- No products in the cart.
BEST SELLING PRODUCTS
The US has placed about 8,500 troops on standby for possible deployment to central and eastern Europe to shore up Nato’s defences as western leaders pledged to form a united front against the threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine.
The Pentagon’s announcement that it was prepared to move additional personnel to Nato’s eastern flank came as the US and its allies hardened their response to Russia’s build-up of forces along the Ukrainian border.
“At the direction of the president and following recommendations made by secretary [Lloyd] Austin, the United States has taken steps to heighten the readiness of its forces at home and abroad,” said John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesperson.
“They are prepared to respond to a range of contingencies, including support to the Nato Response Force, if it is activated,” he added.
Meanwhile, UK prime minister Boris Johnson warned Russia had massed enough troops close to Ukraine for a “lightning war” in which it would try to seize Kyiv and President Vladimir Putin’s insistence that Nato should stop its encroachment towards Russia’s borders is reviving talk of whether Finland and Sweden should join the military alliance.
Thanks for reading FirstFT Europe/Africa. Here’s the rest of today’s news — Will
1. DWS chief under scrutiny over €160,000 ‘Porsche payment’ Deutsche Bank alerted Germany’s financial crime watchdog to a €160,000 payment made by a client to one of its most senior bankers, which the pair later explained was part of a failed attempt to buy a Porsche.
2. UK businesses count the cost of surging inflation British companies have warned that their recovery from the pandemic risks being dented by rising inflation as they wrestle with the dilemma of what proportion of the costs can be passed on to consumers.
3. Burkina Faso’s president overthrown in military coup Roch Kaboré has been overthrown by a group of soldiers in the third military coup in west Africa in eight months. Soldiers announced on national TV that they had detained the president, suspended the constitution, dissolved the government and national assembly and closed the country’s borders.
4. Turkish industry hit by power cuts amid gas troubles Turkey suffered a manufacturing shutdown after problems with gas supplies forced the state to impose electricity cuts. Renault’s joint venture and Tofas, a Turkish carmaker part-owned by Fiat Chrysler, were among those announcing a halt in production yesterday, according to Turkish media.
5. Rise in UK pension age drives record employment among 65-year-olds An increase in the UK state pension age has led to record highs in employment among 65-year-olds. Research found that about 55,000 more were in paid work in 2021 as a result of the rise in the pension age, from 65 to 66, between late 2018 and late 2020.
Boris Johnson’s premiership was plunged deeper into crisis after it emerged that he had a birthday party during England’s first lockdown in 2020, when Covid rules banned indoor social gatherings.
Authorities have lifted a month-long lockdown in the Chinese city of Xi’an less than two weeks before the start of the Beijing Winter Olympics.
Germany’s Lufthansa and Swiss-Italian shipping conglomerate MSC have expressed interest in acquiring a majority stake in ITA Airways, in a sign of how the pandemic could reshape parts of the European aviation industry.
The US drugs regulator has rescinded its authorisation for the monoclonal antibody treatments made by Eli Lilly and Regeneron, which do not work well against the Omicron variant.
Italy The country’s presidential election process continues with a second round of voting. Lawmakers unleashed a deluge of blank votes in the first round yesterday, in a delaying action amid intense backroom negotiations to resolve an impasse over whom to anoint as head of state.
UK HMRC publishes data on public sector borrowing.
Earnings Figures released today will shed light on how much Sweden’s tough stance on Huawei has affected the domestic technology company Ericsson. Japan’s Hyundai Motor and US-based General Electric and Johnson & Johnson are also set to report fourth-quarter data.
ANC rival steps up attacks on South Africa’s judiciary South African tourism minister Lindiwe Sisulu launched a rambling attack on Africa’s most independent judiciary and one of the world’s most progressive constitutions. Both have become targets in the battle to wrest control of the African National Congress from President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Paul Polman: Critics of ‘woke’ capitalism are wrong In straitened times a more morally conscious business elite must, surely, be a good thing, writes the former chief executive of Unilever. Not everyone agrees, however.
Theodore Agnew: Fraud is rampant The former UK minister for efficiency and transformation writes that the failure of government to tackle fraud — which public estimates value at just under £30bn a year — was so egregious and the need for remedy so urgent that he felt the only option was to smash some crockery and resign to get people to take notice.
How cronyism corrodes workplace relations and trust When a group is under threat, the instinct can be to close ranks rather than act in the best interest of the organisation. After all, our ancestry predisposes us to seek advantage through cronyism. These tips advise on how to outsmart our baser instincts.
