US stock futures steady as investors await payrolls data
The S&P 500 (.SPX), opens new tab and Nasdaq (.IXIC), opens new tab closed at record highs after Wednesday's choppy session, boosted by gains in technology stocks and a trade agreement between the United States and Vietnam that eased concerns about prolonged trade tensions.
The blue-chip Dow (.DJI), opens new tab closed 1.3% below all-time highs touched in December.
All eyes are on the nonfarm payrolls report for June, which is scheduled to be released at 8:30 a.m. ET (1230 GMT) - a day ahead of schedule because the U.S. markets are closed on July 4 for Independence Day. Trading volumes are expected to be light, with markets closing early, at 1 p.m. ET on Thursday.
The data is expected to show the U.S. labor market slowed further in June, with the unemployment rate expected to have edged up to more than a three-and-a-half-year high of 4.3%, as economic uncertainty stemming from the Trump administration's policies curbed hiring.
"Chair (Jerome) Powell, leading the camp for the Fed to keep rates on hold, argues that sticky inflation and a solid labor market mean that the policy rate should be kept mildly restrictive," ING analysts said in a note.
"Clearly, any downside surprise in the jobs report would weaken his (Powell's) position and allow the market to push on with pricing a rate cut at the July meeting."
Traders are attaching a 25% chance of the U.S. Federal Reserve cutting rates at the July meeting, according to CME Group's Fedwatch tool, up from about 20% a week ago.
U.S. stocks dipped briefly on Wednesday after data showed private payrolls fell in June for the first time in more than two years.
Other economic data on Thursday includes weekly jobless claims and the S&P Global and ISM services sector activity readings for June.
Meanwhile, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives advanced President Donald Trump's massive tax-cut and spending bill toward a final yes-or-no vote, appearing to overcome internal party divisions over its cost.
The legislation is expected to add $3.4 trillion to the nation's $36.2 trillion in debt over the next decade, according to nonpartisan analysts.
By 5:49 a.m. ET (0949 GMT), S&P 500 e-minis were up 4 points, or 0.06%, Nasdaq 100 e-minis climbed 24.25 points, or 0.11%, and Dow e-minis added 30 points, or 0.07%.
Shares of chip design software firms Synopsys (SNPS.O), opens new tab and Cadence Design Systems (CDNS.O), opens new tab climbed 6.7% and 5.9%, respectively, in premarket trading after the U.S. lifted export restrictions on chip design software to China, signaling a thaw in trade tensions between the world's top two economies.
Tripadvisor (TRIP.O), opens new tab climbed 4.9% after the Wall Street Journal reported activist investor Starboard Value had built a more than 9% stake in the online travel firm.
Datadog (DDOG.O), opens new tab jumped 10.2% after the cloud security firm was set to replace Juniper Networks on the S&P 500.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
16 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Which? reveals best supermarket Magnum ice cream dupes
Stocking up the freezer with ice cream is an absolute must to get us through the scorching summer days, and who can say no to the satisfying crack of a chocolate-covered number? Of course, the top chocolate-covered ice cream brand in the UK is Magnum. However, you could make some savings by buying supermarket own-label ice creams instead - but how do they stack up against a Magnum Classic? Consumer champions Which? tested nine supermarket own-label ice creams in a blind-tasting that involved 60 people, and found that while none of them trumped a classic Magnum, one supermarket did hold a candle to it. A close runner-up came from a budget supermarket, giving ice cream fans more bang for their buck. In fact, two budget supermarket ice creams got higher ratings for flavour and value compared to posh supermarkets like Waitrose. Jessica Carson, Which? Food and Health Editor, said: 'Cooling down with a delicious ice cream on a hot day is the stuff that summer holidays are made of, so having a box full in the freezer is bound to please - whether you are entertaining or if you've got kids. 'While the Classic Magnum wasn't beaten in our test, one supermarket brand matched it and a bargain alternative from Lidl wasn't far behind - and is less than half the price.' The supermarket own-brand ice cream that matched Magnum's rating was none other than the M&S Chocolate Sticks. Both ice creams were rated at 82% and tasters said they loved the balance of chocolate and vanilla flavours, as well as the creamy texture of the ice cream within its chocolate shells. Which? advised customers to look out for deals on the Classic Magnums, which cost £3.50 for a pack of three, making them the most expensive of the lot. However, they are frequently on some kind of deal, so it's best to keep an eye out for special offers to get the most value for money. Classic Magnums are currently £2.75 for three for loyalty card holders at Tesco and Sainsbury's, according to the consumer website. It can also be cheaper to buy Magnums in bigger multipacks of six, if you have the freezer space for them. Here's how Which? rated the nine supermarket Magnum dupes. M&S Chocolate Sticks £2.40 for three 110ml ice creams (80p per stick) These were the only supermarket own-brand ice creams that matched up to Magnums in the Which? taste test, with tasters loving the sweetness and strength of the chocolate flavour, as well as the vanilla flavour. They are the most expensive own-label ice cream tested, but are still over a pound cheaper than full-price Magnums. Lidl Gelatelli Classic Ice Cream Sticks Rated at 79% for great value, Lidl's ice creams are cheap and cheerful. Tasters said they had 'just the right sweetness, creaminess and vanilla flavour'. These ice creams are slightly bigger than Magnums (120ml vs 100ml) yet are less than half the price of Magnum Classics, so customers will be getting more bang for their buck. Aldi Gianni's Milk Chocolate Ice Creams £1.69 for four 100ml ice creams (42p per stick) German budget supermarket Aldi offers the cheapest ice cream tested by Which? and received a decently high rating for flavour. It came in at a 77% rating. While the flavour was good, tasters said they weren't creamy enough, but at just 42p per ice