slot vip 999 WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats failed Wednesday to confirm a Democratic member of the National Labor Relations Board after independent Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema opposed the nomination, thwarting their hopes of locking in a majority at the federal agency for the first two years of President-elect Donald Trump's term. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats failed Wednesday to confirm a Democratic member of the National Labor Relations Board after independent Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema opposed the nomination, thwarting their hopes of locking in a majority at the federal agency for the first two years of President-elect Donald Trump's term. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats failed Wednesday to confirm a Democratic member of the National Labor Relations Board after independent Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema opposed the nomination, thwarting their hopes of locking in a majority at the federal agency for the first two years of President-elect Donald Trump’s term. A vote to move ahead with the nomination of Lauren McFarren, who currently chairs the NLRB, failed 49-50. Had she been confirmed to another five-year term, it would have cemented a Democratic majority on the agency’s board for the first two years of the incoming Trump administration. Now, Trump will likely be able to nominate McFarren’s replacement. The NLRB oversees labor disputes, supervises union elections and has the power to investigate unfair labor practices. The partisan breakdown of the NLRB’s leadership is fiercely contested by businesses and labor groups, as the majority on the board sets the agenda and determines how readily the agency uses its power to investigate and enforce labor laws. “It is deeply disappointing, a direct attack on working people, and incredibly troubling that this highly qualified nominee — with a proven track record of protecting worker rights — did not have the votes,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement. The rejection of McFarren was yet another blow to Senate Democrats and President Joe Biden from Manchin and Sinema, who served as major brakes — and at times outright obstacles — to much of their legislative agenda the first two years of Biden’s term. Manchin left the Democratic Party in May, while Sinema withdrew from the party in 2022. Both chose not to run for another Senate term and will be leaving the Congress in January. Some congressional Republicans praised Manchin and Sinema for preventing the confirmation. “This NLRB seat should be filled by President Trump and the new incoming Senate. Not a historically unpopular president and a Senate Democrat Majority that has lost its mandate to govern,” Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, said in a statement after the vote. “Big Labor knows the days of having the federal government do its bidding are numbered,” Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., wrote in a statement. Foxx, who chairs the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said that the incoming Trump administration would focus on “enacting a truly pro-worker agenda.” Business groups also praised the rejection of McFarren. Kristen Swearingen, a vice president at Associated Builders and Contractors, a trade group, called McFarren’s policies “harmful” and said the process to nominate her was “flawed.” “Under McFerran’s leadership, the NLRB has issued decisions and expanded interpretations of the National Labor Relations Act that have been rejected by the business community, Congress and federal courts,” argued Swearingen. Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. Labor unions decried the vote. Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest consortium of labor unions, said the senators who rejected McFarren’s nomination “voted against the working people of this country” and warned that the incoming Trump administration would direct the NLRB to side with management over workers. “Make no mistake: This vote had nothing to do with stopping Chair McFerran’s renomination and everything to do with reversing generations of progress workers have made toward building a fairer and more just economy,” Shuler said. Democratic lawmakers, like Schumer, took a dim view of the vote. Some directed their anger directly at Manchin and Sinema. “Shortchanging workers is a bad way to leave,” Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., wrote on social media. ___ Advertisement AdvertisementWhile it’s easy to get lost in the latest headlines, now is a good time to take action so that your retirement savings are working