poised

Oct. 20 (UPI) — Bolivia is poised to elect Rodrigo Paz, a right-leaning centrist senator, as president on Sunday, besting former conservative president Jorge Quiroga in an election runoff.

According to preliminary results from the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, Paz, 58, of the Christian Democratic Party, won with 54.6% of the more than 6.5 million people in the country who cast ballots on Sunday.

Paz is the son of former President Jaime Paz Zamora, who served from 1989 to 1993.

Paz was elected after coming out on top of the mid-August presidential election — a surprise rise to the top of a heap of candidates as National Unit Front party’s Samuel Doria Medina was expected to be the winner at the time.

Sunday’s runoff was the result of neither Paz nor Quiroga, 65, winning the presidency outright in that August contest.

With both Paz and Quiroga being conservatives, their victories in the runoff ensured a right-leaning president would lead the country for the first time since 2006, when Bolivia elected union organizer Evo Morales as its first Indigenous president, who served until his resignation amid protests over voting irregularities in 2019.

“Here we were, here we are and here we will continue to be,” Quiroga said in a statement on Facebook as the election results became clear. “THANK YOU! Together we will keep working for a Free Bolivia.”

Paz won on a campaign to establish a market-based economy with the motto of “Capitalism for All.”

Quiroga had similarly championed a market-based economic system during his campaign, which emphasized private property rights for citizens.

The election comes as the South American country faces an economic crisis, with voters’ shunning of the leftist Movement Towards Socialism seen as a repudiation of the party.

“I congratulate the President-elect of Bolivia, Rodrigo Paz, for his victory in the elections and the entire Bolivian people for their democratic participation at the ballot boxes,” Chilean President Gabriel Boric Font said in a statement.

“From Chile, we reaffirm our commitment to strengthening cooperation and joint work between brother countries for the benefit of our peoples.”

U.S. Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., said Bolivia, with the election of Paz, “has turned the page & defeated socialism.”

“From the U.S. Congress, I wish your administration great success as you restore freedom, prosperity & democratic values to Bolivia,” he said on X.

Is past and present stock market performance a good predictor of how the market will perform in the future? It can be sometimes. Otherwise, no one would bother incorporating historical stock data into models that attempt to project future performance.

With that in mind, investors might want to pay attention to what’s going on now with the S&P 500 (^GSPC 1.56%) in relation to what it’s done in years past. The benchmark index is poised to do something that’s only happened 11 times in 100 years. And it could signal a big move for the stock market in 2026.

Image source: Getty Images.

The third time’s the charm

The S&P 500 soared 26% in 2023. It followed with a 25% gain in 2024. As of the market close on Oct. 10, 2025, the S&P is up a little over 11%. As things stand right now, it’s on course to finish the year with a double-digit percentage gain for the third consecutive year.

Such an achievement is rarer than you might think. Over the last 100 years, the S&P 500 has delivered double-digit returns for three consecutive years only 11 times. Technically, the index has only existed in its current form, including 500 companies, for 68 years. However, the S&P 500’s predecessor — the S&P 90 — dates back to 1926.

Granted, the stock market could end 2025 on a negative note. President Trump’s latest threat of additional 100% tariffs on all Chinese imports, on top of 30% tariffs already in place, is causing significant angst among investors.

It doesn’t help matters that the S&P 500 has been trading at record highs. The Buffett indicator, a ratio of total U.S. stock market capitalization to GDP, is well above a level that its namesake, legendary investor Warren Buffett, has said was “playing with fire.”

However, even if the S&P 500 falls over the next few weeks, a rebound to get the index back into double-digit gain territory would still be quite possible. Stocks often enjoy momentum at the end of a year thanks to a phenomenon known as the Santa Claus rally.

A history of big moves following three double-digit years

What could a third consecutive year of double-digit gains for the S&P 500 potentially mean for stocks in 2026? History shows that big moves often follow.

In three of the 11 cases over the last 100 years where the S&P jumped by double digits for three years in a row, the trend soon came to an abrupt end. For example, the S&P 500’s predecessor began with a bang in 1926, racking up three back-to-back double-digit returns. However, any student of history knows what happened in 1929: The stock market crash in October of that year brought a screeching halt to the previous momentum. The S&P finished the year down 8% and continued to decline for the next three years.

More recently, the index generated strong double-digit returns in 2019, 2020, and 2021. But the S&P 500 plunged 18% in 2022 as the Federal Reserve cranked up interest rates.

In four of the 11 cases, though, the strong momentum extended into a fourth year. The first occurrence came during World War II. The S&P soared 20% in 1942, followed by a gain of nearly 26% in 1943 and a 36% jump in 1944. The best was yet to come, with the index skyrocketing 36% in 1945 as the war ended.

Another great example of a three-year streak continuing into a fourth year was during the heady dot-com boom of the 1990s. The S&P 500 delivered returns of 22% or more in 1995, 1996, and 1997. It slowed only slightly in 1998, with a nice gain of 21%.

^SPX data by YCharts

How will the S&P 500 perform in 2026?

