Boy hands homeless woman his birthday cash; what he said next will melt your hearts
8-year-old's kind gesture gets thumbs up on internet
When Mateo saw a woman vendor, he asked if he could help her and buy something. With no hesitation, he reached into his cash box and handed over a $20 bill for a $3 item. 'I see him open up his little box, and he is counting the cash. He pulls out a $20 bill, and I'm like, honey, it's $3, not $23,' Santos recalled. Touched by the moment, she filmed the interaction, now viewed by millions on TikTok.
Also Read: TikTok will go dark in US without Chinese approval of sale deal, says Howard Lutnick
In the viral video, the little one could be seen giving away his birthday money and flashing a heartfelt smile at the street vendor. 'I just wanted other people to feel the same joy and emotion and hope that I did,' said his mother, Daniela Santos. The clip sparked a wave of love across the country, with reportedly comments not just praising Mateo, but honoring the values his mother instilled in him.
'People have messaged me and said such amazing things about Mateo, and they don't know him. A lot of people have said, 'It starts from the home, you've been doing such a good job, being an amazing mom," she added.
Also Read: 'US was designed to take your money': American man explains why he won't return home
Mateo's mission to help others
What began as a sweet birthday moment has grown into a heartfelt mission. After a video of Mateo giving his birthday money to a street vendor went viral, his mother Daniela Santos received messages from strangers offering gifts. But Mateo had other plans. 'I prefer they give me the money so I can keep donating it,' he told her. Moved by his words, Santos started a GoFundMe to support those in need. Mateo's wish? To buy food, clothes, even homes, for others. 'He's grown up learning kindness,' Santos said. 'And now, he's leading with it.'
FAQs
1. Who is Mateo?
Mateo is a young boy from Chicago who went viral for giving his birthday money to a street vendor in an act of kindness.
2. What did Mateo say after the video went viral?
He told his mother he would rather receive money to donate to those in need instead of getting birthday gifts.
3. What is the GoFundMe for?
Mateo's mom launched a GoFundMe to support his wish to help people in need.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
21 minutes ago
- Economic Times
US may lose 150,000 international students this fall, risking $7 billion in revenue
Agencies American universities may see international student enrollment decline by as many as 150,000 this fall, a development that could cost the US higher education sector nearly $7 billion and threaten over 60,000 jobs. This estimate comes from a new analysis by NAFSA: Association of International Educators and JB International, based on recent data from the US Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) and the State Department. The report attributes the expected drop to recent visa disruptions, executive orders, and scrutiny measures introduced by the Trump administration. Unless student visa issuances rebound sharply by August, the study warns of a 15% drop in total international enrollment. In the academic year 2023–24, US colleges hosted 1,126,690 international students — the highest number recorded, according to the Institute of International Education's Open Doors report. These students made up 6% of the total US college population and included those on optional practical training (OPT), who stay for temporary employment related to their studies. International student numbers had recovered post-pandemic, increasing by 200,000 since the 2020 decline. But the new forecast signals that this growth could reverse. Key states face major financial losses According to the NAFSA report, a 30–40% drop in new foreign students would significantly impact several US states. California alone could lose over $1 billion, while New York's losses may be close to that figure. Illinois, Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida could each see losses exceeding $200 million. Four factors behind the projected fall: Suspension of Visa Interviews: Student visa interviews were suspended between May 27 and June 18, 2025 — a peak period for issuances. Interviews have resumed, but consulates are now directed to scrutinize applicants' social media accounts more closely. Appointment Shortages: Limited or no visa appointments were reported in countries that are key sources of international students — including India, China, Nigeria, and Japan. Declining Visa Issuance: F-1 visa grants fell 12% year-on-year from January to April 2025 and 22% in May. Though June data is pending, a decline of up to 90% is anticipated. Visa Bans: A presidential executive order issued on June 4, 2025, imposed restrictions on applicants from 19 countries. A further 36 countries may be added, the report highlighted that international students often pay full tuition fees at private institutions and out-of-state fees at public universities. Their financial contribution helps US colleges subsidize costs for domestic said, 'The projected losses confirm higher education leaders' concerns that anti-immigration policies would have a chilling effect on enrollment and revenue.' Trump vs international students In the past few months, the Trump administration has revoked or terminated visas of hundreds to thousands of international students, particularly those perceived as sympathetic to pro‑Palestinian viewpoints. By April 2025, over 1,000 visas had been canceled, and the administration implemented a 'catch and revoke' strategy—scrutinizing social media for signs of support for groups like Hamas or antisemitic activity—to revoke existing student visas and block renewals. One high‑profile case involved Palestinian student Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident, who was arrested by ICE without a warrant, drawing criticism for potential First Amendment late May 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the US