Aurelia Butler

President Trump, as he announced sweeping tariffs, batted away “very tired predictions” from critics of his economic agenda by citing a large decline in the price of eggs.“The price of eggs dropped now 59 percent, and they’re going down more and the availability is fantastic,” Mr. Trump said on Wednesday.The wholesale price of eggs has indeed fallen by more than half since Mr. Trump’s inauguration, but that drastic decline is not yet reflected in the retail price, which consumers pay at the grocery store.According to the Agriculture Department’s weekly data release, the national wholesale average has fallen from $6.55 a dozen on Jan. 24 to $3 on March 28, a 54 percent decline. But the agency, in its latest release, noted that it could take up to three weeks for retail prices to catch up to wholesale prices and that “consumers are only now starting to see shelf prices slowly decline.”The average price of a dozen eggs in grocery stores was $5.90 in February, the month with the latest available data, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That was almost a dollar more than the average in January.The wholesale prices of eggs remains much higher now than at this point at the end of March 2024, when the national average was $1.70 a dozen.The Agriculture Department predicted in its latest food price outlook that egg prices will increase by 57.6 percent in 2025 compared with the previous year. More

A British regulator said it would examine concerns about Sentebale, the charity Harry co-founded, looking at its chair as well as its trustees.Following days of silence after he was accused of bullying and harassment, Prince Harry said on Thursday that he welcomed an announcement that the bitter dispute at the charity he co-founded is to be examined by the Charity Commission, an independent watchdog that regulates charities in England and Wales.The charity, Sentebale, has been engulfed in a public relations crisis since last week, when Harry and his co-founder, Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, announced they were resigning as patrons in solidarity with five trustees over a damaging rift with the chair of the board, Sophie Chandauka.Ms. Chandauka has since gone on television in Britain to level a series of incendiary claims against the former trustees and Prince Harry, including allegations of sexism, harassment and bullying, which they have strongly denied.“On behalf of the former trustees and patrons, we share in the relief that the Charity Commission confirmed they will be conducting a robust inquiry,” Harry said in a statement issued with Prince Seeiso. He added: “We fully expect it will unveil the truth that collectively forced us to resign.”The dispute between Ms. Chandauka and the prince has spiraled into an ugly spectacle, with her claiming that she was targeted by the publicity machine of Harry and his wife, Meghan, after an awkward encounter with Meghan at a polo match in Miami to raise funds for the charity. The former trustees, in turn, said they had lost confidence in Ms. Chandauka’s leadership.The Charity Commission said it had opened a compliance case to examine concerns about Sentebale, and said its focus would include determining whether trustees, including Ms. Chandauka, had fulfilled their legal duties.“The regulator’s focus, in line with its statutory remit, will be to determine whether the charity’s current and former trustees, including its chair, have fulfilled their duties and responsibilities under charity law,” the commission said in its statement.The commission said it was now “in direct contact with parties who have raised concerns to gather evidence and assess the compliance of the charity and trustees past and present.”Ms. Chandauka said in a statement that she also welcomed the watchdog’s decision to proceed with a compliance case. “We hope that, together, these actions will give the general public, our colleagues, partners, supporters, donors and the communities we serve comfort that Sentebale and its new board of trustees are acting appropriately to demonstrate and ensure good governance,” she added. More

While on a hike with her family, a child stumbled across a 3,800-year-old Egyptian amulet. It will go on display in an upcoming exhibition.A 3½-year-old in Israel recently made an important archaeological discovery.The child, Ziv Nitzan, was hiking with her family last month on a dirt trail about 25 miles outside Jerusalem when a small rock caught her attention. She was drawn to it, she said in an interview translated from Hebrew by her mother, because “it had teeth on it.”Naturally, Ziv picked it up. When she rubbed off the dirt, “she noticed that it was something very special,” her mother, Sivan Nitzan, said.The alluring pebble turned out to be a 3,800-year-old Egyptian amulet, engraved with the design of an insect known as a scarab and dating from the Bronze Age, according to the Israel Antiquities Authority, which later collected it.Ziv, moments after finding the ancient artifact. She said she first picked it up because “it had teeth on it,” and when she rubbed off the dirt, she saw that “it was something very special,” her mother said.via Sivan NitzanIt wasn’t the first time that a young hiker had stumbled upon an archaeological treasure in Israel, given its rich history.Last year, while on a hike on Mount Carmel in Haifa, a 13-year-old boy found a Roman-era ring with an engraving of the goddess Minerva. In 2016, a 7-year-old boy on a trip with friends in the Beit She’an Valley discovered a well-preserved, 3,400-year-old carving of a nude woman. And many sharp-eyed children have unearthed coins made during periods of Roman or Hasmonean rule.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