Europe’s navel gazing With most big countries in western Europe — including the UK, France, Germany and Italy — in the midst of destabilising political transitions, they are even less prepared for a confrontation with Russia, writes Gideon Rachman.
With every take-off and landing, something remarkable is happening beneath the plane. Mark Vanhoenacker, author and a Boeing 787 pilot for British Airways, explains why aircraft tyres are a miracle of engineering.
Walking into the baby aisle of my local New York pharmacy these days feels like entering a Soviet supermarket in the 1970s. Shelves usually jammed with cans of powdered baby formula are empty save for a notice warning customers they can buy a maximum of three tins each.
This shortage has fuelled such a national crisis that the White House is scrambling for a response. Formula is out of stock in 43 per cent of US stores and rising. Medical professionals are having to warn desperate mothers not to risk their children’s health by diluting or making their own formula.
The troubles are rooted in a highly concentrated domestic market that was distorted by government intervention and disrupted by pandemic-related hoarding, supply chain issues and safety concerns. This tangled tale holds important lessons for policymakers everywhere as they look to bring production of essential goods closer to home.
The US formula market has long been dominated by just three players: Abbott, Gerber and Mead Johnson, who account for the lion’s share of sales in what had been a sluggish market. The trio owes its strength to the US government. An estimated two-thirds of all formula is purchased through the Women, Infants and Children nutrition programme, a federal funding scheme for low-income families which contracts solely with these three domestic makers. Tight safety restrictions and import duties have squashed competition from Europe and Canada. Fully 98 per cent of US formula is made domestically.
The combination encouraged steady production but left the industry with little reason to invest in additional capacity. Then came Covid and an unexpected dip in the birth rate. The number of daily births had been falling by an average of 0.39 per cent annually from 2000 to 2019, before dropping precipitously in the winter of 2020-21. In the early months of the pandemic, Americans hoarded baby formula along with toilet paper and pasta, but then store orders fell as the birth rate dropped and parents started using up their stockpiles.
Since then, formula makers, like almost everyone else, have struggled to find workers and trucks to make and transport their product. So they were ill-equipped to ramp up when the birth rate recovered and demand surged.
The pressure was felt everywhere, but especially at a Michigan plant belonging to Abbott, the largest supplier. A Food and Drug Administration inspection last year revealed poor practices that failed to control microbial growth, and a whistleblower alleged shoddy record keeping and lax cleaning. Abbott failed to make changes, and tragedy struck. Several babies fell ill, at least four were hospitalised and two died. The plant was shut down in February and Abbott recalled several brands of formula. Price gouging and shortages followed.
On Monday, the FDA and Abbott reached an agreement that could lead to the plant’s reopening. The federal government said in court documents that both the FDA and Abbott’s own sampling found potentially deadly cronobacter bacteria at the plant, although no links were established between the formula and the actual illnesses.
Once the FDA agrees the plant is clean, the company forecasts it will take at least two weeks to restart production and eight weeks for formula to reach supermarket shelves. Danone, which makes a rival formula, has predicted that supplies will remain tight until at least August.
There is a warning in this. US authorities were simply trying to ensure that American babies were fed safe, locally produced formula from reliable sources when they put up trade barriers and limited purchasing contracts. But their interventions left the country dangerously dependent on a small number of suppliers who in turn relied on very few manufacturing plants.
In a positive step, the FDA this week announced plans to loosen the rules on imported formula, and Abbott has been flying in supplies from Ireland. Permanent changes that drop barriers while still protecting babies are needed to give families more options and bring flexibility to the US supply.
The formula debacle could easily be repeated as authorities bring back local production of critical, highly regulated supplies, such as vaccines and personal protective equipment. Government contracts and protectionism can help jump-start production and provide a necessary base, but left unchecked they can lead to complacency and under-investment.
Stimulating a lively market with lots of credible competitors must be the long-term goal, for baby formula and everything else too.
Supply chain disruptions continue to be a major challenge as the world economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, recent developments related to geopolitics and the pandemic (particularly in China) could put further strains on global supply chains. In a January post, we first presented the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI), a parsimonious global measure designed to capture supply chain disruptions using a range of indicators. We revisited our index in March, and today we are launching the GSCPI as a standalone product, with new readings to be published each month. In this post, we review GSCPI readings through April 2022 and briefly discuss the drivers of recent moves in the index.