History shows that big moves are common after three consecutive years of double-digit gains by the S&P 500. Unfortunately, stocks tumble nearly as often as they jump in the following year. How will the S&P 500 perform in 2026? It’s impossible to know for sure.

What is possible to know, though, is that the S&P 500 has always risen over the long term in the past. The Rolling Stones weren’t talking about the stock market when they sang “Time Is on My Side,” but their premise definitely applies to investing. Regardless of what the S&P 500 does next year, investors who maintain a long-term perspective are likely to make money.

In late August, I was listening to Nvidia‘s (NVDA -4.84%) earnings call for its fiscal second quarter (ended July 27). When Colette Kress, CFO of the artificial intelligence (AI) tech leader, gave quantifiable data about the company’s sovereign AI business, I thought, “Finally!” as such data is only rarely shared.

Nvidia’s sovereign AI business is growing like gangbusters. It appears to be the biggest growth engine of the company’s AI-driven data center platform, which accounts for the bulk of Nvidia’s total revenue. Yet, it gets little coverage in the financial press.

“Sovereign entities” are those that are independent and have total or at least significant control within their borders. This includes many nations, U.S. states, and the European Union (EU).

Image source: Getty Images.

Nvidia “on track to achieve over $20 billion in sovereign AI revenue this year”

From Kress’ remarks on last quarter’s earnings call:

Sovereign AI is on the rise as the nation’s ability to develop its own AI using domestic infrastructure, data, and talent presents a significant opportunity for NVIDIA Corporation. NVIDIA Corporation is at the forefront of landmark initiatives across the UK and Europe. …

We are on track to achieve over $20 billion in Sovereign AI revenue this year, more than double that of last year.

I’ll put the $20 billion in context below.

Kress said that the EU plans to invest 20 billion euros to establish 20 AI factories in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. This will include five gigafactories, and it will increase its AI compute infrastructure by 10-fold.

A “gigafactory” means that the AI compute facility will contain the number of Nvidia’s graphics processing units (GPUs) — which dominate the market for AI chips — that require at least 1 gigawatt of power. For context, 1 gigawatt (or 1,000 megawatts) equates to about the power output of a large-scale nuclear power plant.

Nvidia CEO: “Nations are investing in AI infrastructure like they once did for electricity and the Internet.”

The above quote is from CEO Jensen Huang’s remarks on Nvidia’s fiscal first-quarter earnings call in May. Here are more Huang snippets from that call:

I was honored to join him [President Donald Trump, in May] in announcing a 500-megawatt AI infrastructure project in Saudi Arabia …

[In May,] we announced Taiwan’s first AI factory … Last week, I was in Sweden to launch its first national AI infrastructure. Japan, Korea, India, Canada, France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, and more are now building national AI factories to empower startups, industries, and societies. … [N]ations are investing in AI infrastructure like they once did for electricity and the Internet.

All the countries that Huang rattled off as building sovereign AI infrastructure are using Nvidia’s GPUs and related technology. Talk about big customers!

Putting the sovereign AI business’ projected annual growth in context

For the current fiscal year (fiscal 2026, which ends in late January), Wall Street expects Nvidia’s revenue to be $206.5 billion, up 58% from $130.5 billion last fiscal year. If that estimate proves relatively accurate and the sovereign AI business brings in revenue of $20 billion, it will account for about 9.7% of total revenue. And Kress said “over $20 billion,” so the percentage could be higher.

Below are more stats for further context.

Data source: Nvidia. *Calculations by author.

The above are half-year stats, but they give you an idea of what a standout performer Nvidia’s sovereign AI business is. Given the annual projections Kress shared, this business probably generated first-half revenue in the ballpark of $8 billion, or 10% of the data center’s revenue, and likely grew 100%-plus year over year.

Why Nvidia’s sovereign AI strategy is particularly brilliant

Nvidia is not only selling its technology to sovereign entities, it’s also assisting them in their massive undertakings. These relationships should make Nvidia’s sovereign AI business especially “sticky.” Countries that are happy with Nvidia are likely to stick with Nvidia when they want to upgrade or expand their AI infrastructure.

The sovereign AI business should also lead to other opportunities for Nvidia. Companies, researchers, and technology students that use and become familiar with a country’s sovereign AI infrastructure will probably be more likely to buy Nvidia’s offerings if and when they need their own AI-enabling tech.

Oct. 7 (UPI) — The Supreme Court‘s conservative justices signaled Tuesday they were likely to side with a Christian therapist who argued that Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy violates her free speech rights.

The case stems from a lawsuit by Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor whose practice is based in Christianity who says the Colorado law prevents her from assisting her minor clients who seek “to live a life consistent with their faith.”

Conversion therapy can include psychological, behavioral, physical and faith-based practices that are intended to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identification. Opponents point to evidence that it is harmful and leads to more serious psychological problems for people who experience it. Roughly half of states have banned it.

However, the court’s justices argued whether the conversion therapy banned by Colorado’s law is harmful to minors and if it was a violation of the Constitution’s free speech protections or regulation of medical treatment.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said that Colorado’s law would mean different treatment for an adolescent male who approaches a licensed therapist hoping to lessen his attraction for other males versus another adolescent male who wants to feel something different.

“It looks like blatant viewpoint discrimination,” he said.

