Carney Says Canada Met With European Suppliers Amid F-35 Review
The remarks came minutes after he signed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization pledge to increase core defense spending as a share of gross domestic product to 3.5% from 2% over a decade. Carney has said Canada should stop sending the vast majority of its defense dollars to the US, after President Donald Trump imposed punishing tariffs and repeatedly said Canada should be an American state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
NATO Chief Weighs In on Military Conscription Across Europe
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Each European country will decide independently on whether to introduce military conscription, NATO's secretary-general has said, as the continent forges ahead with its rapid defense ramp up. Why It Matters NATO's European members, plus Canada, are in the middle of a massive defense push, reinvesting in their military after years of leaning heavily on the United States. America has tens of thousands of troops and a host of major bases in Europe, but President Donald Trump—a vociferous NATO skeptic—has demanded that alliance members commit to spending 5 percent of GDP on defense. Many had struggled to hit the 2 percent NATO target as Trump took office. But the alliance inked a pledge in June to reach Trump's figure of 5 percent, a huge leap in military spending for most NATO countries. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte gestures during a meeting with President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 25, 2025. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte gestures during a meeting with President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 25, 2025. AP Photo/Alex Brandon What To Know It is "up to individual countries to decide" whether to put conscription in place, NATO chief Mark Rutte told The New York Times. "Some countries will do it," Rutte said, speaking shortly after the NATO summit in The Hague in late June. "Others will not do it, but it will mean, in general, paying good salaries for our men and women in uniform." Several NATO countries in Europe already have different models of conscription, the need felt much more keenly on the alliance's eastern flank, staring down Russia. The nations with conscription typically also emphasize making sure their societies are ready for war, including by issuing public guides on how to cope during conflict. The Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which have stormed ahead in raising defense spending, all have conscription, as do several of the Nordic countries. Turkey and Greece also have conscription. Other countries, like the U.K., have militaries solely made up of volunteer professional soldiers. In Finland, which joined NATO shortly after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, men must complete mandatory military service before heading into the reserve force. Finland shares hundreds of miles of border with Russia. Sweden, which also became a NATO member after Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, reinstituted conscription in 2017. Conscripts train with the Swedish military, and are put into a wartime unit to join if the government activates mobilization or high alerts. In Norway, conscription is obligatory yet very selective, applying to men and women. Denmark recently changed its laws on conscription, meaning women must also present themselves to be assessed for military service as they turn 18. Women previously joined the military purely on a volunteer basis. Rutte said he was "particularly worried" about Europe's ability to roll out large amounts of military equipment. Russia is "on a war footing in every sense," Rutte said, adding: "The size of the military, what they're investing in, in their tanks, in air defense systems, in their artillery, in ammunition—it is amazing." Rutte said during the NATO summit that the alliance will invest in a "five-fold increase" in air defense capabilities, as well as "thousands more tanks and armored vehicles" and millions of artillery rounds. What People Are Saying NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said: "We simply lack the defense industrial base to produce the weapons we need to make sure that we can deter the Russians or the North Koreans or whoever to attack us."
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Pony AI Inc.'s (NASDAQ:PONY) last week's 5.9% decline must have disappointed individual investors who have a significant stake
Significant control over Pony AI by individual investors implies that the general public has more power to influence management and governance-related decisions The top 4 shareholders own 50% of the company Insiders own 23% of Pony AI Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. Every investor in Pony AI Inc. (NASDAQ:PONY) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are individual investors with 24% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk). While insiders who own 23% came under pressure after market cap dropped to US$4.6b last week,individual investors took the most losses. Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Pony AI, beginning with the chart below. See our latest analysis for Pony AI Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. Pony AI already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. If multiple institutions change their view on a stock at the same time, you could see the share price drop fast. It's therefore worth looking at Pony AI's earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters. Hedge funds don't have many shares in Pony AI. With a 17% stake, CEO Jun Peng is the largest shareholder. With 12% and 12% of the shares outstanding respectively, Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board and Toyota Motor Corporation are the second and third largest shareholders. Our research also brought to light the fact that roughly 50% of the company is controlled by the top 4 shareholders suggesting that these owners wield significant influence on the business. Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too. While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. Our information suggests that insiders maintain a significant holding in Pony AI Inc.. It has a market capitalization of just US$4.6b, and insiders have US$1.0b worth of shares in their own names. That's quite significant. Most would be pleased to see the board is investing alongside them. You may wish to access this free chart showing recent trading by insiders. The general public-- including retail investors -- own 24% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders. With a stake of 19%, private equity firms could influence the Pony AI board. Some investors might be encouraged by this, since private equity are sometimes able to encourage strategies that help the market see the value in the company. Alternatively, those holders might be exiting the investment after taking it public. It appears to us that public companies own 12% of Pony AI. This may be a strategic interest and the two companies may have related business interests. It could be that they have de-merged. This holding is probably worth investigating further. It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Pony AI better, we need to consider many other factors. To that end, you should learn about the 2 warning signs we've spotted with Pony AI (including 1 which can't be ignored) . But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. — Investing narratives with Fair Values Suncorp's Next Chapter: Insurance-Only and Ready to Grow By Robbo – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: A$22.83 · 0.1% Overvalued Thyssenkrupp Nucera Will Achieve Double-Digit Profits by 2030 Boosted by Hydrogen Growth By Chris1 – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: €14.40 · 0.3% Overvalued Tesla's Nvidia Moment – The AI & Robotics Inflection Point By BlackGoat – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: $359.72 · 0.1% Overvalued View more featured narratives — Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
41 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump can shatter the abortion pill cartel
The abortion pill is the only life-ending drug that does not require consultation or any assurance of accurate identifying information. In fact, for a drug that is intended to end a pregnancy, distributors do not even have to confirm pregnancy at all. Anyone not looking through the rose-colored glasses handed out by the abortion lobby can see this lack of regulation for what it clearly is: a recipe for rampant abuse. Several women have already come forward, sharing how their partner ordered the pill and drugged them, forcing abortions. Victims of sex trafficking have also come forward, recounting how they were forced to abort — often multiple times — by their captors, using the abortion pill. Somehow, these women go largely ignored by policymakers and those with the power to prevent future abuse. Abortion pill manufacturers and distributors have been allowed to form a cartel across and within the borders of the U.S. that has gone unchecked. Even those who pride themselves on giving women 'choice' should recognize there is no choice in such abuse. There is no consent in being forced to abort a wanted child. Abortion advocates' core pillar of 'autonomy' has been torn down to nothing more than rubble. As a nation, we attack the foreign cartels threatening the American people in many ways. But can we identify and shatter the ones we have allowed to form within our own borders? Since the Biden-era FDA used the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to remove the in-person dispensing requirement for the abortion drug mifepristone in 2021, abortion pill distributors have rapidly built their expansive cartel. Women and their abusers can access these cartel distributors online and are often required to fill out questionnaires that have no way to verify whether the alleged patient is actually the one behind the screen. Some of the questionnaires tied to these tele services ask you to confidentially verify your name and other personal identifying information. They even ask if you are being forced to order the pills. But what use are any of these questions when the abuser can easily circumvent the system and identify as the victim? In his first term, President Trump ordered one foreign abortion pill distributor to cease and desist illegal trafficking of abortion drugs not approved by the FDA into the U.S. Unfortunately, the administration did not follow through on its warning to the doctor in charge, and trafficking of the pill has only escalated. This term, the Trump administration has the opportunity and ability to send the abortion pill cartel packing. Most urgently, the Trump FDA can reinstate the in-person dispensing requirements for mifepristone. New data shows that by the end of 2024 one in four abortions were provided via 'telehealth,' demonstrating real and immediate impact reinstating REMS requirements would have. This unilateral administrative action can put a swift end to the domestic and criminal mail-order distribution of abortion pills. Although it will not prevent foreign cartel partners from sending the drugs into the country or in-person dispensing at brick-and-mortar abortion businesses, it is a first step. The Trump administration also needs to heighten scrutiny around mifepristone by working with the Department of Health and Human Services and the DEA to designate the drug as a controlled substance. Drugs with high potential for abuse and which may lead to psychological or physical damage are set to only be prescribed by certain licensed practitioners that hold DEA certifications — and mifepristone should not be an exception. Abuse of the abortion pill is rampant. Recent studies have shed further light on the expanded physical and psychological adverse events women are experiencing by taking mifepristone. Women being forced into abortion via the deregulation of the abortion pill are even more likely to experience these dangerous outcomes. The U.S. Code already creates heightened oversight and penalties for importation of controlled substances. If the Trump administration designates the abortion pill as a controlled substance, it will equip the Department of Justice to prosecute members of the cartel — both foreign and domestic — to the fullest extent of the law. Trump must also work alongside the Republican Congress to uphold state laws that prevent abortion pill trafficking. States such as Louisiana and Texas have laws in place that prohibit the abortion pill from being sent women within their borders, but it has been an uphill battle to enforce them, with pro-abortion states enacting shield laws to prevent prosecution of cartel abortionists engaging in pill trafficking. This term, Trump must hold true to abolish cartels — including the ones previous administrations have given free rein within our own borders. If Trump truly believes abortion to be a state issue, he should ensure that states have the power to protect their citizens. Women deserve to live without the paranoia that they might be the next victim of this dangerous cartel. Gavin Oxley is a public relations consultant currently serving at Americans United for Life.