would 'aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those connected to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields,' accompanied by enhanced social media vetting for F, M, and J visa applicants. At US consulates, student visa interviews were suspended temporarily during late May–mid June re‑opening with stricter rules, such as requiring applicants to make their social media profiles public for government review. These policies have heightened fears among prospective and current international students and contributed to a chilling effect on international academic engagement in the US. (Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Can Coforge's ambition to lead the IT Industry become a reality? BlackRock returns, this time with Ambani. Will it be lucky second time? Amazon is making stealthy moves in healthcare, here's why! The trader who blew the whistle on Jane Street Stock Radar: Globus Spirits breaks out from 9-month consolidation; check target & stop loss for long positions Weekly Top Picks: These stocks scored 10 on 10 on Stock Reports Plus These large-caps have 'strong buy' & 'buy' recos and an upside potential of more than 25% Stock picks of the week: 5 stocks with consistent score improvement and upside potential of up to 36% in 1 year
The Print
24 minutes ago
- The Print
India's export basket has no irreplaceables. It's a vulnerability in Trump's power politics
The standard rationale for tariffs is economic. Tariffs have often been used by countries to protect their domestic industry. It is behind tariff walls that industrialisation took off in the United States in the second half of the 19th century. To illustrate this, let us take the example of steel. Since his return to power, US President Donald Trump has issued a series of tariff threats to India. His manner is relentless, and India's discomfort noticeably large, though the Modi government has launched no explicit critique yet. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had celebrated Trump's return to power, fondly remembering their bonhomie during his first term and hoping it would yield benefits. Instead, the India-US relationship has entered an uncertain phase. In 1860, most of America's steel came from Britain. By the first decade of the 1900s, US Steel alone, headquartered in Pittsburgh and protected by a tariff, was not only producing enough for the home market but had also started exporting to Europe. In Japan and South Korea, both big producers of steel today, the steel industry rose in a roughly similar manner. Tariffs fell out of fashion in the most recent era of globalisation, beginning in the 1980s. Economic policymakers came to believe that by stifling competition, tariffs created inefficiencies and restricted economic growth. Think of India. Protected by tariff walls, the steel produced in India in the era of central planning was substandard. India's steel industry finally took off with the lowering of tariff walls after the early 1990s. So, it is not that tariffs have never been used to promote industrialisation (or hinder it in effect). The surprise in Trump's tariff argument is two-fold. Political purpose of tariffs First, it is mostly developing countries that have relied on tariffs to promote industry, as South Korea successfully did in the 1960s and 1970s, and so did post-1865 America, when the US was arguably still a developing economy. Economically developed countries have not generally used tariffs to speed up industrialisation. At best, they have used industry-specific subsidies, not a comprehensive construction of tariff walls. Second, the world had forgotten how to use tariffs for political purposes. In modern history, the most dramatic clash over tariffs led to the two Opium Wars in China during the 1840s and 1850s, when the East India Company sought to open Chinese markets to opium exports from colonial India, and the Chinese emperor resisted the move. To be clear, Trump is not making war threats based on tariffs, but he has used them punitively—raising tariffs on Brazil to attack the Lula government and its courts for prosecuting his ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro. He has also issued tariff threats to Russia, but that is a penalty for not ending its war against Ukraine. This raises the all-important question. Can tariffs be more generally used for political purposes? In a political science classic published nearly half a century back, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition, Robert Keohane and (the recently deceased) Joseph Nye made a famous argument that is highly pertinent today. Their argument also has special relevance to India. Keohane and Nye agreed that tariffs, by restricting competition, caused economic inefficiencies. But they said that the world of politics and power often worked differently, not by the logic of economic efficiency. Though normatively disagreeing with Trump, Keohane and Nye have empirically analysed his tariffs in a recent article ('The End of the Long American Century', Foreign Affairs, July-August 2025). 'The paradox of trade power,' they say, 'is that success in a trading relationship … is a source of vulnerability,' adding that, 'running a trade deficit can strengthen a country's bargaining position. The deficit country, after all, can impose tariffs on the surplus country.' For the applicability of this argument, consider the current trade relationships of the US. Take India first. In 2024, the India-US goods trade was valued at $129.2 billion. India's exports to the US were worth $87.4 billion, and the imports from the US were worth $41.8 billion. Thus, vis-à-vis India, the US had a goods trade deficit of $45.7 billion. India, however, is not even among the ten largest trading partners of the US. The four largest are Canada, Mexico, China, and the European Union. All have had to face Trump's tariff ire. And, with the exception of China, all have had to make a compromise, or are well on the road to one. These trade surplus economies (vis-à-vis