华尔街创历史新高、印度选民清洗争议与高端宠物食品经济学

From The New York Times, it's the headlines. I'm Will Jarvis, in for Tracy Mumford. Today's Wednesday, October 7th. Here's what we're covering.

Wall Street has reached a new record high. Yesterday, the S&P 500, the world's most widely tracked stock index, ticked up to an all-time peak, blowing past a series of other records it set earlier this year. Overall, since January, the index has shot up more than 14%.

I think these things can sometimes seem counterintuitive because we see war in Iran, we see war in Ukraine, we see rising deficits, more government debt, we see affordability issues in the US and people struggling just to make ends meet each day, but that's not what the stock market reflects. The stock market reflects the profits of the biggest companies in the country, and the profits of the biggest companies in the country are still very strong.

Joe Rennison covers Wall Street for the Times. He says the unprecedented surge in the market comes down to two sectors, energy and AI. On the energy front, the war in Iran has pushed the price of oil way up, and energy companies have been able to sell supplies they have in reserve or from places outside the Middle East at that higher price, helping boost revenues. Then, when it comes to AI, investors continue to be all in on the Silicon Valley giants that are racing forward with the technology.

These are the biggest companies in the stock market, by far the biggest companies in the stock market. So, when they're growing, it makes sense that the stock market is also rising. However, there are still signs of trouble lurking just beneath the surface because there is pain in the stock market, there is a reflection of higher interest rates, there is a reflection of some of what is weighing even on households across America reflected in the stock market. Outside of energy and tech, nearly every sector of the index is lower over the past month, kind of pointing even more acutely at how much the tech sector is holding everything up.

Joe says that one way to understand what's happening in the markets more broadly is to look beyond just the S&P 500. For example, another stock index, the Russell 2000, which includes smaller companies more closely tied to the ebb and flow of the economy, has fallen nearly 8% in the past 2 months.

Now, two quick updates on the midterm elections. First, the top super PAC behind Democrats push to take control of the Senate has raised record-breaking amounts of money going into the final stretch of the race. It entered this month with nearly $112 million in the bank as polls suggest that Democrats have a solid chance of getting a majority in the Senate. But, the huge fundraising haul for Democrats still pales in comparison to Republicans war chests, which have been filled in part by ultra-wealthy donors and corporations. The GOP's cash advantage has allowed Republican super PACs and other groups to spend enormous amounts of money on things like TV ads. According to Federal Election Commission data, over the course of the midterm so far, those groups have outspent their Democratic counterparts by more than $400 in Senate races.

And, President Trump is facing new questions about his use of taxpayer money to pay for TV ads that promote him. In the past few weeks, there was bipartisan backlash over a series of pro-Trump ads that some critics said was effectively publicly funded propaganda ahead of the midterms. On Monday, Trump announced that his super PAC would pay for the ads instead. The White House officials later clarified that the group has no plans to reimburse the government for the more than $10 million that had already been spent. Then, yesterday

This was one of the most stunning, effective, and powerful displays of American military might and competence.

A new taxpayer-funded ad began appearing on TV. The 60-second spot features President Trump and some of his cabinet officials bragging about how the administration took out the former leader of Venezuela. The Times asked the White House whether Trump planned to have his super PAC pay for that ad and others that have run after the president said he would not use public funds, but it didn't respond to those questions. Previously, the White House called the series of pro-Trump ads public service announcements, saying they're appropriate because there's no call to action to vote for a particular candidate.

In India in recent weeks, there have been widespread protests as public anger grows over a massive removal of names from the country's voter roll. In a sweeping effort over the past year or so, more than 130 million names have been eliminated from the list of roughly a billion voters.

The government says the effort, which used algorithms to flag anomalies, was meant to clean up duplicates and discrepancies, a kind of routine update. But criticism is mounting that the process was sloppy. For example, 20 million names were deleted after they were marked as dead, even though some of those people are very much alive. And there are accusations that the whole thing was also politically motivated.

Evidence has been piling up that the push disproportionately targeted India's Muslim minority, which is seen as less likely to support the ruling Hindu nationalist party. In interviews with the Times, two senior officials in the ruling party, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the whole process was designed to bolster their party's electoral advantage. And party leaders have publicly called the revision of the voter list an attempt to weed out quote infiltrators, a term that's been used to describe Muslims in the country.

Indian election officials did not respond to requests for comments about the changes to the list. The ruling party has pointed out that in the past, opposition parties also called for updates to the voter roll, but unlike previous efforts in which officials went door-to-door cross-checking names, the new push involved eliminating names first, then letting people appeal if they want to. That's effectively shifted the burden of proof onto everyday Indians, forcing many people to choose between going to work to earn a living or making multiple trips to try and prove to election officials that they're eligible to vote.

And finally, the Times has been covering a fierce global competition to try and tap into one growing and extremely lucrative market.

Every silky broth, every impeccable pâté, what your pet is having for dinner. It's not just nutritious, it's food cats actually want to eat.

Take cat food. Over the past year in the US alone, pet owners have spent over 17 billion dollars on it, a more than 10% jump from just a few years ago. And pet food giants are pouring big money into research to better understand what cats and other pets will just sniff at and what they'll gobble up. One of those companies, Royal Canin, has a center in France with almost 400 cats and dogs living on a lush green campus filled with toys, a pool. It's all in service of taste testing, where staff give the animals new food products with a variety of textures, flavors, smells to see which they prefer. For the record, a company executive said some breeds are never part of the product sampling, like Labradors, who will eat pretty much anything. The staff at the center also study the animals' behavior after their meals. Are they more lethargic than usual? More playful? The research is a work in progress. As anyone with a cat knows, they can be picky. So, one research center in England has been trying to better understand the underlying science of animal sense of taste. Like, why don't cats really like sweet foods? And what's up with their obsession with tuna?

Part of the frenzied race for new recipes is that some companies see a new opportunity emerging. Many of the pets people adopted in droves during the pandemic are now getting into middle age. So, the pet food makers are developing more food aimed at aging animals. They've whipped up ultra-soft mousses that are easy on pets' teeth, and are developing meals for elderly cats whose taste buds fade as they get older.

The big investment is a sign the companies are betting on customers opening their wallets for top-shelf pet food, even as inflation climbs and budgets are stretched. Studies have shown that people will cut back on spending for themselves before they skimp on their pets.

Those are the headlines. And if you're not a Time subscriber yet, a reminder you can get a full month of free access to everything we publish when you download the Times app now. I'm Will Jarvis. The show will be back tomorrow with Tracy Mumford.