Colorado is one of 23 states that ban conversion therapy, which is the practice of attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity through therapy.

Critics call the technique a pseudoscience, and the American Psychological Association and several other mental health and LGBTQIA+ organizations have come out in opposition to its use.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said a Supreme Court ruling striking down Colorado’s law could imperil not only efforts to prevent conversion therapy but other healthcare treatments that medical experts say are harmful or ineffective.

“For centuries, states have regulated professional healthcare to protect patients from substandard treatment,” he said, according to NBC News. “Throughout that time, the First Amendment has never barred states’ ability to prohibit substandard care, regardless of whether it is carried out through words.”

James Campbell, the lawyer for Chiles argued that the studies showing the harms of conversation therapy are flawed because they lump together voluntary conversations between a client and therapist with coercive measures, like shock therapy.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, is representing Chiles in the case.

Shannon Stevenson, the state’s solicitor general, argued that the harm in conversion therapy “comes from telling someone there’s something innate about yourself you can change.”

“Then you spend all kinds of time and effort trying to do that,” she said. “And you fail, but you bore the burden.

A lower court ruling said the Colorado law is a restriction on mental health treatment, not on speech. In a ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, justices said the ban aligned with medical consensus that conversion therapy is “ineffective and harmful” and “rationally serves” the interests of the state in protecting minors.

Stevenson reiterated that argument saying that “Colorado’s law regulates treatments only and because it enforces the professional standard of care,” not speech.

However, conservative members of the court didn’t seem to buy that argument.

“Just because they’re engaged in conduct doesn’t mean that their words aren’t protected,” Chief Justice John Roberts said.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the court’s liberals, brought up how the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. She asked if Colorado’s law wasn’t just the functional equivalent” of Tennessee’s law.

“I realized that there were two different constitutional provisions at issue, but the regulations work in basically the same way, and the question of scrutiny applies in both contexts,” she said. “So it just seems odd to me that we might have a different result here.”

Hashim Mooppan, a principal deputy solicitor general representing the Trump administration, argued that Tennessee’s law concerned drugs and medical treatment while Colorado’s law was focused on what is said during talk therapy sessions.

Today is the day.

At 2 p.m. ET Wednesday, give or take a few minutes, the Federal Open Market Committee should decide on its next round of interest-rate changes. Presumably it will lower its target interest rate from the current range of 4.25% to 4.5%, to one of 4% to 4.25% — a quarter-point cut. Potentially, it could lower the interest rate by twice as much — 0.5%.

Either way, and assuming a cut of any size at all, this will be the first interest-rate cut by the Federal Reserve in the past nine months, the Fed having last cut rates (also by 0.25%) back on Dec. 18, 2024.

Image source: Getty Images.

Why might the Federal Reserve cut interest rates?

Economists seem pretty certain a rate cut of some size is in the offing. According to the latest inflation update here at The Motley Fool, inflation is still running hotter (2.9%) than the Fed’s target rate of 2% — which you might think would give the Fed some pause. That said, the jobs market is showing sufficient signs of weakness that the Fed is getting concerned — and inclined to roll the dice and risk a bit of extra inflation in hopes of goosing the jobs numbers higher.

In July, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that only 73,000 net new jobs were created, which was below projections. Then came August’s number, which was an objectively horrible 22,000 net new jobs — less than one-third of what economists had predicted. And all of this came after May and June jobs numbers were revised downward by more than a quarter-million.

So the jobs market doesn’t look great, and that means the Fed probably will cut rates today. Now what does this mean for you, the individual investor?

What it means for investors

Believe it or not, bad news for the jobs market and worrisome trends in inflation are both generally interpreted as good news for the stock market — at least when a Fed interest-rate cut is on the table as a possible solution. This is because when the Fed lowers interest rates, it becomes cheaper to borrow, and cheaper to pay interest on debts, which can be a boon for companies not yet earning profits.

Which kinds of companies? Well, maybe I’m biased because I write a lot about nuclear stocks. But if you ask about companies that might benefit from debt getting a bit cheaper, the first to come to my mind are the handful working to develop a new generation of small modular (and micro) nuclear reactors (SMRs). In order from smallest to largest, these include Nano Nuclear Energy (NNE -2.67%), NuScale Power (SMR -4.70%), and Oklo (OKLO -2.77%).

Investors value these three companies very differently. Nano Nuclear is worth only $1.5 billion in market capitalization, versus NuScale with an implied market cap of $11.1 billion, and Oklo tipping the scales at a weighty $14.1 billion.

But in many respects, these three companies look similar. Neither Nano Nuclear nor Oklo has any revenue to speak of. NuScale, which does have some revenue (from technology licenses, not from actual sales of either reactors or nuclear energy), still did only $56 million in business over the last 12 months — enough to value the stock at nearly 200 times sales.

Lacking revenue, it stands to reason that all three of these nuclear energy stocks are also unprofitable. What worries me more than the losses based on generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), though, is the fact that these companies must continue burning through their cash reserves as they work toward commercializing their technology. Any nuclear stock that runs out of cash before it starts generating positive free cash flow on its own is at risk of needing to sell shares, or take on debt, to raise the cash it needs.

