret Thatcher mold,” evoking the famously tough conservative leader who became Britain’s first female prime minister in 1979. “Fair or not, I think that Republican women are seen as stronger on national defense,” Collins said. So far, at least, such conservative bona fides haven’t been enough: No woman has won the Republican nomination. And Nikki Haley’s victories in the 2024 District of Columbia and Vermont primaries were the first presidential primary wins by a Republican woman. (STORY CAN END HERE. OPTIONAL MATERIAL FOLLOWS.) Some of those who have been at the center of such debates seem visibly exhausted by the subject of female electability. In January 2019, just days after she began her presidential bid, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., steadfastly refused to engage with questions of sexism. “I’m going to keep fighting on the issues because I think that’s what matters most,” she said in an interview on Capitol Hill. Two years later, after her primary bid had ended in defeat, Warren detailed in a memoir how her focus on ideas in the race had collided with concerns about her gender. She was taken aback, she recounted, by how many times potential donors and supporters had raised Hillary Clinton’s loss as a reason for their trepidation about Warren’s bid. “I wondered whether anyone said to Bernie Sanders when he asked for their support, ‘Gore lost, so how can you win?’ I wondered whether anyone said to Joe Biden, ‘Kerry lost, so clearly America just isn’t ready for a man to be president,’” she recalled thinking as she lay in bed after her first day raising money for her presidential bid. “I tried to laugh, but the joke didn’t seem very funny.” This month, when asked in an interview if a woman could be elected president, Warren, who won a third Senate term in November, just sighed. “Someday,” she said. She declined to elaborate.

It’s not you, it’s me. But it’s also you, as Samantha Bee explained on this week’s episode of The Daily Beast Podcast . Following in her co-host Joanna Coles’ footsteps, Bee was booked to appear on a recent episode of the new CNN panel show Have I Got News For You . Days before taping though, she backed out, and told Coles why. “I really like the show,” Bee said. “But I just can’t go on a fun-loving comedy quiz show with someone who stands so opposite every value I hold dear.” That opponent? Republican congressman Tim Burchett, of Tennessee, who would have joined Bee alongside regular panelists and “team captains” Amber Ruffin and Michael Ian Black. In an appearance on CNN earlier in the year, Burchett controversially described Vice President Kamala Harris (then the Democratic nominee for president) as a “DEI hire.” ADVERTISEMENT Many of Burchett’s political positions are in conflict with Bee’s own values, she explained. His opposition to abortion rights was the breaking point. “I’d spent all day Thursday fighting for the existential future of Planned Parenthood,” Bee, a board member with the Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, explained. “I just can’t be in a photo or a split screen with someone like that and pretend it’s a fun Friday afternoon.” When Coles noted that past episodes of the show—particularly its original iteration, which has run in the United Kingdom for years—had effectively “ribbed” (and in some cases, undone) political figures, Bee agreed, and encouraged others to have at it. But she didn’t feel ready to throw punches or punchlines. “These questions and these issues that we are facing are literally existential,” she said, “and I don’t have a good sense of humor about it.” New episodes of The Daily Beast Podcast drop every Thursday. Like and download on Spotify , Apple Podcasts , YouTube , or your favorite podcast app. And click here for email updates as each episode debuts.Google's biggest wins, fails, and WTF moments of 2024

( MENAFN - AzerNews) by Qaiser Nawab | AzerNEWS The operationalization of the Fund for Responding to Loss andDamage at COP29 represents a historic turning point in globalclimate policy. This long-awaited development marks a significantachievement for developing countries, small island states, andvulnerable communities across the globe who have beendisproportionately affected by the intensifying impacts of climatechange. Spearheaded under the leadership of Azerbaijan's COP29Presidency, this milestone reflects a global commitment toaddressing the inequities of climate change impacts while fosteringhope for more inclusive, effective solutions. The journey to the operationalization of the Loss and DamageFund began during COP27 in Egypt, where nations reached agroundbreaking agreement to establish a mechanism for compensatingcountries most affected by climate-induced disasters. However, thepromise of this fund was met with skepticism, as many questionedwhether political will and financial pledges would translate intoconcrete action. COP28, held in the United Arab Emirates, laid the groundwork forthe Fund's operational launch, demonstrating the commitment ofglobal leaders to move