After writing his recent 6,500-word manifesto called “The Future is for Everyone,” it’s clear that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is now hyperfocused on his parent company Meta’s [NASDAQ: META] hyperscaling efforts.

But this manifesto wasn’t just about Zuckerberg’s AI business objectives — at least not overtly. Instead, he used this text as an opportunity to spell out his philosophy on AI and why he favors an open infrastructure to bring “personal superintelligence” to “billions of people.”

To bring about his AI-enriched future, Zuckerberg claims Meta will offer everyone a “personal agent” that works “24/7 on your behalf to improve your relationships, health, career, finances, home management, hobbies and more.”

But as you read deeper into his post, you may notice these services aren’t entirely free. Ironically, in the bullet point titled “Everyone will have free or affordable access to these tools,” Zuckerberg says, “For those who want to pay to use more compute, there will be a dynamic auction mechanism that will guarantee that everyone gets the lowest price possible for the intelligence and compute they’re using while also ensuring the capacity is used for whatever people collectively find most valuable.”

This bidding war highlights the harsh reality of hardware scarcity. Even though an open source model makes intelligence accessible, it doesn’t magically create more resources. People who are willing to pay the highest price for tokens will still have access to more superintelligence.

Zuckerberg admitted this later in his manifesto when he wrote, “No matter how intelligent AI becomes, there will always be a finite amount of compute and therefore an opportunity cost for how we use it.”

Moneywise reached out to Meta for further comment but didn’t hear back before publication.

Is Zuckerberg more practical than philosophical?

Although Zuckerberg’s manifesto talks a lot about big ideas like “individual empowerment as the source of prosperity,” the support for open-source AI models might make good business sense.

AI leaderboards like Artificial Analysis and LLM Stats consistently show Meta’s AI model Muse Spark simply isn’t as popular as those from closed-source competitors OpenAI and Anthropic. Meta is also struggling against rising open-source Chinese competitors like Moonshot AI’s Kimi 3.

With this backdrop in mind, Zuckerberg’s call for more openness might signal the area where Meta sees its opening in the AI race: A U.S.-based open-source model.

Coincidentally, Zuckerberg recently announced Meta will be open-sourcing its Muse Spark 1.2 model so anyone can download and modify it. Meta also rolled out its open-weight Muse Glimmer AI model, which has the advantage of running on devices like laptops rather than in the cloud.

Neil Shah, co-founder of the market intelligence firm Counterpoint Research, views this as a way for Meta to distinguish itself from other American AI labs. As Shah told CNBC, “Most of its competitors in [the] USA are proprietary and there is an insatiable demand for non-Chinese open models and weights, and Meta can fill in this void well.”

With reference to Glimmer, Shah saw yet another angle where Meta could compete with hyperscalers in terms of compute cost. As Shah reasoned, “Bringing small, agentic models like Muse Glimmer directly onto PC and mobile hardware bypasses cloud compute costs to outcompete Google, Microsoft and others on the end-user’s device.”

While it’s up for debate just how much Zuckerberg truly believes in his philosophical ideals, open sourcing is clearly playing a role in Meta’s AI strategy.

Is all that ‘glimmers’ considered gold for Meta’s AI lab?

Judging by Meta’s recent stock performance, investors are still divided over Zuckerberg’s AI spending.

One of the highlights of Meta’s Q2 2026 earnings report was just how fast it’s pouring billions into its data center buildout. Cost and expenses jumped to $42 billion in the most recent quarter, which is 55% higher than one year ago. For comparison, the company’s revenue grew by 28% in the same period to $60 billion in this quarter.

According to The New York Times, the low-end estimate for Meta’s annual AI spend in 2026 is now around $130 billion.

Even though Zuckerberg argues these investments will bring in more profits and revenue opportunities, Wall Street wasn’t buying it. At the end of March, share prices tumbled down to $539. However, since news of Zuckerberg’s AI manifesto and Glimmer broke, Meta’s stock rebounded back to about $600 at the time of writing.

