Trump Ready To Raise "Core Of China's Core Interests" In Xi Summit: Daily Schedule & What To Expect

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to raise the issue of increasingly costly US arms transfers to Taiwan during their bilateral summit at the end of this week, spanning Thursday through Friday. Taiwan of course remains the "core of China's core interests" - as Beijing has in the recent past characterized the issue. While Trump officials have previewed that it will be focused on trade and investment, the White House too is reportedly placing Taiwan and regional geopolitical hot button issues on the agenda.

"I'm going to have that discussion with President Xi," Trump told reporters at the White House, specifically on the question of weapons sales. "President Xi would like us not to, and I’ll have that discussion. That's one of the many things I’ll be talking about."

via Reuters

Also there's the looming question of the future of the Iran war and blockaded Strait of Hormuz. Currently there's a stalemated situation and supposed ceasefire which is barely holding. By many accounts, Trump was hopeful that the Iran 'excursion' would be wrapped up by now, but it now seems to be sliding into protracted quagmire - critics point out.

The WSJ says that Beijing is feeling confident as it prepares to receive Trump and what's looking to be a rather large entourage:

But behind the scenes, Beijing feels more emboldened, and more insistent on defending areas it regards as vital to its long-term strategic interests.

These include resisting U.S. pressure to relax its grip over global supply chains and fundamentally rebalance trade between the two countries. They also include urging Washington to look the other way as it pressures Taiwan, the self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its own, and as it projects military power across Asia.

“They feel very well about how last year played out,” said Jonathan Czin, a fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution and a former U.S. intelligence officer focused on China. “They showed they could weather the storm and the administration had to climb down from the tariffs and spend most of the past year trying to mollify China.”

As for more implications of the Iran war dragging on as Trump goes to Beijing, CNBC writes:

Iran’s ambassador to China Reza Rahmani Fazli in a Tuesday post on X pressed Tehran's case with Beijing, saying that the relationship between the two is too strong for the U.S. to overcome.

The bottom line is that higher energy prices are baked in for the foreseeable future. The price of crude oil makes up about half of the cost of a gallon of gas, according to the Energy Information Administration. 

And U.S. elections are less than six months away. The 2026 midterm elections will be a crucial referendum on Trump and the Republican Party as they seek to retain a lock on both chambers in Congress.

Trump early Tuesday put out the following message on Truth Social, teasing that the next regime change operations could be unleashed on China's small island-nation ally in America's immediate backyard...

For some further big picture analysis on how the Iran gambit has raised the stakes, and made the Beijing summit more unpredictable, the below is some fresh Rabobank commentary outlining related developments to watch:

In a case of curious timing, the US just imposed fresh sanctions on individuals and firms involved in facilitating Iranian oil sales to China, and Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao yesterday released a new 30-year shipbuilding plan. That plan anticipates the acquisition of 11 nuclear-powered Trump class battleships, new underwater drones, and an ongoing review to the Ford class aircraft carrier design to increase lethality and reliability while reducing unit costs and production lead times. The planned expansion of the US fleet and shipbuilding industrial base is undoubtedly a reaction to China’s growing naval strength and substantial advantage in production capacity. The message to Xi is an unsubtle one.

The FT’s Gideon Rachman characterises Trump as arriving at Xi’s court in a state of supplication, having effectively lost the trade war vs China and the shooting war vs Iran. This perhaps overstates the weakness of Trump’s position by ignoring the fact that the US has tightened its grip on global energy supply chains and has shown that is has the power to put its foot on the hosepipe of Chinese energy imports whenever it likes. In the flurry of commentary over China’s bumper trade surplus in April, it seems to have been missed that import volumes for crude oil were down sharply, but values were higher. Yesterday’s April PPI figures for China also underscored the uncomfortable effects that the Iran war is having on the Chinese industrial economy.

Xi will be acutely aware of this, and he will also be aware that the US holds similar power to disrupt Chinese food imports if it was of a mind to do so. Seapower IS power, as the shipbuilding plan should remind us all. In this respect, Trump holds better cards than the FT is giving him credit for. Perhaps it is no coincidence that China bought more soybeans in April than it had done for months.