beyond rhetoric and take actionable steps. Yet, it was not until COP29, under the meticulousguidance of Azerbaijan's Presidency and the visionary leadership ofPresident Ilham Aliyev, that the Fund was fullyoperationalized. This involved securing agreementswith the World Bank and designating the Philippines as the hostcountry for the Fund's secretariat-a testament to the collaborativeefforts of nations determined to combat the escalating climatecrisis. The Loss and Damage Fund is more than just a financialinstrument; it symbolizes the recognition of historical injusticesfaced by vulnerable nations. Developed countries, which havecontributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions, are finally beingheld accountable for their role in global warming. The Fund servesas a mechanism to transfer financial resources from wealthiernations to those bearing the brunt of climate-induced disasters,such as hurricanes, flooding, and droughts. As of now, the Fund has received pledges totaling over $730million-a promising start but far from what is required to meet thegrowing needs of affected nations. The appointment of IbrahimaCheikh Diong as the Fund's Executive Director further underscoresthe seriousness of this initiative. His leadership, combined with arobust governance structure, ensures that the Fund will be managedtransparently and effectively. The urgency of the Fund's operationalization becomes clear whenexamining the increasing frequency and severity of climatedisasters. The devastating floods in Pakistan in 2022 offer aharrowing example. With nearly one-third of the country submerged,millions were displaced, and the economic losses exceeded $30billion. Pakistan, despite contributing less than 1% of globalgreenhouse gas emissions, faced catastrophic consequences of acrisis it did not create. Similarly, recent hurricanes in the United States, a developednation, have revealed the universal vulnerability toclimate-induced disasters. Storm surges, extreme rainfall, andinfrastructural damages in Florida and Louisiana highlight that nocountry, regardless of its economic status, is immune to the wrathof nature. These events underscore the importance of a unifiedglobal response to climate challenges, making the Loss and DamageFund a cornerstone of international cooperation. Under the COP29 Presidency, Azerbaijan hasdemonstrated remarkable leadership in advancing the global climateagenda. President Ilham Aliyev's emphasis on addressing thechallenges faced by small island states and least-developedcountries reflects a commitment to inclusivity and equity.Azerbaijan's proactive role in hosting the Fund's third Boardmeeting in Baku and facilitating critical agreements with the WorldBank and other stakeholders highlights its determination to ensurethe Fund's success. Azerbaijan's leadership also extends to fosteringpartnerships and encouraging nations to increase their financialcontributions to the Fund. While $730 million is a commendablestart, the scale of climate-induced losses and damages requires amuch larger pool of resources. Countries must view their pledgesnot as acts of charity but as investments in global stability andsustainability. The operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund paves the wayfor financing climate resilience projects beginning in 2025. Thisincludes rebuilding infrastructure destroyed by disasters,supporting displaced communities, and strengthening adaptivecapacities in vulnerable regions. For instance, in flood-prone countries like Pakistan, the Fundcould be instrumental in constructing resilient housing, improvingearly warning systems, and enhancing disaster preparedness.Similarly, small island states grappling with rising sea levelscould use the Fund's resources to invest in seawalls, mangroverestoration, and community relocation plans. The Fund also provides an opportunity for innovative financingmechanisms. By collaborating with private sector entities,governments, and multilateral organizations, the Fund can leverageadditional resources to meet its objectives. Initiatives like greenbonds and climate insurance schemes can complement the Fund'sefforts, ensuring a more comprehensive approach to addressing lossand damage. While the operationalization of the Fund is a significantachievement, it is not without challenges. The first and foremostconcern is the adequacy of financial resources. Developingcountries have estimated that their annual loss and damage costswill exceed $290 billion by 2030. The current pledges, while a stepin the right direction, fall far short of this figure. Another challenge lies in ensuring the equitabledistribution of funds. Transparent governance mechanisms must be inplace to prioritize the most vulnerable communities and preventmisallocation of resources. The involvement of civil societyorganizations and local stakeholders in decision-making processesis essential to maintaining accountability. Lastly, the success of the Fund hinges on sustained politicalwill. Climate negotiations are often marred by delays