Exhibit A is a new tech firm, June AI, co-founded in 2025 by Efrat Rapoport, a former Salesforce executive, as well as Ohad Hen, Barak Goldstein and Idan Tsitiat. The agentic AI helps businesses deploy AI agents across their existing software systems, automating tasks and integrating AI into complex internal operations.

Multi-billionaire Salesforce founder Marc Benioff, who recently told The Wall Street Journal that talk of AI replacing software giants like Salesforce and ruining their stock prices is dead wrong, is a major backer of the new agentic AI company.

In financially backing June AI and its mission, tech industry critics say Benioff is toeing the line between “AI will kill jobs” and his comments about the two technologies coexisting. Anxious software engineers may have nothing to worry about.

The proof is in the pudding

Case in point, in a 2026 Forward Future podcast interview, Benioff told host Matthew Berman that AI is not ready to replace software engineers, adding that Salesforce software engineers, 15,000 strong, are “hugely augmented” by AI models.

“But still, those engineers are needed,” Benioff said. “The model still cannot operate autonomously.”

Salesforce, which has built its $162 billion market cap via cloud-based enterprise software for customer relationship management, is also increasingly using AI in its own company to achieve robust results. While the company’s stock price has slid 25.4% year-to-date, shares have rebounded by over 15% in the past month, thanks in large part to the company’s ambitious Agentforce platform, with company revenues estimated to rise by 13% in the first quarter of 2027.

In an August 2025 interview on “The Logan Bartlett Show”, Benioff acknowledged that AI agents in Salesforce’s customer support channels were already supplanting humans, which has led to more customer sales.

“It’s been eight of the most exciting months of my career,” Benioff said. “I was able to rebalance my headcount on my support. “I’ve reduced it from 9,000 heads to about 5,000 because I need less heads.”

Canary, meet coalmine

Now with Benioff’s financial backing of June AI, which brings more agentic AI to the corporate technology table, tech experts say software jobs are in peril. Yet, not in tidal wave-type cuts that have been posited.

“I don’t see a contradiction, but the software business can do extremely well while some of the jobs around that software might disappear,” Ahmed Ameen, chief operating officer of workplace technology firm ET Group, told Moneywise. “For example, if AI can make a platform easier to employ, configure and support, then customers will likely get more value from the product while needing fewer people to make it all work.”

Other workplace technology analysts say the bigger issue is companies like Salesforce

describing AI agents as “digital labor” and shifting toward charging customers for work performed by AI rather than simply selling software seats.

“The shift is huge,” Matthew Baden, managing technical director at the Search Experience, a tech specialist recruitment firm, told Moneywise. “It suggests the unit of value is moving away from how many people are using the software and toward how much work actually gets done.”

For workers, that means the economic value of simply providing capacity is likely to decline.

“If a company can use AI to perform more of the execution, the value of the human increasingly sits in the judgment calls that AI can’t make for you; deciding what to build, not just building it,” Baden said.

Right now, the technology sector is mostly seeing AI-skilled technology workers, making individual software engineers faster and more leveraged.

“But augmentation and substitution aren’t mutually exclusive,” Baden said. “If one engineer using AI can produce what previously required several people, the engineer is being augmented while some of the additional headcount is being substituted.”

For companies like Salesforce, the software’s value proposition gets stronger “because the customer can run the same rollout with fewer people, and not just buy the software,” Baden added.

Expect fewer software jobs and a highly tech-savvy workforce

In a cruel twist, technology leaders like Benioff could be right about no “SaaSpocalypse” on the horizon. That’s the sharp sell-off and loss of confidence in Software-as-a-Service stocks. But that’s not good news for software workers.

“The industry can grow because each person becomes substantially more productive,” Baden said. “The net result could be a smaller, higher-skilled technical workforce supporting more software value than ever.”

That scenario will help CEOs like Benioff and shareholders more than it will software professionals, who could fall victim to a labor market numbers game with more losers than winners.

“I’m less certain that new roles will appear at the same rate old work disappears,” Ameen said. “But there’s a chance we could have a booming software industry five years from now that simply employs fewer people per dollar of revenue.”