It’s here that lower interest rates from the Fed could lend a helping hand.

Who benefits most from a Fed rate cut?

I expect NuScale Power to benefit more than the others from a rate cut today. With only $420 million in the bank and an annual cash burn rate of $95 million, NuScale’s on course to be the SMR stock that runs out of cash first — potentially before it reaches profitability in 2030 (according to analysts polled by S&P Global Market Intelligence).

In contrast, both Oklo (with $534 million in cash and a burn rate of $53 million per year) and Nano Nuclear (with $210 million and $23 million, respectively) already have enough cash laid up to keep themselves in business for roughly a decade.

Relatively speaking, they’re both in stronger financial positions than NuScale is — but for this very reason, I expect NuScale stock to benefit most from today’s Fed rate decision.

The Chargers embracing an opposite approach in play-calling — moving away from a run-heavy philosophy — left many bemused during their season-opening win over the Kansas City Chiefs in Brazil.

Justin Herbert was given free rein to showcase his arm, firing pass after pass against the defending AFC champions. This approach hinged on trust; not necessarily in Herbert’s ability, but in his receivers’ capabilities.

“It’s all about having a clear mind and trust,” Quentin Johnston said. “Trusting the play call, and then trusting yourself to get open. Trusting Justin that the ball will be in the right place when you get open.”

A byproduct of learning a new system last year, with young receivers thrust into pivotal roles, Herbert and his wideouts looked out of sync at times, whether from a lack of trust, chemistry or rhythm.

With Week 1 as a litmus test, the dynamic looked much improved, thanks to another year of bonding with Johnston and Ladd McConkey and the added reliability of a returning Keenan Allen.

“We were all really close last year and bonded well, so this is just a continuation,” McConkey said. “We know the offense. We have a year under our belt with it, and now we can play more freely, be ourselves.”

A group of “regular guys,” as McConkey puts it, the bond has only grown stronger as the connection off the field has grown through beach volleyball sets, casual board game sessions and rounds of golf.

“Everybody comes in with a positive attitude,” Johnston said. “Never a dull moment with us. Always in the meeting room, just bouncing ideas off each other. I’m having fun on the field, between plays, cracking jokes.”

Chargers wide receiver Keenan Allen, right, celebrates with Ladd McConkey, center, and Quentin Johnston after making a touchdown catch against the Chiefs on Sept. 5.

(Buda Mendes / Getty Images)

That camaraderie has been most vivid in times of adversity.

As a rookie in 2023, Johnston was a lightning rod for ridicule on social media for his inconsistent performances — particularly drops — with many expecting more from a former first-round pick.

But after making two touchdown catches in the best prime-time performance of his three-year career in Brazil, Johnston was showered with positivity.

Herbert called Johnston a “special player” and would continue to “find ways to get him the ball, because good things happen.” McConkey added that “there’s nobody better” when Johnston is playing with confidence.

“First thing that jumps into my mind is, ‘In your face,’” said coach Jim Harbaugh, referring to Johnston’s critics. “If I were Quentin, that’s what I’d be saying, so allow me to say it for him.”

Chargers wide receiver Quentin Johnston (1) celebrates with Ladd McConkey (15) and Omarion Hampton after scoring a touchdown against the Chiefs on Sept. 5.

(Buda Mendes / Getty Images)

For Johnston, support from Harbaugh and his teammates means everything to him.

“These are the guys I come to work with, and go to war with every day. So to have the main dude on the team just be there, always uplift me, it feels good.”

With Johnston, McConkey and Allen, Herbert has a formidable arsenal. The trio were targeted on 26 of his 34 pass attempts and they combined for 221 yards and three touchdowns on 20 receptions.

“Those guys, especially on third down, they came in clutch,” Herbert said. “To have Q, Ladd, Keenan, those guys make plays on third down. It’s only going to help our offense.”

When the Chargers needed an opening-drive score, Johnston hauled in a pass in the back of the end zone. With the offense looking to extend the lead before the half, McConkey made an acrobatic first-down catch. And when they needed to sustain a crucial fourth-quarter drive, Allen picked up just enough yardage to keep it alive after just scoring one of his own.

All on third down.

For Allen, clutch execution has become expected, even at 33. All-Pro safety Derwin James Jr. coined the phrase “Third and Keenan,” a standout soundbite from James’ mic’d-up audio during the game.

“I was trying to express to them [the young guys] what it means having a guy like that,” James said.

From what James saw during the opener, the phrase could extend beyond Allen: “It can be ‘Third and Ladd too.’ You want to double Keenan, Ladd’s gonna do the same thing.”

With a decade more experience than the next-longest-tenured wideout, Allen has been a well of knowledge.

“He’s made a big difference,” Johnston said. “He’s a Chargers legend. So, having a guy like that to look up to and bounce ideas off is always good.”

As the group continues to feed off each other, Allen gave high praise to what could be his final receiving corps.

“I’ve been in some solid receiver rooms — this one’s right up there,” Allen said.