anddisagreements, and the Loss and Damage Fund is no exception.Continuous advocacy, particularly by developing countries andclimate activists, will be crucial in keeping the momentumalive. The operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fundat COP29 is a beacon of hope for nations grappling with thedevastating impacts of climate change. It represents a collectiveacknowledgment that those least responsible for the climate crisismust not bear its consequences alone. However, this is only the beginning. The international communitymust work tirelessly to ensure that the Fund fulfills its purpose.This includes increasing financial contributions, streamlining itsoperations, and fostering global partnerships to address the rootcauses of climate vulnerability. For countries like Pakistan, which have experienced firsthandthe destructive power of climate disasters, the Fund offers alifeline. It is a chance to rebuild, adapt, and secure a moresustainable future. For developed nations, it is an opportunity todemonstrate solidarity and moral responsibility in the face of ashared global challenge. In the words of UN Secretary-General António Guterres, “The era of global boiling has arrived.” Theoperationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund is a vital steptoward mitigating its consequences. Let us seize this moment tobuild a more just, resilient, and inclusive world for generationsto come. The views and opinions expressed by guest columnistsin their op-eds may differ from and do not necessarily reflect theviews of the editorial staff. MENAFN30112024000195011045ID1108941963 Legal Disclaimer: MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.The billing of London-born former Chelsea boss Hayes against England’s Dutch manager Sarina Wiegman – arguably the best two bosses in the women’s game – had generated more buzz in the build-up than the players on the pitch, despite it being a rare encounter between the two top-ranked sides in the world. Hayes enjoyed her return to familiar shores but felt the US lacked the “killer piece” after they looked the likelier side to make the breakthrough. Asked what was going through her mind during the national anthem, Hayes said: “I was definitely mouthing (it), and Naomi (Girma) and Lynn (Williams) could see that I was struggling with where to be and all that. “I got to the end of the anthems and I thought, ‘that’s so ridiculous. I’m proud to be English and I’m proud of our national anthem, and I’m also really proud to coach America’. “Two things are possible all at once. I don’t want to fuel a nationalist debate around it. The realities are both countries are really dear to me for lots of reasons, and I’m really proud to represent both of them.” The Lionesses did not register a shot on target in the first half but grew into the game in the second. US captain Lindsey Horan had the ball in the net after the break but the flag was up, while Hayes’ side had a penalty award for a handball reversed after a VAR check determined substitute Yazmeen Ryan’s shot hit Alex Greenwood’s chest. Hayes, who left Chelsea after 12 trophy-packed years this summer, said: “I’ve been privileged to coach a lot of top-level games, including here, so there’s a familiarity to being here for me. “It’s not new to me, and because of that there was a whole sense of I’m coming back to a place I know. I have a really healthy perspective, and I want to have a really healthy perspective on my profession. “I give everything I possibly can for a team that I really, really enjoy coaching, and I thrive, not just under pressure, but I like these opportunities, I like being in these situations. They bring out the best in me. “You’ve got two top teams now, Sarina is an amazing coach, I thought it was a good tactical match-up, and I just enjoy coaching a high-level football match, to be honest with you. I don’t think too much about it.” Hayes had travelled to London without her entire Olympic gold medal-winning ‘Triple Espresso’ forward line of Trinity Rodman, Mallory Swanson and Sophia Smith, all nursing niggling injuries. Before the match, the 48-year-old was spotted chatting with Wiegman and her US men’s counterpart, fellow ex-Chelsea boss Mauricio Pochettino, who was also in attendance. England were also missing a number of key attackers for the friendly including Lauren Hemp, Lauren James and Ella Toone, all ruled out with injury. Wiegman brushed aside suggestions from some pundits that her side were content to settle for a draw. She said: “I think we were really defending as a team, very strong. We got momentum in the second half, we did better, and of course both teams went for the win. “So many things happened in this game, also in front of the goal, so I don’t think it was boring. “We wanted to go for the win, but it was such a high-intensity game, you have to deal with a very good opponent, so you can’t just say, ‘Now we’re going to go and score that goal’. “We tried, of course, to do that. We didn’t slow down to keep it 0-0. I think that was just how the game went.”