The chart below provides an update of the GSCPI through April; readers can find a link to the updated data series on our new product page. Between December 2021 and March 2022, the index registered an easing of global supply chain pressures, though they remained at very high levels historically. However, the April 2022 reading suggests a worsening of conditions as renewed strains emerge in global supply chains.
April Data Indicate Worsening of Supply Chain Pressures
Before analyzing this recent pickup in supply chain pressures, we remind readers that the GSCPI is based on two sets of data. Global transportation costs are measured by using data on ocean shipping costs, for we which we employ data from the Baltic Dry Index (BDI) and the Harpex index, as well as BLS airfreight cost indices for freight flights between Asia, Europe, and the United States. We also use supply chain-related components of Purchase Manager Index (PMI) surveys—“delivery times,” “backlogs,” and “purchased stocks”—for manufacturing firms across seven interconnected economies: China, the euro area, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Before combining these data within the GSCPI by means of principal component analysis, we strip out demand effects from the underlying series by projecting the PMI supply chain components on the “new orders” components of the corresponding PMI surveys and, in a similar vein, projecting the global transportation cost measures onto GDP-weighted “new orders” and “inputs purchased” components across the seven PMI surveys.
So, what are the drivers behind recent moves in the GSCPI? The charts below illustrate how each of the underlying variables contributed to the overall change in the GSCPI in the last two months. Each column represents the contribution, in standard deviations, of each component of our index to the overall change in the index during a given period. In the first chart, we examine February-March 2022. We note that the lessening of supply chain pressures over this period was widespread across the various components, which indicated a welcome reduction in global supply chain disruptions. Most of the series in our data set declined over this period; the U.K. “backlog” component worsened and the U.S. “purchased stocks” component increased marginally.
Widespread Improvements Seen across Components in March 2022
In the chart below, we focus on the contributions of the underlying components of the GSCPI from March to April 2022.
Global Supply Chain Pressures Worsen in April 2022
As the chart indicates, the worsening of global supply chain pressures in April was predominantly driven by the Chinese “delivery times” component, the increase in airfreight costs from the United States to Asia, and the euro area “delivery times” component, as other components have eased over the month. These developments could be associated with the stringent COVID-19-related lockdown measures adopted in China, as well as the consequences of the Ukraine-Russia conflict for supply chains in Europe.
Finally, as we noted in our previous post and discuss on our product page, recent GSCPI readings are subject to revision. The chart below compares the current GSCPI release with the previous three releases, showing that revisions can have an impact up to a year back in time. The chart indicates that, based on the current vintage of the GSCPI, the decrease in global supply chain pressures through April occurred at a slighter faster pace than previous GSCPI estimates had suggested.
Revised and Realized Data Can Alter Previous Supply Chain Pressure Readings
In this post, we provide an update of the GSCPI through April 2022. This estimate suggests that the moderation we have observed in recent months has been partially reversed, as lockdown measures in China and geopolitical developments are putting further strains on delivery times and transportation costs in China and the euro area. Forthcoming readings will be particularly interesting as we assess the potential for these developments to further heighten global supply chain pressures.
Gianluca Benigno is the head of International Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.
Julian di Giovanni is head of Climate Risk Studies in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.
Jan J.J. Groen is an economic research advisor in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.
Adam Noble is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.
How to cite this post:
Gianluca Benigno, Julian Di Giovanni, Jan Groen, and Adam Noble, “Global Supply Chain Pressure Index: May 2022 Update,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, May 18, 2022, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2022/05/global-supply-chain-pressure-index-may-2022-update/.
The views expressed in this post are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.
A leaked draft of a majority opinion authored by Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito strongly suggests that the court will rule to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the two landmark cases which have upheld the right to an abortion nationwide for the last half-century. If the final ruling largely follows what is sketched out in the leaked draft, abortion services will be drastically curtailed, if not outright banned, in over half the country.
Abortion is often framed as a “culture war” issue, distinct from material “bread and butter” economic issues. In reality, abortion rights and economic progress are deeply interconnected, and the imminent loss of abortion rights means the loss of economic security, independence, and mobility for millions of women. The fall of Roe will be an additional economic blow, as women in the 26 states likely to ban abortion already face an economic landscape of lower wages, worker power, and access to healthcare.
Women’s economic lives, livelihoods, and mobility are at the heart of the reasoning to overrule Roe.