Some more of Trump's latest commentary amid his hope for a 'good' Xi meeting:

Trump: If you have the right president, I don't think Taiwan invasion will happen. I have a very good relationship with President Xi.

We're 9,500 miles away. He's 67 miles away. But there’s a lot of support for Taiwan from Japan and countries in that area. 2X pic.twitter.com/8ipHIKy4pM

— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) May 12, 2026

Below is a preview of the day-by-day schedule and what to expect, via Newsquawk.

*  *  *

PREVIEW: Trump-Xi Summit to take place in Beijing on May 14th-15th

• US President Trump and Chinese President Xi are set to meet in Beijing for the first time since October 2025. The public tone is expected to be warm and friendly, while the substance of the meeting will cover a range of topics.
• No breakthrough is expected in US-China relations, with attention instead focused on implications for Iran and Taiwan.The situation in Iran will likely be one of the core topics, with some fearing an Iran-for-Taiwan bargain.

SCHEDULE

• Trump is expected to arrive in Beijing on the evening of Wednesday, 13th May.
• The main Trump-Xi talks are expected across Thursday, 14th May and Friday, 15th May.

THURSDAY

• The White House said Trump will meet Xi on Thursday at 10:15 Beijing time / 03:15BST / 22:15EDT.
• Thursday is expected to be the main ceremonial and diplomatic day, including a welcome ceremony, Temple of Heaven visit, formal bilateral meeting and state banquet.
• The banquet is scheduled for Thursday at 18:00 Beijing time / 11:00BST / 06:00EDT.

FRIDAY

• Discussions are expected to continue on Friday, including extended talks and a working lunch before Trump’s departure later in the day.

AGENDA

• Iran: A primary focus will be the war in Iran, with the US pressing China to use its influence over Tehran to support de-escalation, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and curb oil-funded escalation.
• Taiwan: Taiwan is expected to be one of the most sensitive issues, with concern focused on whether Xi pushes Trump for softer US language on Taiwan independence or restraint on arms sales.
• Russia: The US is expected to raise China’s economic ties with Russia, including revenue flows, dual-use goods, components, parts and potential weapons-related support.
• Strategic guardrails: The leaders are expected to discuss a possible formal AI communication channel to manage military and cyber risks, alongside nuclear arms-control issues, although Beijing remains cautious on nuclear arsenal transparency.
• Commercial: The summit could produce major “big win” announcements, including Chinese purchases of Boeing aircraft, agricultural products such as soybeans and beef, and energy.
• Board of Trade/Investment: Proposals are on the table for a bilateral Board of Trade and Board of Investment, designed to manage trade and investment flows through formal channels rather than relying mainly on tariff escalation.

DETAILS

Iran/Strait of Hormuz

• Primary summit focus: The war in Iran, which began after US and Israeli strikes on 28th February, is expected to be one of the dominant geopolitical issues at the meeting.
• US pressure on Beijing: Washington is said to be pressing China to use its influence over Tehran, given China’s role as a major buyer of Iranian oil, to push Iran towards a deal and support efforts to end the conflict.
• Strait of Hormuz: The US is expected to press China to help secure the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
• China’s position: Beijing has so far avoided joining a US-led pressure campaign against Tehran, while continuing to call for de-escalation and a diplomatic resolution.
• China’s exposure: China’s dependence on Gulf energy flows gives it a direct interest in ending the Hormuz disruption.
• Sanctions: Days before the summit, on May 11th, the US issued new sanctions against three individuals and nine companies accused of facilitating Iranian oil shipments to China.