South Korean President Yoon's impeachment vote fails after ruling party boycotts itParts of west already flooded, situation expected to worsenRosen Law Firm Encourages Zeta Global Holdings Corp. Investors to Inquire About Securities Class Action Investigation - ZETA

Far-right influencer Nick Fuentes accused of pepper spraying woman on his doorstep - ABC NewsEL SEGUNDO, Calif. (AP) — J.K. Dobbins will miss at least the next four games after the Los Angeles Chargers placed the running back on injured reserve Saturday. The team also placed safety Alohi Gilman on injured reserve and signed safety Tony Jefferson to the active roster. Dobbins sprained the MCL in his left knee late in the first half of the Chargers’ 30-23 loss to the Baltimore Ravens on Monday. Dobbins is fourth in the AFC in rushing with 766 yards and averages 4.8 yards per carry, third highest among AFC running backs with at least 100 carries. He has been considered among the candidates for AP Comeback Player of the Year after suffering a torn Achilles tendon in last season’s opener. Gus Edwards will be counted on to be the lead back in Dobbins' absence. Edwards missed four games during the middle of the season because of an ankle injury and has 25 carries for 93 yards in three games since returning to the lineup. The Chargers are 7-4 and hold the sixth seed in the AFC going into Sunday's game at NFC South leader Atlanta (6-5). Los Angeles is at Kansas City (10-1) in a prime-time game on Dec. 8, hosts Tampa Bay (5-6) on Dec. 15 and Denver (7-5) on Dec. 19. Gilman suffered a hamstring injury in the loss to the Ravens. He has 47 tackles, which is fifth on the team, along with one sack. Los Angeles also elevated cornerback Dicaprio Bootle and linebacker Jeremiah Jean-Baptiste from the practice squad for Sunday’s game. ___ AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/nfl The Associated Press

MetaPhy Health Partners with ActiumHealth to Enhance Patient Engagement Through GenAI Voice AgentsOptions Medical Weight Loss Brings State-of-the-Art Clinics to Philadelphia Metro AreaWith a significant depreciation of the Mexican peso, five interest rate cuts, Tesla’s announcement that its Nuevo León gigafactory project is “paused,” tensions over Mexico’s trade and investment relationship with China, multibillion-dollar investment announcements, it’s been another eventful year for business and economic news in Mexico. Foreign direct investment likely hit a record high in 2024, even as we continue to wait for the much-anticipated nearshoring boom to fully arrive. At Mexico News Daily, we’ve closely followed business and economic developments this year, reporting on a wide range of data, scores of investment announcements and events that have crimped the economy and hurt investor confidence, such as the recently enacted judicial reform . As 2024 draws to a close, here’s a look back at 10 of the biggest business and economy stories in Mexico this year. Many of the developments, events and issues outlined below had a significant impact on the economic situation in Mexico this year and, in several cases, will help shape the future the country will face in the years to come. The Mexican peso has been on a rollercoaster ride this year — one with far more downs (depreciations) than ups (appreciations). The year started off well for the peso, and by early April, it had reached 16.30 to the US dollar , its strongest position in almost nine years. Then, on the first Sunday in June, Mexico held its general elections, made Claudia Sheinbaum as the country’s first female president and voted in favor of a federal Congress dominated by the ruling Morena party and its allies. The peso — trading at 17 to the greenback just before the elections — didn’t take kindly to the results. The currency began to depreciate immediately, and by ten days after the elections had plummeted to almost 19 to the dollar due to factors that included the likelihood of Morena approving a range of constitutional reforms that former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador submitted to Congress in February. Congress has approved more than a dozen of those reforms. A range of factors had the peso trending weaker during subsequent months, including Donald Trump’s victory in the Nov. 5 presidential election in the United States. The peso flirted with a 21-to-the-dollar rate on Nov. 6 but has recovered somewhat since then. At the time of publication of this article it was trading at 20.22 to the greenback. When I sat down to plot out our “10 biggest business stories of 2023” article , I had no hesitation in including Tesla’s Mexico gigafactory announcement . Elon Musk announced in March 2023 that the electric vehicle manufacturer would build a multibillion-dollar plant near Monterrey, Nuevo León, generating excitement across the country and especially in the northern border state governed by Tesla enthusiast and Governor Samuel García. Almost two years later, one could reasonably expect that Tesla would have made significant progress with its gigafactory plans, right? Wrong. Musk said in July that the gigafactory project in Nuevo León was “paused” because of the possibility that Donald Trump would impose tariffs on vehicles made in Mexico if he won the Nov. 5 presidential election in the United States. And at that time, the Tesla CEO hadn’t yet openly cozied up to Trump, who has made several threats to impose tariffs on vehicles made in Mexico, even those manufactured by U.S. companies. Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard said last month that he would seek a meeting with Musk to discuss Tesla’s plans for Mexico, but at the time of publication of this article, there had been no reports of such a meeting taking place. Will Tesla’s gigafactory project go ahead? Stay tuned in 2025. The nearshoring trend — the relocation of companies to Mexico to shorten their supply chains and take advantage of a range of favorable business conditions — continued to receive significant media attention in 2024. A year ago we asked this question : “Is Mexico on the verge of a nearshoring boom?” The question is equally valid today. While there are conflicting opinions, hard data indicates that Mexico can indeed expect to reap the rewards of an oncoming nearshoring boom. Foreign companies continued to make investment announcements in 2024, unveiling plans to invest around US $65 billion in projects in Mexico . That amount — based on investment announcements made in the first nine months of the year — is on top of more than $110 billion in pledged investment last year. If the majority of the announced projects actually go ahead — of which there is no certainty (see Tesla example above) — Mexico can indeed expect a nearshoring boom in coming years. MND CEO Travis Bembenek looked at some of the other key nearshoring data in a recent column before opining that “we are still in the early innings of what will be a significant nearshoring opportunity for both Mexico and North America as a whole for years to come.” Nearshoring to Mexico was a big story in 2024, but it could (or should) be an even bigger one in 2025, 2026 and beyond. As noted above, foreign companies continued to announce plans to invest in Mexico this year, suggesting that a nearshoring boom is on the horizon. Among the major companies that announced projects were: All these projects, and many others, have the potential to provide a significant boost to the Mexican economy. Final numbers won’t be in until early 2025, but all indications are that a new record for foreign direct investment (FDI) in Mexico will be set in 2024. The most recent Economy Ministry data showed that FDI exceeded US $31 billion in the first six months of the year , a 7% increase compared to the same period of 2023. The Mexican Business Council for Foreign Trade, Investment and Technology (COMCE) predicts that FDI will total $38.41 billion this year , which would represent an increase of 6.5% compared to the record high of $36.06 billion in 2023 . There is some concern that the majority of the FDI in Mexico this year has been “reinvestment of profits” by companies that already have a presence here, rather than “new investment.” But foreign investment of any kind represents confidence in Mexico, and the “new investment” percentage of overall FDI should increase in coming years, as long as a good proportion of the companies that have announced investment plans go ahead with their proposed projects. COMCE, for one, is confident that will happen, predicting that FDI will reach $39.3 billion next year before surging to $48 billion in 2026. We included this story in our selection of the biggest news and politics stories of 2024 (see here). We’re including it here as well because of the current impact China is having in Mexico via trade and investment, as well as the country’s potential impact in the future. Let’s look at trade first. An influx of Chinese imports has had a significant impact on Mexico’s consumer market, and even changed the face of the retail landscape in Mexico City’s historic center , one of the country’s most important commercial hubs. Chinese cars have also established a foothold in the Mexican market. “Mexico finds itself, quite suddenly, awash in Chinese cars. Hundreds of thousands of them,” auto-sector analyst Michael Dunner wrote in November . If demand for Chinese cars continues to grow in Mexico, Mexican consumers will buy fewer vehicles made in Mexico, which would hurt the Mexican auto sector. Chinese automakers such as BYD have plans to open plants in Mexico , and while that investment could benefit Mexico in a variety of ways, it could also generate problems in Mexico’s relationship with its North American trade partners. Two Canadian provincial leaders have expressed concerns about Chinese investment in Mexico and even advocated a termination of the USMCA due to their belief that Mexico is too open to such investment. Donald Trump doesn’t want Chinese plants setting up plants on the United States’ doorstep either. While a termination of the USMCA would appear unlikely — the three-way pact will be “reviewed” in 2026 — any deterioration in Mexico’s trade relationship with the U.S. and Canada as a result of its openness to Chinese investment would have a detrimental impact on the Mexican economy. As I wrote last month : “From Mexico’s perspective, there are some important questions to consider. Is Chinese investment a blessing, a curse or both? Should Mexico continue welcoming all Chinese companies, including automakers, in pursuit of investment-related benefits such as job creation and higher economic growth? Or should it be very selective in the Chinese investment it accepts in order to avoid upsetting its North American trade partners?” The federal government has made it clear that its priority is strengthening trade and investment relationships with its North American neighbors, but it hasn’t shut the door completely on China. However, with regard to trade with China, Mexico