By JOSH BOAK, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The economic boom promised by President Donald Trump centers on a single number: $17 trillion.

That’s the sum of new investments that Trump claims to have generated with his tariffs, income tax cuts and aggressive salesmanship of CEOs, financiers, tech titans, prime ministers, presidents and other rulers. The $17 trillion is supposed to fund new factories, new technologies, more jobs, higher incomes and faster economic growth.

Related Articles

The Supreme Court will evaluate Trump’s expansive claims of presidential power in its new term

Republicans and Democrats at an impasse as government shutdown enters sixth day

Leader of UK Conservatives vows to deport 150,000 people a year

Kristi Noem says ICE will be ‘all over’ the Super Bowl

Gov. Newsom to sue Trump over sending California Guard to Oregon

“Under eight months of Trump, we’ve already secured commitments of $17 trillion coming in,” the president said in a speech last month. “There’s never been any country that’s done anything like that.”

But based on statements from various companies, foreign countries and the White House’s own website, that figure appears to be exaggerated, highly speculative and far higher than the actual sum. The White House website lists total investments at $8.8 trillion, though that figure appears to be padded with some investment commitments made during Joe Biden’s presidency.

The White House didn’t lay out the math after multiple requests as to how Trump calculated $17 trillion in investment commitments. But the issue goes beyond Trump’s hyperbolic talk to his belief that the brute force of tariffs and shaming of companies can deliver economic results, a strategy that could go sideways for him politically if the tough talk fails to translate into more jobs and higher incomes.

Just 37% of U.S. adults approve of Trump’s handling of the economy, according to a September poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs. That’s down from a peak of 56% in early 2020 during Trump’s first term — a memory he relied upon when courting voters in last year’s election.

Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute of International Economics, said the public commitments announced by Trump do represent a “meaningful increase” — but one that amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars, not trillions. Even then, that comes with long-term costs as countries might be less inclined to invest with the U.S. after being threatened to do so.

“It is a national security mistake because you’re turning allies into colonies of a sort — you’re forcibly extracting from them things that they don’t see as entirely in their interest,” Posen said. “Twisting the arms of governments to then twist the arms of their own businesses is not going to get you the payoff you want.”

Trump banking on foreign countries making good on promises

The Trump administration is betting that tariffs are an effective tool to prod other countries and international companies to invest in the United States, a big stick that other administrations failed to wield. Trump’s pitch to voters is that he will play a role in directly managing the investment commitments made by foreign countries — and that the allocation of that money starting next year will revive what has been a flagging job market.

“The difference between hypothetical investments and ground being broken on new factories and facilities is good leadership and sound policy,” said White House spokesman Kush Desai.

The White House said that Japan will invest $1 trillion, largely at Trump’s direction. The European Union will commit $600 billion. The United Arab Emirates made commitments of $1.4 trillion over 10 years. Qatar pledged $1.2 trillion. Saudi Arabia intends to pony up $600 billion, India $500 billion and South Korea $450 billion, among others.

The challenge is the precise terms of those investments have yet to be fully codified and released to the public, and some numbers are under dispute, potentially fuzzy math or, in the case of Qatar, more than five times the annual gross domestic product of the entire country. The White House maintains that Qatar is good for the money because it produces oil.

South Korea already has misgivings about its investment commitment, which is $100 billion lower than what the White House claims, after immigration agents raided a Hyundai plant under construction in Georgia and arrested Korean citizens. There are also concerns that an investment that large without a better way to exchange currencies with the U.S. could hurt South Korea’s economy.

“From what I’ve seen, these commitments are worth about as much as the paper they’re not written down on,” said Jared Bernstein, who was the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Biden White House.

As for the $600 billion committed by European companies, that’s based on those businesses having “expressed interest” and having stated “intentions” to do so through 2029 rather than an overt concession, according to European Union documents.

Still too soon to see any investment impact in overall economy

So far, there has yet to be a notable boost in business investment as a percentage of U.S. gross domestic product. As a share of the overall economy, business investment during the first six months of Trump’s presidency has been consistently bouncing around 14%, just as it was before the pandemic.