In the draft majority opinion, Justice Alito dismissed the argument in Casey that women had organized their lives, relationships, and careers with the availability of abortions services, writing “that form of reliance depends on an empirical question that is hard for anyone—and in particular, for a court—to assess, namely the effect of the abortion right on society and in particular on the lives of women.” In fact, this empirical question has been definitively assessed and answered. A rich and rigorous social science literature has examined both the detrimental effect of a denied abortion on women’s lives, as well as the individual and societal economic benefits of abortion legalization, as detailed in the thorough amicus brief filed in Dobbs on behalf of over 100 economists.
Some of the economic consequences of being denied an abortion include a higher chance of being in poverty even four years after; a lower likelihood of being employed full time; and an increase in unpaid debts and financial distress lasting years. Laws that restrict abortion providers, so-called “TRAP” laws (targeted regulation of abortion providers), have led to women in those states being less likely to move into higher-paying occupations.
On the flip side, environments where abortion is legal and accessible have lower rates of teen first births and marriages. Abortion legalization has also been associated with reduced maternal mortality for Black women. The ability to delay having a child has been found to translate to significantly increased wages and labor earnings, especially among Black women as well as an increased likelihood of educational attainment. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen summed up the overall effect: “…eliminating the rights of women to make decisions about when and whether to have children would have very damaging effects on the economy and would set women back decades.”
The draft opinion of this overtly partisan Supreme Court ignores the rigorous data and empirical studies demonstrating the significant economic consequences of this decision. In doing so, it lays bare the cruel and misogynistic politics that motivate it. Justice Alito’s dismissal of claims that forcing women to bear an unwanted pregnancy imposes a heavy burden is shockingly glib, as he simply asserts: “that federal and state laws ban discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, that leave for pregnancy and childbirth are now guaranteed by law in many cases, that the costs of medical care associated with pregnancy are covered by insurance or government assistance….”
Every statement in this casual litany is wildly misleading. Women are still routinely fired for being pregnant, close to 9 in 10 workers lacked paid leave in 2020, the costs of maternity care with insurance have risen sharply and constitute a serious economic burden for even middle-income families, and many of the states certain or likely to ban abortion after the fall of Roe have not expanded Medicaid, leaving women without insurance facing much steeper costs—particularly in the immediate post-partum period. And, of course, our failed health care system often imposes the worst cost of all on pregnant women: The U.S. rate of maternal mortality, especially for Black women, ranks last among similarly wealthy countries. In short, the potential costs of bearing a child are high indeed, and it is women who should decide if and when they wish to shoulder them.
|State||Minimum wage||Incarceration Rate (per 100k)||Abortion status key||Right to Work key||Medicaid Expansion key||Right to Work||Medicaid Expansion||Abortion status|
|Alabama||$7.25||419||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||2|
|Alaska||$10.34||243||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Arizona||$12.80||556||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||2|
|Arkansas||$11.00||585||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|California||$14.00||310||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Colorado||$12.56||342||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Connecticut||$13.00||246||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Delaware||$10.50||380||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Washington D.C.||$15.20||N/A||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Florida||$10.00||444||Likely to ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||3|
|Georgia||$7.25||507||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||2|
|Hawaii||$10.10||215||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Idaho||$7.25||474||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Illinois||$12.00||303||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Indiana||$7.25||400||Likely to ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||3|
|Iowa||$7.25||293||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||2|
|Kansas||$7.25||342||No change||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||0|
|Kentucky||$7.25||515||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Louisiana||$7.25||678||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Maine||$12.75||146||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Maryland||$12.50||305||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Massachusetts||$14.25||133||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Michigan||$9.87||381||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||2|
|Minnesota||$10.33||177||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Mississippi||$7.25||636||Trigger ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||1|
|Missouri||$11.15||423||Trigger ban||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||1|
|Montana||$9.20||439||Likely to ban||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||3|
|Nebraska||$9.00||289||Likely to ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||3|
|Nevada||$9.75||412||No change||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||0|
|New Hampshire||$7.25||197||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|New Jersey||$13.00||209||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|New Mexico||$11.50||315||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|New York||$13.20||224||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|North Carolina||$7.25||313||No change||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||0|
|North Dakota||$7.25||231||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Ohio||$9.30||430||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||2|
|Oklahoma||$7.25||621||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Oregon||$12.75||353||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Pennsylvania||$7.25||355||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Rhode Island||$12.25||156||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|South Carolina||$7.25||352||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||2|
|South Dakota||$9.95||426||Trigger ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||1|
|Tennessee||$7.25||384||Trigger ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||1|
|Texas||$7.25||529||Trigger ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||1|
|Utah||$7.25||207||Trigger ban||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||1|
|Vermont||$12.55||182||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|Virginia||$11.00||421||No change||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||0|
|Washington||$14.49||250||No change||Not RTW||Adopted Expansion||0||0||0|
|West Virginia||$8.75||380||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||Adopted Expansion||1||0||2|
|Wisconsin||$7.25||378||Pre-Roe ban or bans/extreme limits||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||2|
|Wyoming||$7.25||426||Trigger ban||RTW||No Expansion||1||1||1|
Source: Elizabeth Nash and Lauren Cross, “26 States Are Certain or Likely to Ban Abortion without Roe: Here’s Which Ones and Why,” The Guttmacher Institute, October 2021; “State Minimum Wage Laws, Department of Labor, Updated January 2022; Kaiser Family Fund, “Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions,” April 26, 2022; E. Ann Carson, “Prisoners in 2020 — Statistical Tables,” U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, December 2020; “Right-to-Work States,” National Conference of State Legislatures, Updated 2017.