Taiwan

• Arms sales: Trump said he will discuss US arms sales to Taiwan with Xi, alongside other sensitive issues, including Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai. The Trump admin announced a more than USD 11bln weapons package for Taiwan in December, the largest-ever US weapons package for Taiwan.
• No policy change: US officials have said the Trump-Xi summit signals no change in longstanding US policy toward Taiwan.
• China’s position: China said its stance against US arms sales to Taiwan is “consistent and clear.” Beijing continues to frame Taiwan as a core issue and a red line in US-China relations.
• Semiconductor angle: Taiwan’s strategic importance is also tied to the US technology supply chain, particularly semiconductors and advanced manufacturing.
• South China Sea: Regional security is likely to come up alongside Taiwan, military communication and wider US-China strategic competition. The South China Sea remains a persistent flashpoint, with US concerns around Chinese military activity and Chinese objections to US regional deployments and alliances in the region, such as the AUKUS security pact.

Iran-for-Taiwan Risk

• Linkage: There has been reporting and speculation that Beijing could seek to trade help on Iran or the Strait of Hormuz for US restraint on Taiwan, including softer language on Taiwan independence or reduced pressure around arms sales.
• Concerns: The concern is that Beijing may offer help on Iran or the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz in return for softer US language on Taiwan or restraint on arms sales. Politico reported that diplomats from Asian and European countries are worried Trump could make an off-script statement that appears to shift US policy on Taiwan. Taiwanese officials have expressed concern about being “on the menu” during the Trump-Xi talks.
• Shift in Language: The key wording risk is a shift from the current US formulation of “we do not support Taiwan independence” to Beijing’s preferred wording of “we oppose Taiwan independence.” Desks suggest that a shift would be significant as Beijing could use it to challenge routine US-Taiwan engagement, including arms sales, lawmaker visits and other political contacts.
• US Position: Despite the speculation, US officials have publicly stated that US policy toward Taiwan will not change at the summit.

China's Backing of Iran and Russia

• Direct confrontation: Trump is expected to press Xi over China’s economic and material support for Iran and Russia.
• Iranian oil: China remains a major buyer of Iranian oil, and Washington views those flows as helping Tehran withstand US pressure and finance military activity.
• Russia links: The US is also expected to raise China’s economic ties with Russia, including whether Chinese trade is helping Moscow sustain its war effort.
• Dual-use goods: Officials cited concerns around Chinese dual-use goods, components, parts and potential weapons exports to Iran and Russia.
• Iran weapons sanctions: On 8th May, the US imposed sanctions on individuals and companies, including China- and Hong Kong-based entities, accused of helping Iran obtain materials for Shahed drones and ballistic missiles.
• Iran oil sanctions: On 11 May, the US imposed separate sanctions on three individuals and nine companies accused of facilitating Iranian oil shipments to China.
• 50% tariff threat: Trump previously threatened 50% tariffs on imports from countries supplying military weapons to Iran, with no exemptions.

Trade

• Trump tariff stance: Trump commented that the US needs more tariffs, keeping tariff risk firmly on the table.
• Trade-truce extension: The two sides are expected to discuss whether to extend the existing trade-war truce.
• Unclear timing: A US official said it is not yet clear whether the agreement will be extended this week, but expressed confidence that it will eventually be extended.
• October meeting: Trump and Xi's last meeting in October in South Korea resulted in a pause to a trade war that had seen the US impose triple-digit tariffs on Chinese goods and Beijing threaten rare earth restrictions.
• Tariff Legality: Trump has vowed to reimpose some tariffs through alternative legal avenues after the Supreme Court said in February.
• Investments
• Trade and investment forums: Reports suggested that the US and China are expected to agree on forums to facilitate mutual trade and investment.
• Board of Trade / Board of Investment: A Board of Trade and Board of Investment may be formally announced, although officials said these mechanisms may require further work before implementation.
• Chinese purchase announcements: China is expected to announce purchases related to Boeing (BA) aircraft, US agriculture and energy.
• Sectors to watch: The main areas to watch are aircraft, agriculture, energy, trade flows, investment access, market-opening commitments, payments access, technology restrictions and regulatory approvals.
• Delegation: Executives from Tesla (TSLA), Apple (AAPL), Boeing (BA), GE Aerospace (GE), Meta Platforms (META), BlackRock (BLK), Blackstone (BX), Micron (MU), Mastercard (MA), Qualcomm (QCOM), Visa (V), Cargill, Coherent (COHR) and Illumina (ILMN) are part of, or linked to, the US business delegation. Cisco (CSCO) was invited but its CEO is not attending due to earnings, while NVIDIA (NVDA) CEO Jensen Huang is not attending.