as hard as possible for you. By following this checklist, you can improve your investment options, lower your fees, reduce future taxes, and better organize your finances for long-term security. Have a retirement plan ‘reunion’ When financial planners start working with clients, one of the first things we request are the latest statements from all their investment accounts. Some clients easily provide updated reports, while others struggle to track them down. Even after working with us for years, some clients still remember an old account they forgot about. A former colleague called this the “weed garden” — small, forgotten accounts acquired over a series of career moves. With average job tenure perhaps shorter than ever, you don’t need to be that old to have a weed garden. These accounts are rarely monitored and may be invested in archaic, high-cost funds. Years from now those accounts may be completely forgotten. If you have multiple accounts scattered across various employers or financial institutions, now is the time to gather up those statements. This may require a little digging into your work history, but once you have those statements, you’re ready to take the next step. Consider consolidating your accounts While everyone’s financial situation is unique, in general there is little reason have more than a few retirement accounts. If you’re working for an employer with a retirement plan, you’ll want to keep that account open as you’re contributing to them and hopefully receiving an employer match. What about your older accounts? Taking a step back, know that while there are many varieties of retirement accounts, most of them fall into one of two camps — pre-tax and tax-free. In most cases your pre-tax retirement account balances can be moved directly without paying any tax into a traditional IRA or your current retirement plan. The same is true for your tax-free retirement accounts (also called Roth accounts) that may be rolled into a Roth IRA or retirement plan. With both pre-tax and tax-free accounts, you need to contact the investment company of the old plan that you want to move. Your current retirement plan could be a good target for those funds if it has several low-cost diversified investment choices. If you want more investment choices or work with a financial adviser that manages your accounts, you may favor a traditional IRA (pre-tax) or Roth IRA (tax-free). Inherited accounts are not as easy to consolidate, make sure you consult a professional before moving them. Make the right tax election — for most, that’s a Roth When we look at tax rates over the last few decades, you can see they are currently historically low. Unless you’re earning a high income now (above the 24% federal tax bracket), think about directing your retirement savings into tax-free accounts (Roth) rather than pre-tax. In doing so, you’re electing to pay taxes at low rates now to get tax-free investment growth and distributions later when you need the money. Are your investments still the right fit? Retirement accounts change over time with investment options being added and dropped. Look at your retirement accounts. Are they invested in low-cost investment funds? If you have holdings in high-cost investments, know why you’re making this choice as there’s a correlation with low costs and investment performance. It’s also a good time to reassess the risk level in your portfolio. Given the stock market’s strong performance recently, your asset allocation might have shifted, becoming more aggressive than intended. Consider rebalancing your portfolio to bring it back in line with your original investment strategy. If you’re not sure how to invest your retirement funds, a good starting point can be a target retirement fund with the year closest to your projected retirement date. Older workers can boost their contributions In 2025, a new benefit for workers aged 60 to 63 will go into effect under the Secure 2.0 Act. These workers will be able to contribute an additional $3,750 to their 401(k) for a total contribution limit of $34,750 (compared to $23,500 for those under 50, and $31,000 for those 50 and over). If you’re nearing retirement age, this “Super Catch-Up” provision can be a valuable opportunity to boost your retirement savings in the final years before retirement. David Gardner is a certified financial planner and is admitted to practice before the IRS. He recently retired from an independent investment advisory firm and continues to write about financial topics. As financial planning is only possible after knowing the client, the column is not intended to be personal financial or tax advice. Data presented is believed to be accurate at the time of writing.