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans are taking the first steps to change the chamber’s rules on Thursday, making it easier to confirm groups of President Trump’s nominees and overcome Democratic delays.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s move is the latest salvo after a dozen years of gradual changes by both parties to weaken the filibuster and make the nominations process more partisan. He has said the Democrats’ obstruction is “unsustainable” as they have drawn out the confirmation process and infuriated Trump as many positions in his administration have remained unfilled.

Opening up the Senate, Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said that the delays have prevented the Senate from spending time on legislative business.

“We’re going to fix this today, and restore the longtime Senate precedent of expeditious confirmation, and the Senate’s role as first and foremost a legislative body,” Thune said.

Republicans are taking a series of procedural votes Thursday on a group of 48 of Trump’s nominees, and are expected to vote to “overturn the chair,” or change the rules, which takes a simple majority vote. If all goes according to their plan, the nominees — undersecretaries and staff positions for various agencies across the government as well as several ambassadors — could be confirmed by next week.

The rules change effort comes as both parties have obstructed the other’s nominees for years, and as both Republicans and Democrats have advocated speeding the process when they are in the majority. The Republican rules change stops short of speeding up votes on high-level Cabinet officials and lifetime judicial appointments, and it is loosely based on a proposal from Democrats under President Biden.

Republicans have been pushing the rules change since early August, when the Senate left for a monthlong recess after a breakdown in bipartisan negotiations over the confirmation process and Trump told Senate Democratic Leader Charles E. Schumer to “GO TO HELL!” on social media.

Democrats have blocked more nominees than ever before as they have struggled to find ways to oppose Trump and the GOP-dominated Congress, and as their voters have pushed them to fight Republicans at every turn. It’s the first time in recent history that the minority party hasn’t allowed at least some quick confirmations.

Schumer has said Democrats are delaying the nominations because Trump’s nominees are “historically bad.”

“If you don’t debate nominees, if you don’t vote on individual nominees, if there’s not some degree of sunlight, what will stop Donald Trump from nominating even worse individuals than we’ve seen to date, knowing this chamber will rubber stamp anything he wishes?” Schumer said Monday.

Schumer told Republicans that they will “come to regret” their action — echoing a similar warning from GOP Leader Mitch McConnell to then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in 2013, when Democrats changed Senate rules for executive branch and lower-court judicial nominees to remove the 60-vote threshold for confirmations. At the time, Republicans were blocking President Obama’s picks.

Republicans took the Senate majority a year later, and McConnell eventually did the same for Supreme Court nominees in 2017 as Democrats tried to block Trump’s nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch.

“I say to my Republican colleagues, think carefully before taking this step,” Schumer said.

Jalonick writes for the Associated Press.

In a social media post on August 22 2025 the German Ambassador to India Dr Philip Ackermann said:‘New numbers are out! Almost 60,000 students from India are currently studying in Germany – a leap of 20 % over a year.’ He also said that public universities in Germany were a “great choice” due to their reputation and affordability.

The number of Indian students, surpass Chinese students for two successive years

In recent years, the number of Indian students studying in Germany has risen significantly. In 2018-2019, this number was estimated at a little over 20,000 but it has been growing steadily and in 2023-2024 it reached 49,000. Another important point is that Indian students emerged as the largest international student group — surpassing Chinese students —  in Germany for the second year in a row. For long, India and China have been the largest contributors to the International Student Pool in the Anglosphere – US, UK, Canada and Australia. Apart from Canada – especially in the recent past — the number of students from China exceeded students from India in other nations in the Anglosphere. As ties between Washington and Beijing deteriorated, this began to change and the number of Indian students in US higher education institutions surpassed that of Chinese students in 2024.

Indian students and higher education in the US

With the US making several revisions to its student visa policies, the enrolment of Indian students has witnessed a significant decline. In July 2025, the number of Indian student arrivals was estimated at 79,000. This is a dip of 46%. Apart from the policy changes of the Trump administration, it is the delays in visa processing which are discouraging Indian students from pursuing higher studies in the US. One more step which could further discourage Indian students is the proposal of removing the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program. The OPT gives students, on an F-1 Visa, an opportunity to gain experience post their degrees often leading to full time employment and getting a work visa and residency eventually. This is especially handy for STEM students (it was the George W Bush Administration which had raised the duration of the OTP from 12 months to 29 months). In 2024, 200,000 students gained experience via the OPT. Apart from using the OPT for gaining work experience, it is also important since several of the individuals on F1 visas use the visa as a means for re-paying student loans. The US Department of Homeland Security is also planning some drastic changes to the existing F-1 visa rules.

The recent criticisms of the H1-B Visas by senior officials in the Trump Administration, and possible overhaul of the H1-B visa regime could also discourage several Indian students from going for higher studies to the US.

Indian students showing more interest in Germany

If one were to look at Indian students opting for European countries like Germany, it is important to bear in mind, that while some of the policies of the Trump administration may have encouraged students to look at alternative destinations. Germany by itself has been attractive for several reasons even earlier. The first is affordability. Public universities in Germany charge a nominal-fees (and no tuition fees). Second, the high academic standards of programs in the Sciences and Engineering, along with the fact that the programs are run in English. At a time when the US is thinking of removing the OPT, Germany provides an 18-month job seeker permit after completion of the degree. After this, students can apply for a Blue Card. Germany’s relaxation of citizenship rules and work visas could also add to the country’s attractiveness as

While several German Universities are reputed for having excellent departments of engineering, the country is also home to some top higher education institutions in humanities.