AI

• AI channel: Trump and Xi are expected to discuss creating a formal US-China communication channel on AI-related security risks.
• US concern: US officials are increasingly concerned about advanced Chinese AI models and their potential military, cyber and intelligence uses.
• Military risk: Talks are expected to cover AI risks in autonomous weapons, cyber operations and military decision-making.
• Nuclear guardrails: AI may also be discussed alongside nuclear stability, including keeping AI out of nuclear launch decisions.
• Export controls: Any AI dialogue will sit against the backdrop of US chip controls and wider tech restrictions on China.
• Nuclear arms-control
• US stance: Washington has long sought nuclear arms-control talks with Beijing.
• China's stance: China has privately told the US it has no current interest in sitting down for nuclear arms-control discussions.
• No breakthrough: Expectations for a breakthrough on nuclear arms control remain low, but even agreement to continue dialogue would be net constructive.

Fentanyl

• US stance: The US is expected to press China on precursor chemicals and enforcement against supply chains linked to the opioid crisis.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 15:00
https://ift.tt/l4BE7pk
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/l4BE7pk
via IFTTT

Trump Ready To Raise "Core Of China's Core Interests" In Xi Summit: Daily Schedule & What To Expect

Chief Justice Roberts Has No Spine

Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,

He’s a judicial pimp who pragmatically defends the Establishment’s bottom line.

I do not like Chief Justice John Roberts.  I think his loyalties lie more with defending the entrenched powers of the political Establishment than with defending the Constitution of the United States.  I find his jurisprudence squishy.  Although his decisions could be described as advancing, more often than not, conservative viewpoints, Roberts does not seem to have a consistent philosophy guiding his opinions.

Roberts is a pragmatist.  He surveys the mood of the country and considers how the rest of the members of the Court will vote on any case, and he chooses a position that he feels will best preserve the institutional longevity of the Judicial Branch.  Roberts is, in other words, more interested in maintaining the power of the branch that he embodies than in making tough, but correct, decisions.

None of Roberts’ rulings better exemplifies this pragmatic, amoral approach to jurisprudence than his 2012 decision to save Obamacare by redefining the individual insurance mandate as a tax, rather than as a penalty.  During oral arguments, the Obama administration barely addressed the possibility that the mandate could be seen as a tax.  Democrats did not want to admit that nationalizing health insurance would increase costs for Americans, and the word “tax” certainly implies that prices will rise (which they did).

President Obama had been haranguing the Court for over a year that should it strike down his signature welfare legislation putting the federal government in control of American medicine, the decision would be disastrous for the American people and render the Court illegitimate.  Roberts lives in the D.C. bubble.  All his friends live in the D.C. bubble.  The Democrat-controlled corporate news media reflect the prevailing opinions of those who live within the D.C. bubble.  So Chief Justice Roberts chose to avoid leftist backlash (and to protect the Establishment’s sizable financial investments in government-controlled, socialized medicine) by aligning himself with Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

Obama celebrated Roberts’ valuable assist: “The highest court in the land has now spoken,” the president gloated.  It is worth noting that similarly squishy jurist Justice Anthony Kennedy (a man whom Democrats succeeded in elevating to the Court after scuttling President Reagan’s original nomination of Robert Bork and then his replacement nomination of Douglas Ginsburg) actually joined the conservative members of the Court in a dissent that would have invalidated Obamacare in its entirety.  Because Roberts joined the four leftist members of the Court in protecting Obama’s government takeover of the medical profession, healthcare is substantially more expensive and provides substantially worse treatment today.