What to Know About Canadian Consumer Retail Stocks for 2025U.S. tech stocks have gotten extremely expensive. The big-name tech companies (i.e., , , and are all trading well North of 30 times earnings, while some smaller ones like ( ) are at 60 times I’m not saying that U.S. tech stocks are necessarily overvalued today. However, the further their prices rise, the lesser the odds that they will continue to rise further. We are currently in the midst of a two-year bull market in tech stocks that shows no signs of slowing down. In fact, you could argue that we are in a 16-year bull market in tech stocks, one that was interrupted very briefly in 2018, 2020, and 2022 but never seriously challenged as a long-term trend. The periods just referred to were technically “bear markets,” but they didn’t last long. The 16-year trend is clear. You have to wonder how long this party can go on for — the U.S. tech sector is currently valued at an amount approaching that of U.S. GDP. That doesn’t mean a bear market is a near-term certainty, but on a long-term basis, these valuations could cause some problems. In this article, I will explore why U.S. tech stocks have gotten so expensive and why “this time isn’t different.” 46 times cash flow According to CSI Market, the U.S. tech sector is currently trading at 46 times cash flow. The company’s report does not state whether it is talking about operating cash flow or free cash flow, but the multiple is extremely high regardless of which cash flow metric you look at. 46 times cash flow multiples tend not to last long. The U.S. tech stocks are growing, so the multiple could come down because of that. However, these companies’ growth rates are, in many cases, not that high. Also, the growth could reverse, like it did in 2022. The incredible story of Palantir’s nosebleed valuation One company that serves to illustrate the priciness of U.S. tech stocks is Palantir. Trading at 200 times adjusted earnings, 354 times reported earnings, and 60 times sales, it is one of the most expensive large cap stocks of all time. The company’s stock got expensive thanks in no small part to an army of retail investors who “pumped” it on X (the social media app formerly known as Twitter). If history is any indication, PLTR will come crashing down like the meme stocks of yesteryear. Some alternatives to consider If you’re worried about overvaluation in the U.S. tech sector, you could move your money into non-U.S. stocks or bonds. Non-U.S. stocks are than U.S. stocks on average, despite, in many cases, performing as well in fundamental terms. An exchange-traded fund (ETF) of Canadian stocks would make a lot of sense here. The are more heavily concentrated in value sectors like banking, energy, and utilities compared to the U.S. markets. So, investing in a TSX index fund could be one way to diversify your portfolio away from the 60-times-sales wonders dominating the U.S. markets. Consider ( ), for example. It’s an ETF based on the S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index — the 240 biggest Canadian stocks by market cap. The fund actually holds 220 of the 240 stocks, meaning that it represents its benchmark fairly well. Why would an investor consider taking a position in a fund like XIC? First, it’s very diversified, which reduces the risk in its holdings. Second, its holdings are fairly modestly valued. Third, its management fee is only 0.05%, so you don’t need to worry about paying most of your return out to the fund managers. It all adds up to a very sensible fund that could diversify your portfolio away from the unbelievably expensive U.S. tech sector.

Commerce Bank cut its stake in shares of ResMed Inc. ( NYSE:RMD – Free Report ) by 3.5% during the 3rd quarter, according to its most recent 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm owned 6,375 shares of the medical equipment provider’s stock after selling 234 shares during the quarter. Commerce Bank’s holdings in ResMed were worth $1,556,000 as of its most recent SEC filing. A number of other institutional investors have also recently made changes to their positions in the stock. OFI Invest Asset Management bought a new stake in ResMed in the second quarter valued at approximately $32,000. Ashton Thomas Securities LLC acquired a new stake in shares of ResMed during the third quarter worth $34,000. Versant Capital Management Inc raised its stake in ResMed by 196.7% during the second quarter. Versant Capital Management Inc now owns 181 shares of the medical equipment provider’s stock worth $35,000 after buying an additional 120 shares during the last quarter. Financial Connections Group Inc. acquired a new position in ResMed in the second quarter valued at $37,000. Finally, Blue Trust Inc. boosted its position in ResMed by 182.7% during the second quarter. Blue Trust Inc. now owns 212 shares of the medical equipment provider’s stock valued at $42,000 after acquiring an additional 137 shares during the last quarter. Institutional investors own 54.98% of the company’s stock. Insider Activity In other ResMed news, insider Kaushik Ghoshal sold 5,000 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction on Thursday, September 12th. The stock was sold at an average price of $252.56, for a total value of $1,262,800.00. Following the completion of the transaction, the insider now owns 21,788 shares in the company, valued at $5,502,777.28. This represents a 18.67 % decrease in their position. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available through the SEC website . Also, CFO Brett Sandercock sold 1,000 shares of the firm’s stock in a transaction on Monday, September 9th. The shares were sold at an average price of $246.42, for a total value of $246,420.00. Following the sale, the chief financial officer now directly owns 96,812 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $23,856,413.04. This represents a 1.02 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . Insiders sold a total of 62,174 shares of company stock valued at $14,882,278 over the last three months. Corporate insiders own 0.71% of the company’s stock. Analyst Upgrades and Downgrades Check Out Our Latest Analysis on ResMed ResMed Price Performance Shares of NYSE:RMD opened at $243.78 on Friday. The company has a current ratio of 2.92, a quick ratio of 1.91 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.13. The stock has a market cap of $35.79 billion, a PE ratio of 32.29, a price-to-earnings-growth ratio of 1.77 and a beta of 0.69. The stock’s fifty day simple moving average is $241.86 and its two-hundred day simple moving average is $224.47. ResMed Inc. has a 1-year low of $151.95 and a 1-year high of $260.49. ResMed ( NYSE:RMD – Get Free Report ) last released its quarterly earnings results on Thursday, October 24th. The medical equipment provider reported $2.20 earnings per share for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $2.03 by $0.17. ResMed had a net margin of 23.15% and a return on equity of 25.53%. The company had revenue of $1.22 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $1.19 billion. During the same period last year, the firm earned $1.64 earnings per share. The firm’s revenue was up 11.1% on a year-over-year basis. As a group, analysts forecast that ResMed Inc. will post 9.28 EPS for the current fiscal year. ResMed Dividend Announcement The firm also recently announced a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Thursday, December 12th. Stockholders of record on Thursday, November 7th will be paid a $0.53 dividend. The ex-dividend date is Thursday, November 7th. This represents a $2.12 dividend on an annualized basis and a dividend yield of 0.87%. ResMed’s payout ratio is presently 28.08%. ResMed Company Profile ( Free Report ) ResMed Inc develops, manufactures, distributes, and markets medical devices and cloud-based software applications for the healthcare markets. The company operates in two segments, Sleep and Respiratory Care, and Software as a Service. It offers various products and solutions for a range of respiratory disorders, including ApneaLink Air, a portable diagnostic device that measures oximetry, respiratory effort, pulse, nasal flow, and snoring; and NightOwl, a portable, cloud-connected, and disposable diagnostic device that measures AHI based on derived peripheral arterial tone, actigraphy, and oximetry over several nights. Recommended Stories Want to see what other hedge funds are holding RMD? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for ResMed Inc. ( NYSE:RMD – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for ResMed Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for ResMed and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

None

Forexlive Americas FX news wrap: USD/JPY rallies for a second day, AUD struggles after RBA

Steelers believe they're Super Bowl contenders. The next 3 weeks will see if they're right

OTTAWA — First Nations leaders are split over next steps after a landmark $47.8-billion child welfare reform deal with Canada was struck down, prompting differing legal opinions from both sides. The Assembly of First Nations and a board member of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society have received competing legal opinions on potential ways forward. Ontario Regional Chief Abram Benedict says the chiefs he represents are still hoping the agreement that chiefs outside the province voted down two months ago is not moot. Chiefs in Ontario are interveners in the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal case that led to its realization. He added there are also concerns that some of the elements in the new negotiation mandate outlined by chiefs in an October assembly go beyond the current governance structure of the Assembly of First Nations. "There will have to be action by the Assembly of First Nations in the very near future to advance these positions, but you also need willing partners," Benedict said. "We're still considering what our options are." Those options are also being debated in legal reviews commissioned by the Assembly of First Nations and a board member of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, which are both parties to the human rights case, along with Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Khelsilem, a chairperson from the Squamish Nation who penned a resolution that defeated the deal in October, critiqued the stance of Ontario First Nations by saying they negotiated a "bad agreement" for First Nations outside the province and now that chiefs want to go back to the table for a better deal, they want to split from the process entirely. "It potentially undermines the collective unity of First Nations to achieve something that is going to benefit all of us," he said. The $47.8-billion agreement was struck in July after decades of advocacy and litigation from First Nations and experts, seeking to redress discrimination against First Nations children who were torn from their families and placed in foster care. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal said Canada’s underfunding was discriminatory because it meant kids living on reserve were given fewer services than those living off reserves, and tasked Canada with reaching an agreement with First Nations to reform the system. The agreement was meant to cover 10 years of funding for First Nations to take control of their own child welfare services from the federal government. Chiefs and service providers critiqued the deal for months, saying it didn’t go far enough to ensure an end to the discrimination. They have also blasted the federal government for what they say is its failure to consult with First Nations in negotiations, and for the exclusion of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, which helped launched the initial human rights complaint. In October at a special chiefs assembly in Calgary, the deal was struck down through two resolutions. The Assembly of First Nations sought a legal review of those resolutions by Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP — a firm where the former national chief of the organization, Perry Bellegarde, works as a special adviser. In the legal review from Fasken, it appears as though the assembly asked for direction on how to get "rid" of two resolutions used to vote down the deal, with an employee of the firm saying they can review the resolutions together if they want them both gone, or they can "leave room for compromise" with one of the resolutions. In a statement, the Assembly of First Nations said the review was conducted to assess the legal, technical and operational aspects of the resolutions to ensure their "effective implementation." "The opinions formed by external counsel are their own and do not reflect the views or positions of the AFN," said Andrew Bisson, the chief executive officer, who added it's not unusual for the organization to seek such reviews. Bisson did not address the language used by a Fasken employee to "get rid" of resolutions, but said "the legal and technical reviews were conducted in good faith, not to undermine the chiefs' direction. The chiefs have provided clear direction, and the AFN is committed to following that direction." The legal reviews from Fasken, dated Nov. 15, argue that the October resolutions on child welfare require a significant review of who voted for them, along with changes to the organization's charter should they be implemented. Resolution 60 called for a rejection of the final settlement agreement, and for the establishment of a Children's Chiefs Commission that will be representative of all regions and negotiate long-term reforms. It also called for the AFN's executive committee to "unconditionally include" the Caring Society in negotiations. Fasken said that commission is contrary to the AFN's charter, and the law, because the AFN's executive committee doesn't have the power to create one, and that the executive committee "alone" has the authority to execute mandates on behalf of the assembly. It adds there are no accountability measures for the new negotiation body, and that it will represent regions that are not participants in the AFN. Resolution 61, which built upon resolution 60, is similarly against the charter for the same reasons, the review says. As such, it says, the resolutions can't be implemented. The firm also wrote that there were alleged conflicts of interest during the October vote, saying "numerous proxies were also employees, shareholders, directors, agents or otherwise had a vested interest" in the First Nations child and family service agencies whose interests were the subject of the resolutions. Chief Joe Miskokomon of Chippewas of the Thames First Nation in southwestern Ontario called that "political deception." In response to that review, a board member of the Caring Society, which has been a vocal critic of the July deal, sought their own. The review penned by Aird Berlis for Mary Teegee and dated Dec. 2 stated it was "inappropriate for the AFN to seek, and not disclose, legal opinions which are then cited to attempt to second-guess decisions already made by the First Nations in Assembly." It also states that while the AFN's vice-president of strategic policy and integration, Amber Potts, raised concerns with the movers and seconders of the resolutions, the entirety of the legal opinion the assembly sought was not shared with them. Teegee's review challenges that of the AFN's by saying the resolutions are consistent with the AFN's charter, and that nothing restricts First Nations in assembly from expressing their sovereign will by delegating authority to another entity. "AFN's role and purpose at all times is to effect the sovereign will of First Nations, however it is expressed, on 'any matter' that they see fit," the review from Aird Berlis reads. "It is too late to attempt to question the resolutions. They are now final." This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 9, 2024. Alessia Passafiume, The Canadian Press