But economists also note that Trump is double-counting and relying on investments that were initially announced during the Biden administration or investments that were already likely to occur because of the artificial intelligence build out.

For example, the White House lists a $16 billion investment by computer chipmaker Global Foundries. But of that sum, more than $13 billion was announced during the Biden administration and supported by $1.6 billion in grants by the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, as well as other state and federal incentives.

Similarly, the White House is banking on $200 billion being invested by the chipmaker Micron, but at least $120 billion of that was announced during the Biden era.

‘The tariffs played a big role’

For their part, White House officials largely credit Trump’s tariffs — like those imposed on Oct. 1 on kitchen cabinets, large trucks and pharmaceutical drugs — for forcing companies to make investments in the U.S., saying that the risk of additional import taxes if countries and companies fail to deliver on their promises will ensure that the promised cash comes into the economy.

On Tuesday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla endorsed this approach after his pharmaceutical drug company received a three-year grace period on tariffs and announced $70 billion in investments in the U.S.

“The president was absolutely right,” Bourla said. “Tariffs is the most powerful tool to motivate behaviors.”

“The tariffs played a big role,” Trump added.

By MARK SHERMAN and LINDSAY WHITEHURST, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is beginning a new term with a sharp focus on President Donald Trump’s robust assertion of executive power.

Pivotal cases on voting and the rights of LGBTQ people also are on the agenda. On Tuesday, the justices will hear arguments over bans passed by nearly half of U.S. states on therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation or gender identity.

Related Articles

Republicans and Democrats at an impasse as government shutdown enters sixth day

Leader of UK Conservatives vows to deport 150,000 people a year

Kristi Noem says ICE will be ‘all over’ the Super Bowl

Gov. Newsom to sue Trump over sending California Guard to Oregon

Strong-Armed by Trump, Netanyahu embraces Gaza deal as a personal win

The opening session on Monday has lower-profile cases, including a dispute over the right of a criminal defendant to consult with his lawyer during an overnight break in his testimony. The judge in a Texas murder trial ordered defense lawyers not to talk to their client about his testimony.

A major thrust of the next 10 months, however, is expected to be the justices’ evaluation of Trump’s expansive claims of presidential power.

The court’s conservative majority has so far been receptive, at least in preliminary rulings, to many emergency appeals from Trump’s Republican administration. But there could be more skepticism, however, when the court conducts in-depth examinations of some Trump policies, including the president’s imposition of tariffs and his desired restrictions on birthright citizenship.

The justices are hearing a pivotal case for Trump’s economic agenda in early November as they consider the legality of many of his sweeping tariffs. Two lower courts have found the Republican president does not have the power to unilaterally impose wide-ranging tariffs under an emergency powers law.

FILE – Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

In December, the justices will take up Trump’s power to fire independent agency members at will, a case that probably will lead the court to overturn, or drastically narrow, a 90-year-old decision. It required a cause, like neglect of duty, before a president could remove the Senate-confirmed officials from their jobs.

The outcome appears to be in little doubt because the conservatives have allowed the firings to take effect while the case plays out, even after lower-court judges found the firings illegal. The three liberal justices on the nine-member court have dissented each time.

Another case that has arrived at the court but has yet to be considered involves Trump’s executive order denying birthright citizenship to children born in the United States to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily.

The administration has appealed lower-court rulings blocking the order as unconstitutional, or likely so, flouting more than 125 years of general understanding and an 1898 Supreme Court ruling. The case could be argued in the late winter or early spring.

Approximately 150,000 New York City children ride buses to school, including around 66,000 students with disabilities and students living the shelter system. When there’s a problem with bus service, these groups are usually the ones who suffer most.

In just the first weeks of the 2025-2026 school year, there have been 4,476 no-shows and 8,068 reported bus delays and breakdowns as of last week, city officials said. (Dogora Sun / Shutterstock.com)

As the new school year kicked off last month, iconic yellow school buses are rolling again through the streets of New York City. But some are running behind schedule.

The Road to Better Busing Coalition, made up of advocates and parents affected by bus delays and other issues, are rallying for improvements. 

New York is the largest school district in the country, so it also has the largest school bus system. Approximately 150,000 children ride these buses, the majority of whom are Latino and Black, according to researchers.