Roberts’ constitutionally illiterate and philosophically unsound Obamacare opinion permitted a nefarious government-corporate power axis to take hold that has killed private practices across the country, made every medical doctor a de facto government employee, replaced medical science with government-regulated treatments, and inserted a government bureaucrat inside every examination room.  But Roberts did preserve his standing in the D.C. bubble, maximize the profits of large insurance companies, bankrupt rural hospitals, increase the investment portfolio-generated wealth of insider-trading members of Congress, eliminate small practices that prioritized patient care, and let labor unions off the hook for healthcare obligations that they owed to their members.  Furthermore, an entire generation of young leftists — too ignorant to know that President Obama and his fellow Democrats are responsible for the horrible state of healthcare in the United States today — openly celebrate the assassination of health insurance company executives walking down the street.

When the issue of Obamacare’s unconstitutionality came before the Roberts Court, the chief justice could have saved the country from all the harm that has come from forcing another illegitimate government power grab upon the American people.  But that would have taken guts, wisdom, and principle.  Roberts has none of those virtues.  He’s a judicial pimp who pragmatically defends the Establishment’s bottom line.  The medical profession in America is worse off and American patients are poorer and less healthy because of Roberts’ cowardice.

What I find particularly galling about the chief justice, however, is that he demands to be respected as some kind of impartial and inherently righteous judicial priest.  If he could admit that he lacks a jurisprudential backbone and primarily represents the interests of the Establishment Blob in D.C., I would grant him some small measure of respect for being self-aware enough to understand that he is little more than a swampy, Leviathan-controlled, gelatinous judge whose opinions can be molded into whatever D.C.’s “elites” need.  But Roberts is not honest enough to do that.  Instead, he pretends to be above venal politics and struts around in his priestly robes as if he represents a branch of government too holy to be tainted by the inherently corrupting influence of power.

Although Roberts never said anything when Obama and his Democrat goons were threatening the Court before its damaging Obamacare decision, the chief justice jumped into action in 2018 to reprimand President Trump during his first term.  Trump had publicly excoriated a 9th Circuit judge for usurping constitutional powers vested to the president of the United States.  In doing so, Trump called the judicial tyrant “an Obama judge.”  Well, that rather anodyne remark threw Chief Justice Roberts into a “Why, I never” tizzy, and the Judicial Branch’s limp caretaker found his way to a member of the Democrat-controlled press in order to correct the president’s errant thinking: “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.  What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”

Uhhh…sure, Chief Justice Gumby.  Why would a grown man feel compelled to tell such a blatant lie?  The whole country knows that judges come with certain ideological proclivities that influence their decisions on the bench.  While Republican presidents have repeatedly stumbled into nominating raging leftists (among them, Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice David Souter) to the Supreme Court, nobody has any doubt that federal judges are chosen for their perceived philosophical bent.

This problem exists only because federal judges have proved incapable of performing their jobs with self-restraint.  In the past, Roberts has correctly defined the Judiciary’s obligations: “Our role is very clear.  We are to interpret the Constitution and laws of the United States and ensure that the political branches act within them.”  But that’s not how most judges act!  Instead of interpreting the Constitution, federal judges rewrite the Constitution.  Instead of interpreting laws written by Congress, federal judges rewrite those laws into laws of their own.  For Roberts to pretend that federal judges have not spent the last century imposing their will upon the American people makes him richly deserving of Queen Gertrude’s quip: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Eight years later, Lady Roberts is still protesting!  In a speech last week in Hershey, Pennsylvania, the chief justice claimed that judges are not “political actors.”  (Tell that to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, whose opinions sound as if they were written by teenaged Marxists with dog-eared copies of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals!)  Roberts lamented how too many Americans “think we’re making policy decisions.”  (Perhaps that’s because too many judges are, in fact, making policy decisions!)  The chief justice also insisted that it is “not appropriate” for Americans to criticize individual judges.

Well, perhaps Chief Justice Roberts should convince his federal judges to stop behaving as partisan hacks!  Rather than permitting, through his silence, individual judges to usurp the powers of the president of the United States, perhaps Roberts should call those tyrannical judges out by name.  If he wants the Judicial Branch to be perceived as “independent” and “nonpartisan,” then he should insist that judges exercise constitutional self-restraint!