cream, they're a good budget-friendly alternative to Magnums. Iceland Belgian Milk Chocolate Majestics The frozen food specialists' ice cream treat rounds off the Which? top five list, scoring well at 77% for looking great and offering a satisfyingly creamy texture. However, nearly a third of tasters complained they were too sweet. £2.25 for three 100ml ice creams (75p per ice cream) Waitrose has a reputation for being posh and expensive, but their ice creams are 5p cheaper than M&S - however, nearly half of tasters thought the vanilla flavour was far too weak. Morrisons Classic Milk Chocolate Amour Sticks £2.25 for three 110ml ice creams (75p per ice cream) Half of the tasters thought Morrison's Magnum dupes 'weren't bad', but they also were not creamy enough. £2.10 for three 110ml ice creams (70p per ice cream) Asda scored decently for sweetness and strength of chocolate flavour, but the vanilla ice cream within let it down by not being creamy enough. Tesco Milk Chocolate Ice Creams £1.39 for three 110ml ice creams (46p per ice cream) Whilst this was among the cheapest ice creams that Which? tested, over half of the tasters thought the vanilla flavour was too weak. Despite being more expensive than three of the top five ice creams, Co-op's Magnum dupes ranked the lowest because the ice cream wasn't creamy enough and the chocolate wasn't chocolatey enough. 'A bit of a letdown, but not terrible,' Which? said.
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump's big bill achieved what conservatives have been trying to do for decades
For decades, Republicans have argued that the US would be better off if taxes were low, and programs to help low-income Americans were harder to access. With Donald Trump's marquee tax and spending bill now set to become law, the country will find out what it's like to live under that sort of system. The massive legislation that Trump plans to sign Friday will make his campaign promises a reality by extending tax cuts enacted during his first term, and creating new deductions aimed at the working-class voters who backed his re-election. But it will also fundamentally reorder two major social safety net programs, slashing funding and imposing new work requirements that nonpartisan estimates say will cost millions of people their benefits. The ripple effects, experts say, will be felt across the country, and not just by the poor. 'Sometimes people like to feel like this is an us versus them [issue], but this is really all of us. It is the people that your kids are going to school with it, is your neighbor, the people that you play soccer with,' said Lelaine Bigelow, executive director of the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality 'This is going to have a massive effect on a lot of people around this country.' The 'one big, beautiful bill', as Trump calls it, won final approval by the House of Representatives on Thursday, in time for his signature on 4 July, the US Independence Day holiday. In addition to the tax cuts, it will also channel tens of billions in dollars towards immigration enforcement and building a wall along the Mexican border. To cut costs, Republicans included provisions to end green energy incentives created under Joe Biden, but the bulk of the savings will come from changes to two programs: Medicaid, which provides healthcare to low-income and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which helps low-income Americans afford food. Both programs will face new and stricter work requirements, and states will be forced to share part of the cost of Snap for the first time ever. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the bill's Medicaid changes could cost as many as 11.8 million people their healthcare, and the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities forecasts about 8 million people, or one in five recipients, may lose their Snap benefits. The GOP argues that the bill will not cut Medicaid or Snap, but weed out 'waste, fraud and abuse' thereby making the programs more efficient. At one point, House speaker Mike Johnson circulated research from the conservative American Enterprise Institute finding that, after sleeping, playing video games was how Medicaid recipients who do not work spend most of their time. If they did not act, Republicans warned, the 2017 tax cuts would expire this year, many Americans would be forced to pay more, and economic growth would suffer. However, analyses of the law found that it was the highest earners who felt most of the benefit from the tax regimen. Bigelow warns that the benefit cuts will be the most widespread effect of the bill. Her center's research found that 34% of the country's population will be negatively affected by the bill, mostly through the Snap and Medicaid cuts, while just under 2% of taxpayers are in the income bracket that will get most of the tax relief. And though the bill cuts taxes on tips, overtime and car loan interest, they only to last through 2028. Even Americans who do not interact with federal safety programs could feel the economic effects of its retrenchment. Fewer Snap enrollees could mean less business for grocery stores, while rural hospitals could be hard hit by the Medicaid cuts, even with a $50bn fund included in the bill to help those in poor financial shape. Robert Manduca, a University of Michigan sociology professor, forecast a $120bn per year hit to local economies from the benefit cuts. Employees and business owners, he warned, 'might see their job become less secure because the demand in their local economy is getting reduced'. Paradoxically, the bill is still hugely expensive. The CBO forecasts it will add $3.3tn to the deficit through 2034, mostly due to the tax cuts. For fiscal hawks concerned about the sustainability of the country's budget deficit, which has yawned higher in recent years as Washington DC battled the Covid-19 pandemic with massive fiscal stimulus, there's little beauty in Trump's bill. 'Yes, the economy may well enjoy a sugar-high the next couple of years, as borrowing stimulates near-term consumption,' said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates for lowering the deficit. 'But a sugar-high won't be sustained, it will do real damage, and often what comes next is the crash. The longer-term health of our economy, American families, and our children will be worse off due to this debt-financed bill.'