Hegseth meets with moderate Sen. Collins as he lobbies for key votes in the Senate

Apollomics Regains Compliance with Nasdaq's Minimum Bid Price RequirementNone

Emergence of the new SyriaNEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stock indexes got back to climbing on Wednesday after the latest update on inflation appeared to clear the way for more help for the economy from the Federal Reserve . The S&P 500 rose 0.8% to break its first two-day losing streak in nearly a month and finished just short of its all-time high. Big Tech stocks led the way, which drove the Nasdaq composite up 1.8% to top the 20,000 level for the first time. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, meanwhile, lagged the market with a dip of 99 points, or 0.2%. Stocks got a boost as expectations built that Wednesday’s inflation data will allow the Fed to deliver another cut to interest rates at its meeting next week. Traders are betting on a nearly 99% probability of that, according to data from CME Group, up from 89% a day before. If they’re correct, it would be a third straight cut by the Fed after it began lowering rates in September from a two-decade high. It’s hoping to support a slowing job market after getting inflation nearly all the way down to its 2% target. Lower rates would give a boost to the economy and to prices for investments, but they could also provide more fuel for inflation. “The data have given the Fed the ‘all clear’ for next week, and today’s inflation data keep a January cut in active discussion,” according to Ellen Zentner, chief economic strategist for Morgan Stanley Wealth Management. Expectations for a series of cuts to rates by the Fed have been one of the main reasons the S&P 500 has set an all-time high 57 times this year , with the latest coming last week. The biggest boosts for the index on Wednesday came from Nvidia and other Big Tech stocks. Their massive growth has made them Wall Street’s biggest stars for years, though other kinds of stocks have recently been catching up somewhat amid hopes for the broader U.S. economy. Tesla jumped 5.9% to finish above $420 at $424.77. It’s a level that Elon Musk made famous in a 2018 tweet when he said he had secured funding to take Tesla private at $420 per share . Stitch Fix soared 44.3% after the company that sends clothes to your door reported a smaller loss for the latest quarter than analysts expected. It also gave financial forecasts for the current quarter that were better than expected, including for revenue. GE Vernova rallied 5% for one of the biggest gains in the S&P 500. The energy company that spun out of General Electric said it would pay a 25 cent dividend every three months, and it approved a plan to send up to another $6 billion to its shareholders by buying back its own stock. On the losing end of Wall Street, Dave & Buster’s Entertainment tumbled 20.1% after reporting a worse loss for the latest quarter than expected. It also said CEO Chris Morris has resigned, and the board has been working with an executive-search firm for the last few months to find its next permanent leader. Albertsons fell 1.5% after filing a lawsuit against Kroger, saying it didn’t do enough for their proposed $24.6 billion merger agreement to win regulatory clearance. Albertsons said it’s seeking billions of dollars in damages from Kroger, whose stock rose 1%. A day earlier, judges in separate cases in Oregon and Washington nixed the supermarket giants’ merger. The grocers contended a combination could have helped them compete with big retailers like Walmart, Costco and Amazon, but critics said it would hurt competition. After terminating the merger agreement with Kroger, Albertsons said it plans to boost its dividend 25% and increased the size of its program to buy back its own stock. Macy’s slipped 0.8% after cutting some of its financial forecasts for the full year of 2024, including for how much profit it expects to make off each $1 of revenue. All told, the S&P 500 rose 49.28 points to 6,084.19. The Dow dipped 99.27 to 44,148.56, and the Nasdaq composite rallied 347.65 to 20,034.89. In the bond market, the yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 4.27% from 4.23% late Tuesday. The two-year Treasury yield, which more closely tracks expectations for the Fed, edged up to 4.15% from 4.14%. In stock markets abroad, indexes rose across much of Europe and Asia. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng was an outlier and slipped 0.8% as Chinese leaders convened an annual planning meeting in Beijing that is expected to set economic policies and growth targets for the coming year. South Korea’s Kospi rose 1%, up for a second straight day as it climbs back following last week’s political turmoil where its president briefly declared martial law. AP Writers Matt Ott and Zimo Zhong contributed.A Top ETF to Buy With $2,000 and Hold Forever