Both the employment opportunities as well as Germany’s growing emphasis on strengthening the country’s Research and Development – R &D eco-system – also could make it an attractive destination for international students.

Germany looking to draw Indian talent

In June 2025, the German Ambassador made a strong pitch for Germany pointing to the strengths it possesses as well as the predictability and stability in immigration policies:

“We are interested in Indian talent, we are interested in Indian brains. We are interested in those Indians who really want to achieve something, and Germany will always be a partner for such people. So, we are not erratic, we are not volatile, we are very, very steady,”

Apart from all the advantages discussed during the article, predictable and stable student visa policies are likely to be an important factor in drawing international students.

Conclusion

Given the strengths which Germany possesses – both in terms of academic standards and logistics – discussed in the article it is likely, that Germany has the potential of emerging as an important destination for higher education for international students – especially from India.

The stocks of Google parent Alphabet (GOOGL 3.10%) (GOOG 2.98%) and Meta Platforms (META 2.04%) shot higher in Friday trading. Although most stocks rose because the Federal Reserve strongly hinted at a September cut in interest rates, another factor was likely the announcement of Meta’s cloud deal with Google, as reported by The Information.

Considering the $10 billion size of the deal, one has to assume it is critical, particularly to Alphabet. Still, considering the state of the artificial intelligence (AI) stock, it could serve as a much-needed catalyst for the company’s investors. Here’s why.

Image source: Getty Images.

Terms of the partnership

Under the terms of the deal, Meta will pay Google $10 billion over six years. In exchange, it will receive access to Google Cloud’s storage, server, and networking services, along with other products.

Meta has previously relied on Amazon‘s Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft‘s Azure for such services. The deal does not necessarily mean it will deal less with these companies. More likely, it speaks to Meta’s insatiable demand for cloud infrastructure as it seeks to become a major player in the AI space.

Additionally, Meta and Alphabet are each other’s largest competitors in the digital advertising market. And in the first half of 2025, 98% of Meta’s revenue came from digital ads. Hence, in a sense, it is remarkable that these two would become partners in a different business.

How it helps Alphabet

However, in another sense, this is a huge step forward for Alphabet’s future. In the first half of this year, Alphabet earned 74% of its revenue from the digital ad market, down from 76% in the same period in 2024. This is also by design, as Alphabet has purchased dozens of businesses unrelated to the digital ad market in its efforts to transition into a more diversified technology enterprise.

So far, Google Cloud is the only one of these enterprises to appear in Alphabet’s financials. It accounted for 14% of Alphabet’s revenue in the first two quarters of 2025, up from 12% in the same year-ago period.

Additionally, Google Cloud generated over $49 billion in revenue over the trailing 12 months, implying the $10 billion from Meta over six years will make up a relatively small portion of Google Cloud’s business.

Nonetheless, the deal serves as a vote of confidence for Alphabet’s cloud business, one that continues to lag AWS and Azure in terms of market share.

Image source: Statista. Y-o-y = year over year.

The investor perspective is also crucial. Over the last year, Alphabet stock has outpaced the total returns of the S&P 500 by a significant but not eye-popping margin. However, it may help that Alphabet’s price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 22 is the lowest among “Magnificent Seven” stocks. Hence, the Meta deal could prompt investors to look more favorably upon that earnings multiple.

GOOGL Total Return Level data by YCharts.

Furthermore, if the Meta deal prompts other companies to do more business with Google Cloud, it could provide a boost to its market share and, by extension, Alphabet stock.

The Meta deal and Alphabet stock

Ultimately, Meta’s deal with Google Cloud will more than likely take Alphabet stock a leg higher, but investors should expect the effects to be more indirect. Indeed, the deal is remarkable in that it serves as a boost for third-place Google Cloud and is notable since the two companies are direct competitors in each other’s largest enterprises.

Although $10 billion in added business over six years is substantial, Google Cloud generated $49 billion over the last 12 months. Thus, it is a significant but not game-changing boost to the enterprise.

However, the deal may make Google Cloud more attractive to prospective customers, and the low P/E ratio could attract more investors to Alphabet. In the end, those could become the more significant benefits of the deal.

Aug. 12 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to rehear a case that will have implications on the Voting Rights Act when its next term begins in October.

The high court posted an order in the case Louisiana vs. Callais on Aug. 1, directing the parties involved to file supplemental briefs. The court heard arguments in the case in March but did not hand down a decision, setting the stage for reargument at a later date.

Louisiana vs. Callais is a case over redistricting Louisiana’s congressional map.

There are six congressional districts in Louisiana. The state legislature passed a redistricted map in 2024 that included two districts where a majority of voters are Black: District 2 and District 6, represented by Rep. Troy Carter and Rep. Cleo Fields respectively.

Fields, a Democrat from Baton Rouge, was elected to represent the second majority Black district in 2024.

About one-third of Louisiana’s population is Black, reflected in the newly-drawn congressional map.