Unfortunately, that plan is now getting harder to pull off, because the S&P 500’s dividend yield has been running just above 1%, which is the lowest reading on record, according to Charlie Bilello, chief market strategist at Creative Planning.

The payouts themselves haven’t shrunk, but yield is dividends measured against price, and prices have climbed far faster than payouts. The index crossed 7,700 for the first time in early August and because it weighs companies by market value, it now leans heavily on megacap tech names that pay little or nothing.

Steven Yedlin, a 75-year-old retired doctor in East Grand Rapids, Mich., has watched this happen in his own accounts. He told the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) that he built his portfolio around dividend ETFs and by the time he stopped working, his taxable account was split evenly between dividend funds and S&P 500 index funds.

“Not much you can do about the yields,” Yedlin said.

What he could do was change where the money goes. He shut off automatic reinvestment and the payouts now land in high-yield money-market funds — or he gives them to his kids.

Why the checks feel smaller

If, for instance, you have $500,000 sitting in a broad index fund, at today’s yield, that accrues roughly $5,250 per year for you in dividends. Then park the same amount in 10-year Treasurys, which currently yield about 4.65%, and you’d collect about $23,250 — more than four times as much.

And stock dividends no longer beat safe alternatives like Treasurys or CDs once taxes are accounted for, the WSJ reported. That stings most if dividend income is what you’re living on in retirement.

To be fair, dividend investors have had a strong stretch. High-dividend stocks beat the market on a total-return basis over the past year, according to the WSJ.

Dividends can disappear overnight

Papa John’s and UWM Holdings proved this possibility within two days of each other last week, scrapping their payouts. A dividend will last only as long as the board wants it to.

The pizza chain told the SEC on Aug. 6 that its board voted to suspend the quarterly dividend beginning in the third quarter, redirecting the cash toward franchise incentives, new point-of-sale technology and supply chain work. And looking closely, you’ll see that the decision came out of a rough quarter — revenue fell 8.8% to $482.4 million and North America comparable sales dropped 8.3% — with CEO Todd Penegor conceding the turnaround is “taking longer than anticipated.” The board says it will revisit dividends and buybacks once the strategy delivers.

In a similar vein, the parent of United Wholesale Mortgage reported an Aug. 5 second-quarter net loss of $451.9 million on $888 million in revenue, alongside a $2.05 billion investment from Oaktree Capital Management and SFS Group Capital, a vehicle owned by the family of CEO Mat Ishbia. That money came in as preferred stock carrying a 10% cash dividend — 13% if paid in kind. Shares fell about 35% the next day, CNBC reported.

Even when the checks from dividends keep coming, plenty of investors misread what those payments represent. Finance professors Samuel Hartzmark and David Solomon named the mistake the “free dividend fallacy”: treating a payout as bonus money layered on top of the share price. In reality, when a company pays $1 per share, the stock drops by roughly $1. Collect a $1,000 dividend or sell $1,000 of stock — once taxes and trading costs are counted, you’re in nearly the same place.

Chasing yield anyway has a price, Hartzmark told the WSJ. Those investors tend to end up less diversified, with bigger tax bills, holding dividend stocks they overpaid for.

“I would say in general, one 25 basis point move probably doesn’t do a whole lot for the economy,” Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland President Beth Hammack said in a Yahoo Finance interview published Monday. “So it’s probably some number… But I don’t want to prejudge what that number is going to be.”

She added that the Fed shouldn’t fade into the background regarding its mandate to ensure stable prices. “Markets are a complement for the Fed,” Hammack told Yahoo Finance. “They’re not a substitute. We have to stand behind our words with our actions when appropriate.”

Late last month, Fed officials voted 9-3 to keep interest rates unchanged in the range of 3.5% to 3.75% for the fifth time in a row. The three dissenting voices came from regional bank presidents who favored a quarter-point rate increase to address energy supply shocks from the Iran War that pushed up gasoline prices, along with the cost of plenty of other products that rely on diesel for transportation, such as groceries. Hammock was among them.