Around 66,000 bus riders are students with disabilities and students living in temporary housing, including those staying in the city’s shelter system. When there’s a problem with bus service, these groups are usually the ones who suffer most.

“Each year, as the school year begins, there’s one thing we can count on: our phones will ring off the hook with calls from families whose children can’t get to school due to school bus service failures,” said Randi Levine, policy director of Advocates for Children of New York, during remarks at a rally outside City Hall in late September.

During the 2023–2024 school year, in a network of 9,000 school bus routes braiding city streets, there were 80,000 delays. In just the first weeks of the 2025-2026 school year, there have been 4,476 no-shows and 8,068 reported bus delays and breakdowns as of last week, city officials said.

Most of the problems in the latter category are delays (7,629) while there were 439 breakdowns in September, according to New York City’s Public Schools (NYCPS, formerly known as the Department of Education).

NYCPS cautioned that the Office of Pupil Transportation (OPT) manages the tracker for school bus delays and breakdowns, and said there may be errors in the data.

When these incidents happen, parents can submit complaints in a few ways: use ServiceNow to call the OPT Service Desk (which offers translation services in multiple languages), use SupportHub to submit online, or send an email to NYCPS.

“We work diligently to resolve any issues families have with their services so that every student gets to school on time,” an education department spokesperson said in a statement. “That’s why we introduced modern GPS tracking for buses, expanded communication tools to families, and made route planning improvements to better meet students’ needs.”

However, Gothamist reported in early September that the GPS for school buses in New York City has flaws: drivers and bus companies do not consistently log into the system, which also relies on self-reported inputs.

Mia Greenidge is a senior manager for youth transition services at IncludeNYC—an organization helping young people with disabilities—as well as the mother of a 5-year-old kindergartener who uses specialized busing. Her son was dropped off at the wrong school building during the first few days of school, she said.

“We were lucky in this situation,” Greenidge said, explaining that her son was delivered to the right location in about 20 minutes. “The school that he got dropped off to was maybe a few blocks away [from his correct school].”

Another time, Greenidge said her son was on the bus for almost two hours, despite living 30 minutes away from his school. “In trying to follow up with the bus company—the dispatcher or the management at the bus company—I never was able to actually speak to anyone there. So a lot of it was me communicating with the school,” she said.

Levine said Advocates for Children of New York has received a lot of complaints about bus services this school year so far, and in 40 cases, had to call the education department to resolve the issue.

Lori Podvesker, director of disability and education policy at IncludeNYC, said the organization has noticed a 20 percent increase in bus complaints compared to the same time last year. Out of 27 calls IncludeNYC received about transportation issues, 13 were about buses that didn’t show up, she said.

The education department, meanwhile, said it has received more complaints for no-show buses than late ones this month: 4,476 and 4,270, respectively.

There are repercussions for students when they arrive late to school or back home, advocates and parents say. They may be missing out both on classroom time and on specialized services. Greenidge said her son goes to applied behavior analysis therapy after school. She schedules the appointments with some leeway, but when the bus delays are long, he ends up missing them.

“That costs money, because when you have to cancel a session, they still charge you,” she said.

Another problem is the duration of many students’ bus trip. Parents to Improve School Transportation, a community-based organization that advocates for better bus services, shared the story of a family whose son’s route zigzags all over Manhattan for more than two hours, causing their child to wet himself on the long ride. 

For many years, advocates and parents have pointed to the 46-year-old contract between the NYCPS and school bus companies, as well as a shortage of drivers, as root causes of the problem. 

Sara Catalinotto, co-founder of Parents to Improve School Transportation, told City Limits that the city needs to better recruit and retain drivers, and should encourage more companies to compete for contracts. Advocates are also calling on the city not to extend busing contracts without accountability.

“As an organization focused on education, we want to spend our time advocating for what happens inside the classroom—ensuring students have the support they need to thrive. But instead, we are forced to spend our energy fighting just to make sure students can get to school in the first place,” Levine said to the crowd during the late September rally. “This has to change.”

To reach the reporter behind this story, contact Daniel@citylimits.org. To reach the editor, contact Jeanmarie@citylimits.org

Want to republish this story? Find City Limits’ reprint policy here.