But he won’t do that.  Because Roberts has opinions but no spine.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/11/2026 - 15:40
https://ift.tt/0nWBFJi
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/0nWBFJi
via IFTTT

Chief Justice Roberts Has No Spine

Secret Israeli Base Hidden In Iraqi Desert Backed Operations Inside Iran

In a revelation sure to outrage Baghdad and broad swathes of the Iraqi public, Israel established a secret military base in Iraq's desert region to support air operations against Iran, related to the start of Trump's Operation Epic Fury, The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.

Israeli forces even at one point launched airstrikes early in the conflict on Iraqi troops who approached the site and risked exposing it, per sources cited in the report. The outpost was reportedly erected under extreme secrecy shortly before the US and Israel launched the surprise, unprovoked aerial bombardment of Iran, and at a moment Tehran thought it was negotiating with Washington.

Illustrative: IDF image

The WSJ further said the secret base was placed there with US awareness and used it as a logistics hub for Israeli air force operations, further with Israeli special forces operating. 

According to details in the report, the site was to assist in any emergency special forces operations connected with the bombing raids on nearby Iran:

Search-and-rescue teams were positioned there in case Israeli pilots were downed. None have been. When a U.S. F-15 was shot down near Isfahan, Israel offered to help, but U.S. forces managed the rescue of two airmen themselves, one of the people said. Israel did carry out airstrikes to help protect the operation.

The Israeli base was almost discovered in early March. Iraqi state media said a local shepherd reported unusual military activity in the area, including helicopter flights, and the Iraqi military sent troops to investigate. Israel kept them at bay with airstrikes, one of the people familiar with the matter said.

In the end, no rescue missions became necessary, or at least as far as public awareness goes. There may be much that happened related to the outpost which remains classified, however.

The report further describes that after a US F-15 fighter jet was downed near Isfahan, Israel offered assistance, but US forces recovered the two crew members on their own. Strangely, the Pentagon has still issued nothing confirmable related to that operation, and not even the identities of the rescued pilots are as yet known.

The base almost was exposed in early March after Iraqi state media reported that a shepherd spotted suspicious military activity in the area, including helicopter movements, triggering an Iraqi military investigation.

Certainly if Iraqi forces had discovered it, the base would have been immediately attacked, especially by pro-Iran paramilitary forces.

The blue lines on the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and Euphrates rivers – the borders of the biblical "Greater Israel"

In other news, Israel maintained a secret base inside Iraq and attacked Iraqi soldiers when they attempted to investigate it https://t.co/sHoetrHrOC

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) May 9, 2026

As the WSJ story becomes more well-known inside Iraq this weekend, rising anger and outrage is expected, at a sensitive moment that a new future Iraqi prime minister has been tapped.

"This reckless operation was carried out without coordination or approval," Qais Al-Muhammadawi, deputy commander of Iraq's Joint Operations Command, told Iraqi state media following the March incident.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/10/2026 - 15:10
https://ift.tt/jDlEcF1
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/jDlEcF1
via IFTTT

Secret Israeli Base Hidden In Iraqi Desert Backed Operations Inside Iran

"Dateflation": 40% Of Singles Are Going On Fewer Dates Due To High Costs

Inflation is reshaping modern dating by making romantic outings more expensive and forcing many singles to be more intentional about how they spend, according to a new study from DealSeek. 

Rising costs are affecting how often people go out, with 71% of singles saying dating is more expensive than it was a year ago and 40% saying they are going on fewer dates because of it. For many people, paying for transportation, meals, drinks, entertainment, and other date-related expenses has become harder to justify as everyday living costs continue to rise.

That financial pressure is changing expectations around first dates. Most singles now prefer keeping first dates relatively inexpensive, with 57% saying they want to spend $75 or less and 39% preferring to stay under $50. Only 8% are willing to spend more than $150. Rather than choosing expensive dinners or elaborate nights out, many people are opting for lower-cost activities like coffee dates, walks, park outings, community events, or discounted entertainment options that feel more practical.