is now making a concerted effort to reduce reliance on Chinese goods . For the import substitution plan to succeed production in Mexico will have to increase, which would benefit the Mexican economy. Additional tariffs on imports will also likely be needed to make Mexican-made goods more competitive. Just last week, the federal government announced new tariffs on textile goods including clothes to protect the Mexican textile industry. Cheap Chinese clothes will inevitably become more expensive, potentially upsetting Mexican consumers. Despite that, look out for more tariffs on Chinese products in 2025. We also included this story in our selection of the biggest news and politics stories of 2024 (see here). We’re including it here as well given the major impact U.S. tariffs would have on the Mexican economy if they were to be imposed on Mexican exports. Gabriela Siller, director of econonomic analysis at Banco Base, said in late November that the Mexican economy would go into recession if Trump keeps his word and imposes a 25% tariff on Mexican exports to the United States. Similarly, the Associated Press reported that “the tariffs would probably plunge Mexico into an immediate recession.” Some 150,000 export sector jobs would immediately be lost, according to manufacturing association INDEX . Siller also said that if the incoming U.S. president’s tariff threat “materializes,” foreign companies will “gradually” leave Mexico. Tariffs on Mexican exports to the United States would, of course, significantly diminish Mexico’s attractiveness as a nearshoring destination and make a “nearshoring boom” less likely in coming years. Mexico’s export sector — an engine of the Mexican economy — would inevitably suffer. Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that Japanese auto manufacturer Mazda was reconsidering its investment strategy in Mexico over uncertainty related to tariff threats made by Trump. In that respect, Mazda is certainly not alone. The Bank of Mexico’s benchmark interest rate was a record high 11.25% at the start of the year, having reached that level in March 2023 at the end of a 21-month tightening cycle aimed at combating high inflation. Now, after five interest rate cuts this year, the central bank’s key rate is 125 basis points lower at an even 10%. And Bank of Mexico Deputy Governor Jonathan Heath recently told reporters that the central bank could vote continue its easing cycle at its February 6 meeting and cut interest rates up to 50 basis points . At 4.55% in November , Mexico’s annual headline inflation is still above the Bank of Mexico’s 3% target, but the central bank has focused more on the decline in core inflation, which it has said “better reflects inflation’s trend.” The annual core inflation rate declined for a 22nd consecutive month in November to reach 3.58%. More interest rate cuts are expected in 2025 — and they would be very welcome in what is forecast to be a low-growth environment in Mexico. As is the case with FDI, economic growth data for 2024 won’t be published until early 2025, but there is no doubt that the Mexican economy slowed this year. GDP increased just 1.5% annually in the first nine months of the year compared to the same period last year, according to national statistics agency INEGI . That level of growth represents a significant slowdown compared to the 3.2% expansion of 2023 . The consensus forecast of analysts recently consulted by the Bank of Mexico is that the Mexican economy will record a growth rate of 1.6% in 2024 , and just 1.12% next year. Such low levels of growth are clearly not indicative of an economy that is booming as a result of high levels of foreign investment. The new federal government will certainly hope that growth will increase as it pursues a range of economic initiatives including a plan to develop 10 new industrial corridors spanning all 32 federal entities of Mexico . One positive despite this year’s economic slowdown is that Mexico’s job market has remained strong. The unemployment rate was 2.5% in October , just above the record low of 2.3% in March. The announcement that the United States would partner with Mexico in a new semiconductor initiative whose ultimate aim is to strengthen and grow the Mexican semiconductor industry was big news this year. The expectation is that the partnership — provided it continues during Trump’s second term — will bear fruit in the coming years. “What I see in five years is a very well-integrated [semiconductors] supply chain [in North America],” Pedro Casas Alatriste, executive vice president and CEO of the American Chamber of Commerce of Mexico, told Mexico News Daily in July . The U.S. also announced a regional semiconductor initiative in July that U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said would “turbocharge” capacity in the Americas to assemble, test and package the critical electronic components. And in October the United States Embassy in Mexico and the National Chamber for the Electronic, Telecommunications and Information Technology Industry presented a joint Master Plan for the Development of the Semiconductor Industry in Mexico for 2024 to 2030. As things stand, it appears that the semiconductor industry could play a significant role in the Mexican economy in coming years. Indeed, the growth of Mexico’s semiconductor sector could become one of Mexico’s biggest economic success stories in the years ahead. By Mexico News Daily chief staff writer Peter Davies ( [email protected] )