“Now is the time to act,” she said on Tuesday. At a recent City Club of Cleveland event, she said, “Inflation does not merely raise costs. It raises uncertainty.”

The Fed’s next moves on inflation

Hammack said after the Fed’s July meeting that she had heard rising anxiety among consumers and businesses about the recent spike in prices. For many workers, inflation is swallowing most of their wage gains, while businesses grapple with higher shipping costs and inflation-weary customers.

“What I have heard from across the Fourth Federal Reserve District reinforces this view: Businesses describe pricing pressures as broadening rather than fading, and consumers are expressing despair over persistently higher prices,” Hammack said in a LinkedIn post.

Fed officials won’t reconvene again until mid-September, but a pair of inflation readings will set the stage for its next moves on rates.

The July consumer price index (CPI) will be released on Wednesday, and most analysts believe it will show a 2.5% year-over-year increase after stripping out volatile energy and food prices. The Fed’s preferred inflation gauge tracking personal consumption expenditures (PCE) will be published on Aug. 26. If the reports display a round of higher-than-anticipated price increases, pressure will mount on Fed Chair Kevin Warsh to push through interest rate hikes.

The case to hold interest rates steady for now

Not everyone’s on board to increase interest rates right away. Fed Governor Lisa Cook, another FOMC voting member, said in an Aug. 5 speech that she believed price pressures would fade over time and supported sitting still on rates.

She argued tariff-fueled inflation on products was mostly in the rearview mirror at this stage and cited analyst forecasts that oil prices would come down by year’s end. She also expected AI supply chains to adjust and ward off the price increases on computer chips that are in extremely high demand from tech companies.

“For these three reasons, I felt it was appropriate not to change rates while we see how these factors evolve,” she said at an economic luncheon in Alaska. “If I do not see signs of continued disinflation soon, I am prepared to act.”

Speculation has been growing steadily since the SpaceX IPO that Musk could consolidate his business empire, though he has made no public comments about doing so. Should he decide to, however, The Wall Street Journal reports such a move could trigger a clause in Musk’s contract that would accelerate a tremendous payday package, which the company approved last November.

A line buried in the contract, at the bottom of the fifth page, declares half of the targets Musk previously had to meet to earn the payout would be considered met if Tesla is acquired or taken over.

A longshot gets a lot closer

Musk reportedly lobbied for the $1 trillion pay package and even indicated he could leave the company if it wasn’t approved. Still, the package was seen by many as a long shot of ever being realized.

The agreement was made up of 12 tranches of shares to be granted to Musk if Tesla hit certain milestones in the next decade.

The first of those required Tesla to hit a market capitalization of $2 trillion. (The company currently has a market cap of $1.04 trillion, which is considerably less than Tesla’s $1.54 trillion evaluation last November.) The next nine tranches see Musk earning more stock each time Tesla’s value increases by $500 billion, up to $6.5 trillion.

The final two required market cap rises of $1 trillion each, which means Tesla would need to hit a market cap of $8.5 trillion for Musk to get the full package.

The Journal laid out a SpaceX offer that valued Tesla at a 54% premium, making it a $2 trillion deal. In an all-stock deal, Tesla shareholders would receive 3.8 shares in the combined company for each share they own.

Musk, meanwhile, would retain complete operational control of both companies. His Class B shares have 10 times the voting power of publicly traded Class A shares, giving him 73% of the voting power at SpaceX. Even if the deal values Tesla at a whopping $8.5 trillion, he would retain 56% of the voting power.

To get the $1 trillion pay package, SpaceX would have to buy Tesla at that $8.5 trillion valuation.

It’s about control

Since talk began about the Tesla pay package, Musk has insisted it was not about the money, it was about control, saying “I just don’t feel comfortable building a robot army here and then being ousted because of some asinine recommendations from ISS and Glass Lewis who have no freaking clue. I mean, those guys are corporate terrorists,” on Tesla’s quarterly earnings call last October.

