The head of France's leading leftist trade union has called for strikes to support the youth riots after the government refused to meet demands for minimum wage hikes and more spending on education.
The post Top Leftist Trade Union Calls for Strike in Support of French Youth Revolt appeared first on Breitbart.
At a protest against a bill to legalize Waymo in Washington, D.C., earlier in October, the main tagline was: "Robotaxis don't vote; we vote." Little is known about the group behind it, raising questions about who's fueling the pushback against robotaxis in America's major cities.
People First Transportation Alliance (PFTA), the organization in question, describes itself as a "statewide coalition of labor unions" dedicated to putting "people over untested technology." The PFTA states it's a "coalition of community organizations, safe-streets advocates, and faith leaders." However, as The Washington Post reported on Monday, the group appears to have overstated its affiliation with four of the 13 individuals and organizations listed as its founding members.
"Several groups and individuals said statements made about them on the Transportation Alliance website were inaccurate," the Post reported, adding that PFTA "appears to be newly formed, with a minimal social media presence. Its website domain was created in late April, according to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers." The group created its social media accounts in May, but it has no posts and no followers.
Apart from its recent interest in the nation's capital, the PFTA lists New York and Philadelphia as its priorities, two cities led by lawmakers who publicly oppose Waymo's presence. Yet for a relatively unknown, recently created organization, the PFTA has found success in its campaign to shut autonomous vehicles like Waymo out of America's Northeast.
In February, the New York Post reported that Gov. Kathy Hochul (D–N.Y.) withdrew her own proposal—which would have allowed commercial robotaxi services such as Waymo to operate in smaller cities in upstate New York—after a PFTA-led coalition prompted enough backlash to kill support for the measure. A Hochul spokesperson told the Post that it was "clear that the support was not there to advance this proposal."
The PFTA told the Post that the organization would urge the state to "pass legislation requiring a human driver behind the wheel in every vehicle and a comprehensive study leading to a plan to address the impact driverless cars would have on New York State."
The group's resolution comes despite customer support for autonomous vehicles: A 2025 study on Waymo, Uber, and Lyft by Obi—a company that aggregates real-time rideshare prices—found that 70 percent of riders who've used Waymo preferred it over Lyft or Uber and 42.7 percent of all respondents were willing to pay Waymo's premium price (up to $10 more) to use the service.
Despite consumer support, autonomous vehicles can't count on a fair shake from lawmakers in some of the country's largest cities. In New York City, Waymo's permit to operate a pilot program on public streets expired in March. Mayor Zohran Mamdani has so far been noncommittal on renewing the company's permit. At a press conference that same month, he said his administration would be prioritizing workers such as the city's taxi drivers who "for far too long, have been sold a dream of being able to work their way to the middle class, only to have the rug pulled out from under them."
Despite the mystery surrounding the PFTA, its D.C. protest drew enough public support to elicit a statement from a person who will likely be the city's next mayor, current D.C. Councilmember Janeese Lewis George. In a post on X, Lewis George said D.C. was "facing a jobs crisis" that would be exacerbated by "rushing the legalization of autonomous vehicles." She urged the D.C. Council—which is currently considering a punitive proposal to legalize commercial autonomous vehicles—to "get this right and not rush Waymo legislation this year."
It's unclear how much longer Lewis George wants the District's residents to wait before autonomous vehicles are available for use. D.C.'s approach to legalizing commercial robotaxis hardly seems rushed.
Waymo began testing its vehicles in the city nearly two and a half years ago, in spring 2024. The company's co-CEO Tekedra N. Mawakana said its fleet has driven "more than 300,000 miles in Washington, D.C."Meanwhile, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) has been conducting studies and organizing working groups on autonomous vehicles for nearly a decade. Still, the agency has been unable to draft a regulatory framework that would eventually enable commercial robotaxi use in the nation's capital. In March, UrbanTurf reported that DDOT would be conducting a long-awaited study on autonomous vehicles—originally due in 2022—and "expects to propose recommendations on AV deployment later this year."
Opponents of autonomous vehicles, such as Lewis George and the PFTA, often cite job loss as a reason not to legalize the tech. Still, with only 200 full-time ride-share drivers in a city of roughly 400,000 workers, as Lewis George has reportedly stated, the situation is a far cry from a crisis.
As for PFTA's public safety claims, Waymo's independently reviewed data show that, compared with an average human driver over the same distance, its vehicles caused 95 percent fewer serious-injury-or-worse crashes and 93 percent fewer pedestrian crashes with serious injuries.
PFTA claims it represents the people most directly affected by transportation policy. The little publicly available information suggests the group is more focused on protecting its members' position in the ride-share market than enhancing the experience of riders, who are increasingly opting for robotaxis when given the opportunity.
The post A Months-Old Anti-Robotaxi Group Is Steering Transportation Policy From Albany to D.C. appeared first on Reason Magazine.
Thousands of people took to the streets across Colombia on Wednesday in the first national strike against President Abelardo de la Espriella’s administration, as police used tear gas, rubber bullets and armored vehicles to disperse demonstrators in several cities.