The Trump administration threatened on Thursday to withhold federal funding from public schools unless state education officials verified the elimination of all programs that it said unfairly promoted diversity, equity and inclusion.In a memo sent to top public education officials across the country, the Education Department said that funding for schools with high percentages of low-income students, known as Title I funding, was at risk pending compliance with the administration’s directive.The memo included a certification letter that state and local school officials must sign and return to the department within 10 days, even as the administration has struggled to define which programs would violate its interpretation of civil rights laws. The move is the latest in a series of Education Department directives aimed at carrying out President Trump’s political agenda in the nation’s schools.At her confirmation hearing in February, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said schools should be allowed to celebrate the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But she was more circumspect when asked whether classes that focused on Black history ran afoul of Mr. Trump’s agenda and should be banned.“I’m not quite certain,” Ms. McMahon said, “and I’d like to look into it further.”More recently, the Education Department said that an “assessment of school policies and programs depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.”Programs aimed at recognizing historical events and contributions and promoting awareness would not violate the law “so long as they do not engage in racial exclusion or discrimination,” the department wrote.“However, schools must consider whether any school programming discourages members of all races from attending, either by excluding or discouraging students of a particular race or races, or by creating hostile environments based on race for students who do participate,” the Education Department said.It also noted that the Justice Department could sue for breach of contract if it found that federal funds were spent while violating civil rights laws.The federal government accounts for about 8 percent of local school funding, but the amounts vary widely. In Mississippi, for example, about 23 percent of school funding comes from federal sources, while just 7 percent of school funding in New York comes from Washington, according to the Pew Research Center.“Federal financial assistance is a privilege, not a right,” Craig Trainor, the acting assistant education secretary for civil rights, said in a statement. “When state education commissioners accept federal funds, they agree to abide by federal anti-discrimination requirements.” More

Javier Milei of Argentina might not be that useful for the United States on economics or geopolitics — but he can help to fight the culture wars.The day after President Trump antagonized world leaders across the globe with his most sweeping set of tariffs yet, he was scheduled to fly to Florida and potentially see the one leader he has called his “favorite president.”That leader, President Javier Milei of Argentina, had flown overnight to receive an award on Thursday at a right-wing gala at Mar-a-Lago. Mr. Trump was scheduled to also be there late Thursday — Mr. Milei said Mr. Trump would receive an award, too — and Mr. Milei said he hoped the two would meet.It was Mr. Milei’s 10th trip to the United States in 15 months as president, and nearly every time, he has met Mr. Trump or Elon Musk.Mr. Trump has posited that he is reshuffling U.S. foreign policy strictly around what is good for the United States.So what can be puzzling about his elevation of Argentina to the front row of America’s allies — Mr. Milei and Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of Italy were the only world leaders onstage at Mr. Trump’s inauguration — is that the chronically distressed South American nation is not particularly important as an economic or geopolitical partner.Instead, through Mr. Milei, Argentina has offered Mr. Trump something else he appears to crave: adoration.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

The death of the actress Kim Sae-ron has plunged her former boyfriend, the superstar actor Kim Soo-hyun, into the biggest crisis of his career.When Kim Sae-ron was found dead at her home in February, she joined a growing list of South Korean entertainers who have ended their own lives. But the actress, who was 24, has generated more headlines in death than in life as her relationship with an older male superstar has come under scrutiny.The tragedy and scandal has embroiled Kim Soo-hyun, 37, one of ​South Korea’s best-known actors,​ and is packed with allegations worthy of a K-drama story line: A former child prodigy and a man 13 years her senior started dating. Not long after they broke up, the actress got into a drunk-driving incident that proved fatal to her career and suffered financial troubles, while the actor became one of the country’s richest stars. She tried but​ failed to ​stage a comeback​. Then she took her own life.The scandal also raised more serious accusations. Since Ms. Kim’s death, her family has said Mr. Kim started dating her when she was a minor, and that after they parted, a talent agency he founded had pressured her over a ​debt she was unable to repay. Mr. Kim has denied the accusations ​against him, and filed a defamation lawsuit against Ms. Kim’s family.But the scandal has already begun burning Mr. Kim’s career and highlighted the perils of ​celebrity in South Korea, where personal lives can come under unforgiving scrutiny. Stars have seen their careers ruined — or even ended their own lives — because of aggressive and sometimes malicious online rumors over everything from plastic surgeries to their romantic life.“South Koreans treat entertainers like public figures who must live up to textbooklike ethical standards,” said Bae Kug-nam, the author of several books about South Korea’s entertainment industry.That culture ​has created a deadly trap when combined with YouTubers and other influencers who have dished out sensational details of ​a star’s personal life, Mr. Bae said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

As he unfurled his list of tariffs targeting most of America’s trading partners, President Trump repeatedly stressed that each nation’s rate was reciprocal — reflecting the barriers they had long erected to U.S. goods.He said little about the methodology behind those calculations, but a possible answer emerged later on Wednesday. Each country’s new tariff rate appeared to be derived by:Taking the trade deficit that America runs with that nation and dividing it by the exports that country sent into the United States.Then, because Mr. Trump said he was being “kind,” the final tariff number was cut in half.James Surowiecki, a financial writer and book author, first pointed out the trend in a post on X. His comment set off widespread speculation, given that Mr. Trump previously said each nation’s tariff rate would be “the combined rate of all their tariffs, non-monetary barriers and other forms of cheating.”Those non-monetary barriers include a host of hard-to-quantify laws and other policies that Mr. Trump sees as the primary reason that the U.S. experiences such trade imbalances in the first place. (There are exceptions: Some nations face only a standard 10 percent minimum tariff starting this month.)In an earlier briefing with reporters, White House officials said the figures were calculated by the Council of Economic Advisers using well-established methodologies. The official added the model was based on the concept that the trade deficit that we have with any given country is the sum of all the unfair trade practices and “cheating” that country has done.The White House later clarified its methodology in this post. Though it uses some mathematical symbols that might be hard to parse, it confirms that the formula is essentially based on the U.S. trade deficit with a foreign country, divided by the country’s exports.“It was always going to be a really difficult exercise to come up with a very precise reciprocal tariff rate,” said Emily Kilcrease, the director of the Energy, Economics and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security and a former deputy assistant U.S. trade representative.“Given what seems to be their desire to get something out quickly, it appears what they’ve done is come up with an approximation that is consistent with their policy goals,” she said. More