Many singles are also becoming more proactive about saving money while dating. Around 37% said they suggest free activities for dates, while 30% actively search for discounts or deals before making plans. These habits show how dating is becoming less centered on extravagant gestures and more focused on spending time together in affordable ways.

The DealSeek report writes that financial responsibility is increasingly viewed as an attractive trait. About half of singles said they appreciate partners who suggest inexpensive date ideas, while 49% said being open about budgeting is appealing. Even using coupons is seen positively by 41% of respondents. These responses suggest that being practical with money is becoming more valued in relationships.

At the same time, irresponsible spending habits are seen as major red flags. Around 78% of singles said bragging about money is unattractive, 61% said overspending is a turnoff, and 69% dislike people who complain about finances while continuing to spend recklessly. Many people appear to value financial maturity over flashy displays of wealth.

Money concerns are also shaping dating decisions in deeper ways. Nearly half of respondents, 47%, admitted they have tried dating someone who earns more than they do. Meanwhile, 53% said they have misrepresented their financial situation while dating, and 42% said they have stopped seeing someone because of financial issues. Dating profiles are reflecting these changing attitudes as well, with 61% of people finding profiles that mention simple, low-cost hobbies more attractive than profiles focused on career ambition or high-paying jobs.

Overall, dating is becoming more practical as people adjust to higher costs. Instead of trying to impress others through expensive dates or displays of wealth, many singles are placing greater value on honesty, affordability, and financial responsibility.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/09/2026 - 16:55
https://ift.tt/60mvYuy
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/60mvYuy
via IFTTT

"Dateflation": 40% Of Singles Are Going On Fewer Dates Due To High Costs

Trump Says He's Not Replacing FDA Chief Makary

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump said on May 8 that he has no plans to replace Marty Makary as commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

When asked by reporters outside the White House about Makary, Trump responded: “Nothing much, he’s doing fine,” without elaborating further.

Trump said he had seen reports suggesting the administration was planning to remove Makary from his role leading the FDA, but added that he knows “nothing about it.”

The president also rejected the notion that he would hire someone new to replace Makary.

Amid the media speculation, White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement to multiple news outlets that Trump “has assembled the most experienced and talented administration in history.”

Several media outlets, citing unnamed sources, on May 8 stated that the president intends to remove Makary after controversies surrounding abortion drug mifepristone.

A federal appeals court on May 1 blocked the mailing of mifepristone until the FDA can ensure the abortion drug is “safe and effective” for use in the United States. The Supreme Court later put the ruling on hold after pill maker Danco Laboratories requested an emergency stay.

Mifepristone has long been available to women after consulting with doctors. In 2023, federal authorities enabled access via mail and at pharmacies.

In its May 1 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said mifepristone could not be shipped because the FDA “conceded it had failed to adequately study whether remotely prescribing mifepristone is safe.”

Susan B. Anthony (SBA) Pro-Life America had previously called for Makary’s removal, accusing him of being indifferent toward calls for stricter regulations on abortion drugs.

“FDA Commissioner Makary should be fired immediately. Indifference is completely unacceptable to millions of pro-life voters expecting the administration to act to save lives,” SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a May 4 statement.

“More than 90,000 abortions occur each year just in states that protect babies in the law throughout all nine months of pregnancy—a direct result of Biden’s COVID-era mail-order abortion drug rule, which the Trump administration inexplicably allows to continue.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ​which oversees the FDA, for comment.

Meanwhile, Dr. Vinay Prasad, the top vaccine official at the FDA, left the agency for a second time on April 30. Prasad served as head of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) before resigning from the role in July 2025. He subsequently rejoined the agency two weeks later at the FDA’s request.

Katherine Szarama, who had been CBER’s deputy director, has been elevated to acting director of the center following Prasad’s departure, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/09/2026 - 15:10
https://ift.tt/gQSvX3b
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gQSvX3b
via IFTTT

Trump Says He's Not Replacing FDA Chief Makary