Company officials agreed. “It’s less about compensation and more about the voting influence,” Board Chair Robyn Denholm told CNBC at the time.

It’s worth noting that because the number of Tesla shares has increased since the pay package was signed, Musk’s salary from Tesla would no longer hit $1 trillion, but would come in at about $824 billion.

“I got sick of hearing about this K-shaped economy,” he told CNBC’s Joe Kernen. “I can say here definitively, the K-shaped economy is over.”

Other economists aren’t so sure. As recently as June, Moody’s chief economist Mark Zandi had the exact opposite opinion.

“The K-shaped economy remains firmly intact,” Zandi said in an X post. “Americans in the top 20% of the income distribution (those who earn over $175k annually) account for an astounding nearly 60% of outlays.

The two economists used two different metrics to reach their conclusions. Here’s what to know about both methods — and what it means for your portfolio.

Wage growth vs. outlays

In the CNBC interview, Bessent said that the U.S. economy is now a “C economy,” arguing that “the lower end of wage earners are finally calling it back.” He said the bottom 25% of earners are currently experiencing year-over-year wage growth of 5.5%, three times more than the top 25%.

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the bottom 25% of earners had a moving average of median wage growth of 3.6% in June 2026, lower than any other quartile. The bottom 25% of earners have had the lowest median wage growth of all quartiles each month since October 2024.

Instead of using wage growth, Zandi used the Fed’s Financial Accounts and Survey of Consumer Finance to determine the outlays of both the top 20% and the bottom 80% to make his K-shaped economy calculations.

Outlays are people’s expenditures. Moody’s methodology defines personal outlays to include “consumer spending, interest payments on consumer installment debt and transfers such as donations.”

According to Zandi, the top 20% and bottom 80% spent roughly similar amounts in the 1990s. By the 2000s, the top 20% had started accounting for a larger percentage of spending. The gap between the two groups’ outlays has been expanding ever since.

Zandi’s graph shows that the top 20%’s outlays increased by 6.5% over the past year — significantly above the CPI inflation rate of 2.7%. In comparison, the bottom 80% spent slightly less than inflation, suggesting their budgets may have been struggling to keep up with rising prices.

“No wonder most Americans are upset with their financial situations and the broader economy,” Zandi said in the X post.

Diversify by catering to both arms of the K

If you’re worried about protecting your wealth in a K-shaped economy, having a portfolio is a great start. Assets tend to perform significantly better than labor when the economy splits.

“If you’ve already accumulated wealth, you’re a member of the upper K, and the reason you’re doing OK is because you almost certainly have significant exposure to the financial markets,” Deon Strickland, a professor of finance at Wake Forest University and former SEC economist, told Forbes.

Making regular contributions to your investment portfolio is important to continuing to build wealth. So is diversification, especially as the wealth divide grows deeper.

Investing in both cyclical assets — investments or goods that tend to do well when the economy is strong — and countercyclical assets — investments or goods that tend to do well when the economy is weak — can help keep your portfolio balanced no matter what comes next.

An example of a countercyclical asset might be stock in a budget store like Dollar Tree — something that people may turn to when they’re trying to spend less. These investments cater to the lower part of a K-shaped economy, while your other, cyclical assets are geared toward the upper half.

Diversification is of utmost importance even outside of a K-shaped economy. You never know what the future has in store, and you don’t want to be caught unprepared.

Pay someone thousands of dollars to help their college-bound daughter choose dresses and practice making conversation? Absolutely not. But a year later, Lindsay Lookingbill is glad she reconsidered.

Her daughter, Reagan, now a member of Alpha Delta Pi at the University of Mississippi, navigated one of American college life’s most socially complex rituals with the help of a professional, and Lookingbill credits the outcome largely to that decision.

“You’re not going into another world. You’re not going to Mars,” she told Bloomberg. “But you are going into a different culture.”

What rush coaches do and how much they charge

Sorority rush consulting has existed for years, but it’s no longer a niche Southern industry.