America) depend on the US market much more than the US does on their markets. Can India follow China and push back against the US? Despite its surplus vis-à-vis the US, China can partially deviate from trade vulnerability because it has, as of now, virtually irreplaceable control over precious minerals, called 'rare earths' today. Newer technologies in the industrial sector critically depend on rare earths. There is nothing irreplaceable in India's export bundle. Thus, India's trade surplus creates vulnerability. Second, in terms of balance of power, the management of India's adversarial relationship with China requires US support. In the past, the Soviet Union helped India manage its security environment. Today, Russia is weaker than the Soviet Union was in the 1970s. Besides, to counter the West, including the US, Russia is also seeking an alliance with China. If India had economically and militarily grown as rapidly as China over the last three and a half decades, there would have been no need to seek the support of the US. India could have stood on its own feet. But to counter China now and manage its larger security environment, India needs powerful allies like the US. Also read: India sees the value of US defence ties, but MAGA-style tariffs threaten long-term stability Imbalance of power Power politics drives Trump's foreign and economic policy. Interests, not the larger principles of democracy, now shape America's bilateral relationships. Both adversaries and the so-called allies – think of Western Europe, Japan, and South Korea—are subject to the same master narrative of power politics. Unless the courts force him to drop the Presidential construction of tariff policy, leaving it to the US Congress, or the MAGA consumers are hurt by his tariffs, forcing him to change, India will have to develop a response from a position of imbalance or relative weakness. That is not the way international relations should be. But that is how they often are. Trump is only the most recent example of power politics in international relations. Ashutosh Varshney is Sol Goldman Professor of International Studies and the Social Sciences and Professor of Political Science at Brown University. He tweets @ProfVarshney. Views are personal. (Edited by Ratan Priya)
India Today
24 minutes ago
- India Today
Why is Trump threatening India over Russian oil? Here's the real reason
'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil, they are then, for much of the oil purchased, selling it on the open market for big profits,' Donald Trump posted on Truth Social. 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA.'advertisementOn the surface, it reads like outrage. But Trump's threat to slap higher tariffs on Indian goods isn't just about Ukraine, or even Russia. It's about crude calculations in an election year: shielding US oil interests, redirecting energy trade, and flexing economic muscle over strategic INDIA LOVES RUSSIAN OILSince the Ukraine war began, India has become one of Russia's biggest energy buyers. Between January and June 2025, Indian refiners purchased over 1.75 million barrels of Russian crude per day—covering nearly 36-40% of the country's total oil demand. The move has helped India manage inflation and cut import bills, even as it drew criticism in Washington. The irony? Back in 2022 and 2023, US officials had privately nudged India to keep buying Russian oil to 'ensure global price stability.' That line has now REASON WHY TRUMP IS UPSETAt the core of Trump's pressure campaign is a push to boost American oil exports. His campaign is backed heavily by US fossil fuel giants, and his latest tax package offers nearly $18 billion in new incentives for the oil and gas sector, per The New York is already a rising customer. US crude shipments to India surged over 50% in the first half of 2025, now making up 8% of India's oil imports, according to the US Energy Information more India leans toward American oil and LNG, the more it strengthens US energy clout, and helps Trump's backers USING TARIFFS AS BARGAINING CHIPSTrump's tariff warning isn't just about punishing India for its energy choices. It's US takes in nearly a fifth of India's exports. A tariff hike would strike at key sectors—textiles, pharmaceuticals, auto parts, and electronics. Analysts say Trump is using tariffs not as a blunt-force weapon, but as a calculated tool to redirect India's trade and energy IT MEANS FOR INDIA?If India is forced to slash Russian oil imports and pivot to costlier alternatives, its annual crude bill could climb by $11 billion, say experts. That would feed into inflation and hit if Trump's tariff threat materialises, India's export sectors could take an $18 billion annual hit, cutting into margins, raising prices, and endangering jobs across small and mid-sized POSITIONThe Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), responding to Trump's remarks, said India turned to discounted Russian oil after traditional suppliers shifted exports to Europe. At the time, the US had supported India's purchases to stabilise global markets."India's imports are meant to ensure predictable and affordable energy costs to the Indian consumer. They are a necessity compelled by global market situation," the MEA said. It also pointed out that the EU's trade with Russia in 2024 was significantly larger than India's, and the US continues to import uranium, palladium, and fertilisers from the MEA asserted, will act in accordance with its national interest, and efforts to single it out ignore broader trade realities. Its energy choices are based on economic security and pragmatic Trump's playbook blends oil politics with trade pressure. His latest warnings reflect not just anger at Moscow, but America's wider push to redraw energy alliances and corner strategic warning is less about Moscow and more about Washington's desire to redraw energy alliances. By linking oil and tariffs, he's drawing a hard line, one aimed at securing economic advantage, not defending global norms.- Ends advertisement