Recognizing that abortion is an economic issue is an important step in building support for protecting women’s right of access. But this recognition also allows us to see the potential fall of Roe v. Wade as a key piece in a broader politics and economics of control. Twenty-six states currently have laws or constitutional amendments on their books that ban abortion. If Roe is declared overruled, these bans will go into effect. Low- and middle-income women, especially Black and Brown women will bear the brunt of the impact. Many of the states with preexisting abortion bans held at bay by Roe are also states that have created an economic policy architecture of low wages, barely functional or funded public services, at-will employment, and no paid leave or parental support. In these states, the denial of abortion services is one more piece in a sustained project of economic subjugation and disempowerment.
Figure A shows the 26 states that have “trigger bans” that will set in immediately after the SCOTUS decision, pre-Roe bans or extreme limits, and likely bans. Figure A also shows the minimum wage in that state, whether that state is a so-called “right-to-work” state which makes it harder for workers to collectively bargain and unionize, whether the state has expanded Medicaid, and the rate of incarceration per 100,000 people in that state. While wages and access to health care (through Medicaid) are relatively obvious measures of well-being, so-called “right-to-work” laws are also useful to look at as worker power and unionization also have strong connections to economic, social, and physical health. Mass incarceration and the criminal justice system are also deeply intertwined with racial and economic inequality, from the impact of a criminal record on employment and earnings, to the intergenerational effects on families and communities.
It is no coincidence that the states which will ban abortion first are also largely the states with the lowest minimum wages, states less likely to have expanded Medicaid, states more likely to be anti-union “right-to-work” states, and states with higher-than-average incarceration rates. For example, among the states which will ban abortion, the average minimum wage is $8.39, compared to $11.48 in the states which have abortion access. Similarly, 10 of the 26 anti-abortion states have not expanded Medicaid and all but two of the states are anti-union “right-to-work” states. Where the average rate of incarceration is 419 per 100,000 people. The 26 anti-abortion states, on average, incarcerate 439 per 100,000 people, compared to 272 for the states without abortion restrictions. The consequences of low wages and lack of access to health care, including abortion services fall especially hard on Black women in many of these states. There is a long history of racism motivating political organization, like the rise of “right-to-work” legislation in the Jim Crow south, or the complicated combination of anti-abortion politics and backlash against desegregation efforts during the political realignment in the 1970s.
Policymakers and advocates must recognize that the fall of Roe is an economic issue and would be one more victory for the economics of control and disempowerment—low wages, little worker power, and rising disinvestment. Reproductive justice is key to economic justice and protects women’s humanity, dignity, and the right to exert freedom over their own choices in the economy.
Sign up for EPI’s newsletter so you never miss our research and insights on ways to make the economy work better for everyone.
About Google Data Analytics Professional Certification | Includes my opinion
‘Selling Sunset’ Star Christine Quinn And Tech Entrepreneur Husband Have Plans To Disrupt The Real Estate Industry
Everything You Need to Know About the Solana Blockchain and NFTs
Location, celebrity partners unveiled for $150M sports destination coming to Miami-Dade
NYC Amazon Workers Vote Against Unionizing; Warren Buffett Reveals Big Investments | NTD Business
22 Rising NFT Artists to Watch in 2022
Apple marks Black History Month with a ‘Black Unity’ Watch strap
Business News | Stock and Share Market News | Finance News