Trisha Addicks, who founded It’s All Greek to Me in Atlanta, charges $6,500 for a one-year coaching program. This fall she’s launching a two-year Legacy Mentorship package priced at $12,000.

“Until very recently, people didn’t even know this industry existed outside of the South,” she told Bloomberg.

Lorie Stefanelli walked away from a human resources career to run her New York-based firm, Greek Chic, full time in 2024. Since then, her client roster has grown from five families per rush season to nearly 80. When the University of Alabama’s rush week got underway this year, she was simultaneously texting eight families — six of them from New Jersey, New York and Connecticut.

The work itself goes well beyond wardrobe selection. For example, coaches help candidates audit their social media profiles, removing anything that could signal poor judgment — like party photos, revealing outfits or an excess of selfies.

That social media dimension has amplified the stakes considerably. A 2022 University of South Carolina study found that the average #RushTok video was viewed around 66,000 times — a level of exposure that has reshaped expectations and intensified the competition, according to Mindy Farr, founder of SororitySolutions in Alabama, who worked with Reagan.

Coaches also prepare their clients for high-pressure conversations conducted in noisy rooms, coaching on posture, eye contact, engagement, topic selection and how to project authenticity, warmth and confidence.

Before a candidate even arrives on campus, she typically needs a professional headshot, a polished résumé, documented philanthropic goals, introductory videos for each chapter and recommendation letters from established sorority alumnae.

Surging demand from outside the South

The growth in out-of-state coaching clients tracks a well-documented enrollment trend. Since 2004, according to Bloomberg’s analysis of data from the National Center for Education Statistics, universities including Alabama, Mississippi, LSU, Georgia and Tennessee have more than tripled their share of incoming freshmen from outside the southern region — drawn by football culture, active Greek life and substantial scholarships.

More than half of undergraduates at Mississippi and Auburn now belong to sororities or fraternities, and Clemson saw its incoming sorority membership more than double between 2017 and 2025, Bloomberg reports.

For students arriving from places like Illinois, California or the Northeast with no sorority connections or cultural frame of reference, the process can feel intimidating. That’s where coaching can help.

“I knew nothing about Southern sorority rush before I hired Lorie,” Brooke Goodrich, a Massachusetts native now at Alabama, pointed out to Bloomberg. After six months of preparation and plenty of texting with Stefanelli during rush, Goodrich received a bid from Alpha Chi Omega. “I got what I paid for, 100%.“

The full cost — and benefit — of going Greek

It’s key to note that rush coaching is only the starting expense. Lookingbill would already absorb $21,000 in annual out-of-state tuition, plus at least another $3,000 per semester for Reagan’s sorority dues.

According to the University of Arkansas Panhellenic Council, the average new member of a sorority pays $4,193 in first-year fees, with ongoing annual out-of-house dues averaging $3,315. Living in the sorority house averages $11,542 per year.

That means a family spending $6,500 on coaching, $21,000 on out-of-state tuition and several thousand dollars in first-year dues is looking at well over $30,000 before accounting for books, housing, meals and other college costs — with no contractual guarantee of a bid at the end of rush week.

Lookingbill’s conclusion reframes the investment in a way many families in this market have come to share.

“At the end of the day, I didn’t pay Mindy to help my daughter through rush,” she told Bloomberg. “I paid Mindy for life skills development that will help her [Raegen] throughout life.”

Ida Huddleston and her family first caught people’s attention in March, when an unnamed Fortune 100 company offered them more than $26 million for half of their 1,200-acre family farm. The offer was roughly 10 times the land’s worth, but the family quickly and soundly rejected the offer.

“They call us old stupid farmers, you know, but we’re not,” Huddleston told the local news outlet WKRC at the time. “We know whenever our food is disappearing, our lands are disappearing, and we don’t have any water.”

Huddleston’s grandfather and great-grandfather farmed the land, growing wheat during the Great Depression — and she said she has no interest in disrupting that legacy.