RELATED: Colombia Holds First National Strike Against De la Espriella
Protests spread across more than a dozen departmental capitals and municipalities, including Bogotá, Medellín, Cali, Barranquilla, Ibagué, Popayán and Bucaramanga. In Bogotá, four columns of demonstrators converged on Bolívar Square under a security operation monitored by a Unified Command Post.
In Medellín, demonstrations escalated into clashes between protesters and the Mobile Anti-Riot Squadron (ESMAD). Security forces deployed tear gas, rubber bullets and armored vehicles, leading to several arrests. Assaults on members of the press were also reported.
Clashes and serious public disturbances were also recorded in Ibagué and Popayán following police interventions. Human rights organizations, including the NGO Temblores, denounced the presence of armed men carrying rifles on the rooftops of government buildings in Bogotá, describing their deployment as a direct threat to protesters.
The demonstrations brought together trade unions, teachers, university students, Indigenous communities, LGBTQ+ groups and feminist organizations. Opposition figures, including former President Gustavo Petro and Senator Iván Cepeda, also took part.
Protesters called for labor, education and social protections, seeking to preserve measures introduced under the previous administration, including free access to public universities and increases in the minimum wage. They opposed what they described as a neoliberal shift under De la Espriella’s government, citing budget cuts and the administration’s initial economic reforms.
Colombianos:
— Abelardo De La Espriella (@ABDELAESPRIELLA) October 15, 2026
Me dirijo a ustedes esta noche para entregarles un balance claro, objetivo y contundente de la jornada de manifestaciones que vivió hoy nuestro país.
¡Que quede absolutamente claro! El 98% de las movilizaciones transcurrió de manera pacífica.
La inmensa mayoría de… pic.twitter.com/CmllZVPBtu
Text Reads: Colombians: I address you tonight to deliver a clear, objective, and unequivocal report on the day of demonstrations that our country experienced today. Let it be absolutely clear! 98% of the mobilizations took place peacefully. The vast majority of those who took to the streets exercised their legitimate right to protest in an orderly and respectful manner toward the institutions. That is democracy, and as President of the Republic, I will always defend and guarantee it. At the close of this day, the national tally records a total of 62,000 citizens mobilized. A figure that represents a very small proportion of the Colombian population, but whose rights and guarantees deserve the full respect of the State. From the first day of my Government, I have issued a directive that admits no interpretations: peaceful protest is respected, protected, and guaranteed. But violence, vandalism, and any attempt to violate the rights of others will have no place under my mandate. Because as legitimate as the right to demonstrate is the right of millions of Colombians to work, move freely, and live in tranquility. Here there is a State, here there is authority, and here there is a Government that respects freedoms, enforces the law, and protects the millions of Colombians who rise early every day to work and build the Nation. Firm for the Nation! Long live Christ the King! (A.D.L.E.)
Demonstrators also rejected the restoration of diplomatic relations with Israel and what they described as U.S. interference in Colombia’s affairs.
Tensions mounted after the government signed a decree hours before the marches that changes the rules governing police conduct during public demonstrations. De la Espriella defended the measure as necessary to combat “urban terrorism,” while opposition politicians and social organizations condemned it as an attempt to intimidate protesters.
Senator Cepeda warned that the decree risked returning Colombia to a situation in which fear enabled arbitrary actions by security forces.
“They want to take us back to a time when fear becomes the means through which the security forces act arbitrarily,” Cepeda said.
Trade union sources said organizers were already drawing up a schedule of further mobilizations for the coming months following Wednesday’s mass protests. The campaign could culminate in a general strike in November.
Hello and welcome to another edition of Free Agent! It's a great week to do something nice for the furry friends in your life.
Let's get into some nitty-gritty about baseball's salary cap fight. We'll dive in with two sections on that, then move on to some new thoughts about an old video game.
I made a game where you draft your All 22 Pokemon team from randomly rolled Regions and Pokemon Types and the goal is to finish the season 17-0
So far my best record is 10-7 lolhttps://t.co/9ht5V4hiuT pic.twitter.com/5XwzOgPcSu
— Cole (@ColeThereum) October 9, 2026
In 2025, baseball fans wanting to avoid a lockout, a salary cap, or both, were rooting for the small market, small payroll Milwaukee Brewers to beat the goliath Los Angeles Dodgers in the National League Championship Series (NLCS). The Brewers got swept. Now it's 2026, and guess what? Baseball fans wanting to avoid a lockout, a salary cap, or both, are rooting for the small market, small payroll Brewers to beat the goliath Dodgers in the NLCS. (At least the Brewers aren't getting swept this time!)
But what if none of that matters at all to the salary cap fight?
A small market World Series victory for the Brewers (19th in MLB payroll), the Tampa Bay Rays (28th), or, yuck, the Cleveland Guardians (30th) helps boost the theoretical argument that MLB doesn't need a salary cap for small market teams to succeed. But labor negotiations are not decided by debate club rules—you don't win with a better policy argument. It's all about the power dynamics and leverage of what is essentially a business negotiation between employees and employers. The policy argument might matter to public opinion, but it makes hardly any difference to leverage.