The plaintiffs, a group of voters in Louisiana, argue that race was the prevailing consideration in redistricting, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Stuart Naifeh, manager of the Redistricting Project at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, argued the case in favor of the map before the Supreme Court in March. He told UPI that fair representation is at stake in this case.

“It’s not about proportional representation,” Naifeh said. “It’s about places where unless you create a district to provide an opportunity to have representatives of your choice a particular group will not have a fair opportunity to do that because of the race-infused politics that exist in those places.”

The issue at hand in Louisiana vs. Callais, according to Naifeh, is whether the redistricting map adopted in January 2024 is a remedy to a Voting Rights Act violation or if it is itself racial gerrymandering as plaintiffs claim.

“The question that they asked us to brief is somewhat general. In some ways it’s asking us to rebrief the same issue,” Naifeh said. “But then it refers to a specific section of the plaintiff’s brief where they argue, at least in Louisiana, that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act can no longer be applied without violating the Constitution.”

“So you can’t draw a second majority-Black district without violating the Constitution, is the argument that they have made,” he added.

The Voting Rights Act, passed in 1965, represents a key victory for Civil Rights advocates. It was passed to address racial discrimination in voting. Section 2 prohibits discrimination in voting policies and procedures on the basis of race, color or minority status.

The previous version of the congressional map, drawn in 2020, included just one majority-Black district. That map was determined to have violated the Voting Rights Act because it diluted the role of Black voters in electing representatives.

Former Gov. John Bel Edwards vetoed that map in 2022 but the Republican-led legislature held a special session to override his veto.

The NAACP Legal Defense Fund and a group of voters then filed a complaint to challenge the map, arguing that it was an instance of unconstitutional gerrymandering.

A federal judge ruled in favor of the NAACP and co-plaintiffs but their ruling was blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court. It put enforcement of the federal judge’s decision on hold as another redistricting case was mulled by the high court Allen vs. Milligan.

The Allen vs. Milligan case was based on a congressional redistricting plan out of Alabama in which a majority of Black voters were placed into a single district, using a “race-neutral benchmark” theory and “modern computer technology” to draw its congressional map.

Plaintiffs argued that this plan, like the 2020 redistricting plan in Louisiana, violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 in favor of Black voters in Alabama and subsequently Louisiana. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined in part by Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the court’s three liberal judges.

In Roberts’ opinion, he noted that there is sometimes difficulty in discerning between “racial predominance” and “racial consciousness.”

“When it comes to considering race in the context of districting, we have made clear that there is a difference ‘between being aware of racial considerations and being motivated by them,'” Roberts wrote. “The former is permissible; the latter is usually not. That is because ‘[r]edistricting legislatures will — almost always be aware of racial demographics,’ but such ‘race consciousness does not lead inevitably to impermissible race discrimination.'”

Naifeh highlights Kavanaugh’s partial concurrence with the majority opinion as a key factor in redistricting cases going forward, including Louisiana vs. Callais.

Kavanaugh agreed with the minority opinion of Justice Clarence Thomas that while “race-based redistricting” may be required in some circumstances, it should not continue indefinitely.

“The authority to conduct race-based redistricting cannot extend indefinitely into the future,” Kavanaugh wrote. “But Alabama did not raise that temporal argument in this Court, and I therefore would not consider it at this time.”

A victory for Naifeh, the NAACP and Black voters in Louisiana does not rely solely on the proposed congressional map remaining intact, Naifeh said.

“Victory, for Black voters in Louisiana in particular, is that they continue to have the opportunity to elect candidates of choice and are not shut out of having a voice in the political process on account of race, which was the situation until the state adopted this new map,” he said. “We don’t see victory as meaning the state keeps this particular map.”

Looking beyond Louisiana vs. Callais, Naifeh notes that race continues to be a “salient factor” in elections across the country. It remains a motivator in political platforms and civic engagement.

“We still have parts of this country where race is a very salient factor in elections and it’s not because of the Voting Rights Act,” Naifeh said. “Where race is still such a salient part of the electoral process we continue to need the Voting Rights Act. That’s what it was designed to address. So I worry that we will have a country where race is still such a salient part of elections and there is no remedy. The court needs to recognize that race continues to play a role in elections in many places.”

Nicolas Batum plans on re-signing with the Clippers on a two-year contract for $11.5 million with a team option for the second season, according to people with knowledge of negotiations not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Batum, 36, had declined his option of $4.9 million with the Clippers for next season that made him an unrestricted free agent, but he always had intention of returning to the organization that he says saved his career.

Viewed as one of the Clippers’ top role players and veteran presence in the locker room, Batum averaged 4.0 points, 2.8 rebounds and 1.1 assists last season. He shot 43.7% from the field, 43.3% from three-point range and played in 78 regular-season games.

After the Clippers were knocked out of the first round of the playoffs in May, Batum was asked if he wanted to return to the team.

“If they want me to,” the 18-year veteran said.

Frank took charge at Brentford in 2018, after his initial spell as assistant boss, and guided them into the Premier League, winning the Championship play-off final at Wembley in 2021 and establishing them as a top-flight club on a small budget.

