The UK Is Struggling to Shake Off the Bond Vigilantes
'High levels of public debt are a significant vulnerability that governments can no longer ignore,' was what Bank for International Settlements chief Agustin Carstens warned in his final speech in June. That echoed a cacophony of alarm bells from global monetary officials over the past months and years.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Will 45% Of Work At Moderna Be Completed By AI By 2030? Yes
The rapid automation of high-level cognitive work is underreported and will dramatically transform talent management. Within two years, 95% of all cognitive tasks performed by humans will be better executed by AI. This prediction, shared by AI experts from DeepMind, Meta and MIT at the MIT AI Day at Davos in January, is stunning, and we are only beginning to realize its profound implications to talent management. Gen AI now automates high-level cognitive work such as software development (through code-editing tools) and research (via deep research tools) in ways unimaginable just 24 months ago. Early adopters of gen AI are showing us the new definition of talent management as they reimagine and restructure their entire operations around fewer people and more AI technology to drive higher productivity. Moderna and One Digital: Case Studies in AI Co-workers Consider Moderna, a highly sophisticated life sciences company, many of whom perform extremely advanced cognitive work. These employees conduct high-value cognitive tasks across many departments: Moderna is a major user of OpenAI's ChatGPT Enterprise across its 5,000-person workforce and already operates 3,000 GPTs or simple AI agents, according to the Wall Street Journal. To better manage this change, it notably combined its HR and AI efforts into a new role, chief people and digital technology officer, led by Tracey Franklin. Companies like OneDigital are going as far as naming its software AI co-workers, providing them with job descriptions and training periods, and allowing them to be "fired" if they underperform (as my colleague, John Sviokla, explained in Forbes here).Based on rapid AI improvement trends, strong Moderna leadership and competitive industry pressure, the following cognitive work scenario is possible. The rapid adoption of gen AI increases the ratio of AI software robots to human workers Percent of Cognitive Work Done by AI at Moderna Seem crazy? I don't think so. Just think about how much the frontier of possibility has changed in the last two years, since OpenAI introduced ChatGPT. These trends represent a fundamental and historic shift in how executives think about workforce composition. "Talent" for high-value cognitive tasks is no longer exclusively human. AI-progressive companies will grow mixed AI-human teams, similar to how modern military operations fully integrate AI with human with all gen AI applications, recognize that AI is probabilistic-based software, and errors or "hallucinations" can occur. Eliminating the associated business risks often involves having a 'human the loop'. The transformation is already underway. AI progressive firms will be a mix of humans and thousands of AI agents. Leaders are starting on this journey today.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
UK Doesn't Know How Much Billionaires Pay in Taxes, MPs Say
The UK tax authority cannot identify how much tax the nation's billionaires pay on their wealth, hampering its ability to properly impose levies on the ultra-wealthy, according to lawmakers. His Majesty's Revenue and Customs has an incomplete grasp of the financial affairs of billionaires, the cross-party group of Members of Parliament on the Public Accounts Committee said in a report Wednesday, expressing disappointment over the lack of data collection on their wealth and assets.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Analysis: Russia hawks face new dilemma over Trump's 50-day Putin deadline
The Russia hawks' initial reaction to President Donald Trump's tougher stance on Vladimir Putin was positive. That included a Monday joint statement from Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal calling Trump's threat of ramped-up economic penalties if Russia doesn't cut a peace deal in next 50 days 'a real executive hammer to drive the parties to the negotiating table.' But a day later, a real sense of skepticism about Trump's threats has crept in. The Russians have basically shrugged it off and even treated it as a green light to take what they can in the next several weeks. Ukrainians and foreign leaders have expressed fears about what happens over the next 50 days. And even some Trump allies in Congress and elsewhere are wondering: Why the delay? Why not pass the sanctions legislation that more than 80 senators already support today? Trump by Tuesday afternoon rejected criticisms of that timetable. 'Oh, I don't think 50 days is very long, and it could be sooner than that,' he said. 'I don't think 50 days is very long. ' The president has often pushed off major decisions and announcements by giving himself a future deadline that he might or might not abide by (often 'two weeks'). He did recently strike Iran right after a 60-day window he had given it to cut a nuclear deal that never arrived. But there seems to be a growing fear that this is just more kicking the can down the road or a pointless intermission. Perhaps most striking Tuesday were the comments of a pair of Republican senators. Sen. Rick Scott of Florida praised Trump for his desire to bring Putin to the table. But he said the Russian leader is 'not going to change.' 'I don't know why he gave him that many days. From my standpoint, I think Trump's being very generous,' Scott told CNN's Manu Raju. 'I would love there to be sanctions now. I'd love there to be tariffs now.' Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina said the 50-day timetable 'worries' him. Tillis said Putin could use the time to ramp up efforts to win the war quickly or try to gain power 'after having murdered and potentially collected more ground as a basis for negotiation.' As CNN's Matthew Chance noted, officials in Moscow were breathing a sigh of relief about an announcement that could have been much worse for them – and may now view it as license to do what they can over the next 50 days. While Russia has called Trump's threats and the weapons he said he's funneling to Ukraine 'very serious,' Russian officials like Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev – a key Putin ally – also publicly downplayed the 50-day timeline. 'Trump issued a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin,' Medvedev posted on X. 'The world shuddered, expecting the consequences. Belligerent Europe was disappointed. Russia didn't care.' The markets in Russia also appear to have shrugged. The New York Times reported Tuesday that Moscow's stock index jumped up 2.5 points on Tuesday, potentially because secondary sanctions appear more distant now – if they ever arrive. Fears that Trump is giving Russia too long a leash were also prominent in Europe. Officials including European Union foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas praised the tougher stance but cast the timeframe as a very long one. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who has often allied with Trump, praised him for 'turning up the heat on Putin.' 'But why wait? Putin is butchering innocent people every day. Let's get this thing over,' Johnson posted on X, adding: 'Let's sanction the Putin enablers now.' The dilemma for Russia hawks is readily apparent. On the one hand, Trump is saying tougher things about Putin than he ever has before, and they want to give him credit for that – however belated they might think that pivot is. But given Trump's unpredictability and the fact that he's treated Putin with kid gloves plenty before, they might also view this as a smokescreen and not tough enough. So now that Trump appears to have soured on his Russian counterpart, they might want to gently push him toward more urgent action. What seems clear is that the concerns about the 50-day deadline have registered. Trump grew testy Tuesday when pressed on the matter. 'You should've asked that same question to Biden,' Trump said, repeating one of his frequent refrains that it's really his predecessor who is responsible for Putin's unprovoked invasion of its neighbor. 'Why did he get us into this war? You should ask that question.' Graham also seemed to respond to critics of the 50-day timeline, saying Trump very recently demonstrated how serious such deadlines can be – on Iran. 'If Putin and others are wondering what happens on day 51, I would suggest they call the Ayatollah,' Graham posted on X. 'If I were a country buying cheap Russian oil, propping up Putin's war machine, I would take President Trump at his word.' The comparison isn't perfect. Trump didn't threaten to bomb Moscow. And the option to get tougher on Russia is a lot easier for Trump to make; it basically just involves telling Congress to pass a bill it appears poised to pass whenever called upon. We'll see if Trump feels compelled to get tougher, quicker.