BBC News
21 minutes ago
- BBC News
'I'm being paid to fix issues caused by AI'
AI is making me extra money, says Sarah Skidd, a product marketing manager who writes for tech and start-up May Ms Skidd was approached by a content agency to urgently rework website copy that had been produced via generative AI for a hospitality was supposed to save money had, instead, caused a host of problems. "It was the kind of copy that you typically see in AI copy – just very basic; it wasn't interesting," says Ms Skidd."It was supposed to sell and intrigue but instead it was very vanilla."Ms Skidd spent about 20 hours rewriting the copy, charging $100 (£74) an hour. Rather than making small changes, she "had to redo the whole thing".Ms Skidd, who lives in Arizona, is not worried that businesses are switching to AI, like ChatGPT, rather than using copywriters like herself."Maybe I'm being naive, but I think if you are very good, you won't have trouble."For now, she's hearing of writers whose main role now is to fix copy churned-out by AI."Someone connected with me and said that was 90% of their work right now. So, it's not only me making money off such missteps, there's other writers out there."Ms Skidd is certainly not anti-AI and believes it can be an excellent resource."My husband and son are dyslexic and writing for them is very difficult - anything to help somebody to write; it can be lifechanging."In the last few years, generative AI has taken off and businesses are turning to systems like ChatGPT developed by OpenAI, and Google Gemini to transform business practices, and cut time and than a third (35%) of small businesses plan to expand AI use within two years, rising to 60% among those aiming for rapid sales growth, according to research by the Federation of Small Businesses. However, some businesses are rushing in, and as Ms Skidd shows, it can often create more work and costs than originally that's the experience of Sophie Warner, co-owner of Create Designs, a digital marketing agency in Hampshire in the the last six to eight months, she seen a surge in requests for help from clients who have turned to AI for a quick fix, but have run into problems."Before clients would message us if they were having issues with their site or wanted to introduce new functionality," says Ms Warner. "Now they are going to ChatGPT first."Ms Warner says this has led to clients adding code to their website that has been suggested by ChatGPT. This, she says, has resulted in websites crashing and clients becoming vulnerable to points to one client who, instead of manually updating their event page, which she says would have taken 15 minutes, instead turned to ChatGPT for easier error ultimately "cost them about £360 and their business was down for three days".Ms Warner says it also happens to larger clients too."We are spending more time educating clients on the consequences [of using AI]. "We often have to charge an investigation fee to find out what has gone wrong, as they don't want to admit it, and the process of correcting these mistakes takes much longer than if professionals had been consulted from the beginning."Prof Feng Li, associate dean for research and innovation at Bayes Business School, says some businesses are too optimistic about what current AI tools can points out that AI is known to hallucinate - to generate content that is irrelevant, made-up, or inconsistent."Human oversight is essential," he says."We've seen companies generate low-quality website content or implement faulty code that breaks critical systems."Poor implementation can lead to reputational damage and unexpected costs – and even significant liabilities, often requiring rework by professionals." In Gujarat in northwesten India, copywriter Kashish Barot says she has been editing content written by AI for US-based clients to make it appear more human and remove sentence patterns that make it sound like the often-poor quality of the content, she says clients are becoming used to the speed of AI and that is creating unrealistic expectations."AI really makes everyone think it's a few minutes work," says Ms Barot, who says clients are using Open AI's ChatGPT."However good copyediting, like writing, takes time because you need to think and not curate like AI, which also doesn't understand nuance well because it's curating the data."The hype around AI has prompted many companies to experiment without clear goals, adequate infrastructure, or a realistic understanding of what the technology can deliver, says Prof Li."For example, companies must assess whether they have the right data infrastructure, governance processes, and in-house capabilities to support AI use. Relying on off-the-shelf tools without understanding their limitations can lead to poor outcomes," he says that ChatGPT can help with a wide range of tasks, "but results vary depending on the model used, the user's experience working with AI, and how the prompt is written".It also points out that there are several versions of ChatGPT."Each of our models has different capabilities for completing different tasks." Is Warner worried about the impact of AI, if – as expected – it rapidly improves?"Yes and no," she says. "While it seems like a quick and inexpensive option, AI rarely takes into account unique brand identity, target demographics, or conversion-focused design. As a result, much of the output looks generic and can actually damage the brand's reputation or effectiveness."She adds: "While AI can be a helpful tool, it simply cannot replace the value of human expertise and context in our industry."