The post A New School Year is Here—And So Are School Bus Delays appeared first on City Limits.

PARIS (AP) — France’s new prime minister Sébastien Lecornu resigned less than 24 hours after naming his government and after less than a month in office, plunging the country into a deep political crisis and leaving French President Emmanuel Macron with few options.

The French presidency said in a statement Monday that Macron, who has been hitting record lows in opinion polls, has accepted his resignation.

French outgoing Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu, who resigned just a day after naming his government, arrives to deliver his statement at the Hotel Matignon in Paris, Monday, Oct. 6, 2025. (Stephane Mahe/Pool via AP)

Lecornu had replaced his predecessor, François Bayrou, in September to become France’s fourth prime minister in barely a year during a prolonged period of political instability.

French politics have been in disarray since Macron called snap elections last year that produced a deeply fragmented legislature and a political impasse. Far-right and left-wing lawmakers hold over 320 seats at the National Assembly, while the centrists and allied conservatives hold 210, with no party having an overall majority.

A faithful ally of Macron, Lecornu said conditions were no longer met to remain in office after failing to build a consensus.

“It would take little for it to work,” Lecornu said in his resignation speech. “By being more selfless for many, by knowing how to show humility. One must always put one’s country before one’s party.”

With less than two years before the next presidential election, Macron’s opponents immediately tried to capitalize on the shocking resignation, with the far-right National Rally calling on him to either call for new snap parliamentary elections or resign.

FILE – Then French Defense minister Sebastien Lecornu, right, and France’s President Emmanuel Macron talk at the end of an address by the president to army leaders in Paris Sunday July 13, 2025, (Ludovic Marin, Pool via AP, File)

“This raises a question for the President of the Republic: can he continue to resist the legislature dissolution? We have reached the end of the road,” far-right leader Marine Le Pen said. “There is no other solution. The only wise course of action in these circumstances is to return to the polls.”

On the far left, France Unbowed also asked for Macron’s departure, while voices on the left called for the revival of a coalition made up of leftists, socialists, greens and communists.

The resignation rattled investors, sending the CAC-40 index of leading French companies plunging. The index was down by nearly 2% on its Friday close.

Ministers appointed just the previous night found themselves in the bizarre situation of becoming caretaker ministers — kept in place only to manage day-to-day affairs until a new government is formed — before some of them had even been formally installed in office.

Agnès Pannier-Runacher, the newly reappointed minister for ecology, posted on X: “I despair of this circus.”

Related Articles

The Nobel Prize in medicine goes to 3 scientists for work on the human immune system

Today in History: October 6, Anwar Sadat assassinated

Leader of UK Conservatives vows to deport 150,000 people a year

Strong-Armed by Trump, Netanyahu embraces Gaza deal as a personal win

Today in History: October 5, Televangelist convicted of fraud

Lecornu’s choice of ministers has been criticized across the political spectrum, particularly his decision to bring back former Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire to serve at the defense ministry, with critics saying that under his watch France’s public deficit soared.

Lecornu’s main task would have been to pass a budget as France is faced with a massive debt crisis. At the end of the first quarter of 2025, France’s public debt stood at $3.9 trillion, or 114% of GDP. Debt servicing remains a major budget item, accounting for around 7% of state spending.

Other key positions remained largely unchanged from the previous cabinet, with conservative Bruno Retailleau staying on as interior minister in charge of policing and internal security, Jean-Noël Barrot remaining as foreign minister and Gérald Darmanin keeping the justice ministry.

Retailleau, the head of the conservative Republicans party, said he did not feel responsible for Lecornu’s fall despite lashing out at the composition of the new government. Retailleau blamed Lecornu for not letting him know Le Maire would be part of the government. “It’s a matter of trust,” he told TF1 broadcaster. “You promise a break and end up with returning horses. This government embodied all the conditions to be censured.”

Seeking consensus at the National Assembly, Lecornu consulted with all political forces and trade unions before forming his Cabinet. He also vowed that he would not employ a special constitutional power his predecessors had used to force budgets through Parliament without a vote and would instead seek compromise with lawmakers from the left and the right.