Competitive balance may not matter to the owners at all (in fact, some studies have found that salary caps don't create more balance, but revenue sharing does). The owners are almost certainly focused on keeping down their labor costs. A salary cap would likely give an immediate boost to team values—when Formula 1 teams recently agreed to a broad cap on their expenses, valuations shot up.
The lockout fight will come down to who can endure the pain the longest, and how much the "losing" side is willing to stomach what the "winning" side is offering. The billionaire owners have plenty of wealth and income from their other assets, but also don't want a lockout to crater the value of one of their biggest assets. The players have had years to save and plan for a lockout, and some can still try to lean on endorsements, merchandise, and other nonpayroll income to help them along. The owners will try to say they're showing good faith by combining their salary cap with a salary floor that would force some teams to spend more on players—but that won't appeal much to the union's player leadership, which is largely made up of high-level players who want a big payday coming out of the lockout (I see you, future free agents Tarik Skubal and Paul Skenes).
The only way public opinion might matter is if government officials decide to get involved. President Donald Trump has already made noise about taking action, and backs the owners' push for a salary cap, but it's unclear how much he can lean on negotiations. The National Labor Relations Board may end up involved—all four members were appointed by Trump (one is a Democrat who used to work for the players union). Members of Congress could threaten to take away MLB's antitrust exemption, but probably wouldn't have the votes to do it.
It goes without saying all this is incredibly frustrating for fans (as well as players who want to earn a living and teams that want to plan for the future). The lockout is going to hit baseball like a car crash that everyone saw coming from miles away. The basic bargaining positions have not changed in years, but the two sides have made basically no progress.
At least Minor League Baseball won't get locked out, and should get a major viewership boost if MLB ends up losing games.
What's funny to me is that the MLB salary cap debate is happening in the wake of two of the biggest spending cap scandals in sports history: the Los Angeles Clippers salary cap circumvention scandal and, in soccer, the Manchester City financial scandal. You'd think the difficulty of enforcing these rules would cause some people to think twice about a salary cap, and how cheaters can ruin the integrity of the game for fans.
If MLB owners do manage to convince the players to agree to a cap, the cap's rules will make a big difference in how successful it is.
The NBA had a scandal over fake endorsement deals, the Premier League had a scandal over fake sponsorships, and hockey fans got mad every year about players coming off the long-term injured reserve list just in time for the playoffs, changing their cap hit, until the league finally closed the loophole. In multiple sports, fans from high-income-tax states complain that their salary cap limits are the same as teams in low- or no-tax states, making the latter more appealing to free agents.
Meanwhile, in the NFL—actually, it's somehow been largely scandal-free on the salary cap front for over a decade, except for a couple minor scandals.
I'm not exactly sure how the NFL manages this—maybe it's the hard cap with few exceptions, maybe it's the size of their rosters, maybe it's because many of the tactics teams use to game the cap are legal (for example, converting a "signing bonus" into base salary paid out over five years). Or maybe there is a ton of salary cap circumvention with sham side deals and the NFL just fails to catch it.
Regardless, I'm morally not a fan of teams colluding to avoid paying players their competitive market wage. We're talking about millionaires, so you might not have much sympathy. But if you had the talent and put in the hard work to earn a million fans, you wouldn't want owners to collectively diminish your wage either.
Just when I thought I was out, Gran Turismo 7 has pulled me back in. First released in 2022 (see my brief review from the time here), the game is now my go-to activity when I have free time.
A few times a week, my 2-year-old son will ask to see race cars on TV, and sometimes I will fire up Gran Turismo 7 or the latest Formula 1 game for him to watch me play (he sort of pays attention, but what he really wants is to break small pieces off my Formula 1 Lego sets, forcing me to pause each lap and reassemble them). A few weeks ago, I noticed Gran Turismo 7 has weekly challenges of five races. While working through them, I noticed that—despite having beaten most of the game's most difficult challenges on its hardest difficulty—I'd won less than 40 percent of its races.
That just couldn't stand, and now I'm trying to work through them all. AI has added a new component for me—I've used it to help with car selection, pit strategy, and tweaking of settings.
All this is to say that I'm impressed a 4-year-old video game can still make me obsessed. Kudos to the Gran Turismo 7 team for releasing several updates throughout the year with new tracks, cars, and more.
I watched this live and on replay so many times, and still can't figure out what they thought was going on. Was it a designed run play, and with what purpose? Did the players forget they didn't have any timeouts? Were the Commanders coaches running the clock low because they thought they'd have to kick it back to the Giants? I thought maybe they were trying to line it up for the kicker, but that would have involved a quick kneel followed by a spike.
The whole overtime was bonkers, and the Commanders are cowards anyway.
Jayden Daniels thought the clock would stop at 5 seconds out of respect for him pic.twitter.com/CQ16tDxL5o
— NFL Memes (@NFLMemes) October 11, 2026
That's all for this week. Enjoy watching the real event of the week, as the Grand Slam of Curling Co-op Invitational gets underway.
The post MLB's Salary Cap Fight Isn't About Competitive Balance, It's About Limiting Labor Costs appeared first on Reason Magazine.
Login