Brentford finished 10th in the 2024-25 Premier League season, seven places and 18 points above Tottenham, who ended in 17th spot and won just 11 of their 38 games in the competition.

Australian Postecoglou was sacked 16 days after leading Tottenham to victory in the Europa League final, their first major trophy for 17 years.

One of the first issues facing Frank, if appointed in north London, would be the future of captain Son Heung-min.

“I still have one more year left on the contract,” Son said on Tuesday to Korean agency Yonhap.

“Rather than saying anything at this moment, I think we should all wait and see what happens.”

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas this year has been the center of the nation’s largest measles outbreak in more than two decades, as a mostly eradicated disease has sickened more than 700 in the state, sent dozens to hospitals and led to the death of two children who were unvaccinated.

But even as the outbreak slows, a bill approved by state lawmakers and sent to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott would make it significantly easier for parents to enroll their children in school without standard vaccinations for diseases such as measles, whooping cough, polio and hepatitis A and B.

Supporters say the bill streamlines an already legal exemption process that allows families to avoid vaccines for reasons of conscience, religious beliefs or medical reasons. It would let them download the required forms from a website instead of contacting state health officials and waiting for one to come in the mail.

The bill does not change which vaccines are required. However, critics say easing the exemption process opens a door to further outbreaks with potentially deadly results.

“If this bill becomes law, Texas is likely to see more illness, more death and higher health care costs for families and business,” Rekha Lakshmanan, chief strategy officer for Texas-based nonprofit Immunization Project, told state senators before the bill won final approval.

“The outbreak (in Texas) is not a coincidence. It is the canary in the coal mine screaming at the top of its lungs,” she said.

The exemption bill — as well as other bills passed by the Texas House on lawsuits against vaccine makers and removing immunization restrictions on organ transplants — are a snapshot of efforts across dozens of conservative states to question vaccines or roll back requirements.

At the national level, this wave has been buoyed by still-lingering pushback from the COVID-19 pandemic and the Trump administration’s embrace of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was one of the nation’s leading anti-vaccine advocates before being appointed secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department.

The most recent federal data shows U.S. kindergarten vaccination rates have dipped since the pandemic — 92.7% in the 2023-24 school year compared to 95% before COVID-19 — and the proportion of children with exemptions rose to an all-time high. And last week, the “Make America Healthy Again” federal report on the nation’s health and wellness questioned the necessity of vaccine mandates for schoolkids.

The national Association of Immunization Managers, an organization of state and local immunization officials, has been tracking nearly 600 vaccine-related bills across the country in 2025, and the majority would not be considered pro-vaccine, said Brent Ewig, the group’s the group’s chief policy officer.

“We saw a spike in vaccine-related bills during the pandemic. The last few years it had been tapering off. With recent actions at the federal level, there has been a spike again,” Ewig said.

The Texas measles outbreak and vaccine requirements

Measles has been considered eliminated from the United States since 2000. The Texas outbreak started in late January in West Texas’ Mennonite communities that have been resistant to vaccines and distrustful of government intervention, and the highly contagious virus quickly jumped to other places with low vaccination rates.

Like many states, Texas requires children to obtain vaccines to protect against 11 diseases to attend public and private schools and child care centers. The state’s vaccination rates for the 2023-24 school year ranged between 93.78% for chicken pox to 95.78% for hepatitis B.

But parents can obtain exemptions for religious or personal reasons, or if a doctor determines it would not be safe because of a medical condition.

Exemption rates in Texas have been rising for nearly two decades, with a dramatic spike over the last five years. According to the Texas Department of Health Services, the agency received exemption requests for nearly 153,000 students in the 2023-2024 fiscal year, up from 136,000 the previous year and nearly double the 77,000 requested in 2019.

Texas’ vaccine rollback

The bill on vaccine exemption paperwork would make it easier for parents to obtain the needed form by letting them download it to a computer or smartphone. The current system where parents ask state health officials to mail a paper copy to their home can sometimes take weeks. The form would still need to be notarized before it is turned in to a school and a student is enrolled.

Advocates say the changes would help parents thread the bureaucratic process and get their children enrolled in school quicker.

“This bill is not about whether vaccines are good or bad, it’s about government efficiency and keeping kids in schools,” said Jackie Schlegal, founder of Texans for Medical Freedom, which advocates for “vaccine freedom of choice.”

Critics argue that simplifying the exemption form process makes it too easy for unvaccinated kids to enroll in a school, endangering the health of other kids and families.

“For years Texas has struck a delicate balance of parents’ right and public health and safety,” Lakshmanan said. “This bill is more than just a form … We can support parents without putting other families at risk.”

Still waiting for a Senate vote is a bill that would allow vaccine makers who advertise in Texas to be sued if their vaccine causes a person to be injured. That bill has been opposed by the Texas Association of Manufacturers.

The author of that bill is first-term state Rep. Shelley Luther, who was briefly jailed in 2020 for opening her Dallas salon in violation of governor’s emergency order during the pandemic. Abbott quickly weakened his enforcement of coronavirus safeguards and a court ordered her released.

Vertuno writes for the Associated Press.