Continuing the fight between family farms and data centers

While Huddleston was able to resist the extraordinarily high payday, not all of her neighbors were — including the owners of a mobile home park, where 28 residents lived, many of whom were retired or on a fixed income. The company revised its plans after Huddleston said no, and filed a rezoning request for over 2,000 acres nearby. In May, that rezoning was approved by the Mason County Fiscal Court.

That led Huddleston’s daughter, Delsia Bare, to join a lawsuit aiming to stop the data center project.

She worries, she said, about the impact of the data center on the local community, including the power and gas lines it will require and the effects on the local water supply.

The unknown company agreed to fully fund all necessary infrastructure, including roads, water, sewer, fiber, and electrical service, so the community carries no financial burden, county officials said. And it said the facility would bring 400 permanent jobs to the area, paying six figures.

Huddleston doesn’t believe them.

“I say they’re a liar,” she said. “That’s what I say. It’s a scam.”

Growing resistance to data center build-out

While Huddleston and her family are rallying opponents in Kentucky, resistance groups in other states are continuing to gain strength.

A recent Gallup poll showed 71% of Americans oppose data centers. Politicians are using them as talking points in midterm elections. And several communities and states have passed laws banning the operations.

That’s having an impact. A report from Goldman Sachs said only about half of the AI computing capacity scheduled to activate by 2028 is expected to come online by its target date, as completion times get stretched due to opposition efforts.

“God gave the land to us to take care of,” Huddleston said to People magazine. “And that’s what we are doing.”

The most desirable ZIP code in the nation right now is 01960, according to Realtor.com’s 2026 Hottest ZIP Codes report. That ZIP code belongs to Peabody, Massachusetts, a town located near Boston.

Cameron and Hannah Zirpolo, for example, spent five months trying to find a home in Peabody. “The housing market is not for the weak,” Cameron told MarketWatch.

After going to 15 open houses between April and June and being outbid six times on offers, they realized they were going to have to step it up. “We needed to go at least $50,000 over asking to even have a chance,” Cameron said.

The Zirpolos ultimately found a home for $751,000 after five months of looking, noting “there is nothing not to love” about their choice after a challenging journey.

This is the first year Peabody earned the distinction of “hottest” ZIP code, though it ranked in the report’s top 10 in 2018 and 2021. This year, ZIP code 07042 (Montclair, New Jersey) came in at No. 2, while 08080 (Sewell, New Jersey) took third place.

This year’s hottest ZIP codes

During the first half of this year, homes in Peabody spent just 20 days on the market, according to Hottest ZIP Codes. That compares to 57 days at a national level.

The median price of a home here isn’t cheap: it’s around $600,000. And in June, it reached $667,000, according to Realtor.com. However, that was still almost 20% below the Boston metro average.

Peabody is just 20 miles from downtown Boston (with highway access) and close to major employers. “Its mix of livability, relative value and easy commuting distance helped make it one of the year’s hottest ZIP codes,” according to the report.

In Montclair, which came second in the rankings, homes spent only about 18 days on the market, despite a median listing price of $1,050,000. In Sewell, third in the rankings, homes spent about 25 days on the market, priced at a median of $426,000.

The rankings are based on market demand (measured by unique viewers per property on Realtor.com) and the number of days a listing spends on the market.

Overall, the report found that buyers are “prioritizing space and established character over affordability alone.” They’re also willing to pay a premium “to live in larger, older homes within reach of a major job center rather than settling for less space closer in.”

Aside from Massachusetts and New Jersey, this year’s hottest ZIP codes can be found in New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan. Realtor.com points to tighter new-construction pipelines in these regions, which constrains supply.

Affordability still plagues homebuyers

“Nationally, the typical home sold for about 2.3% below its list price in the first half of 2026 — a sign of a market where sellers are, on average, still conceding ground to close a deal,” says the report.

But affordability continues to plague many would-be homebuyers.

As of Aug. 6, mortgage rates averaged 6.69% for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, according to Freddie Mac. The same time a year ago, the rate was 6.63%.

At a national level, there still isn’t enough supply to meet demand, which means housing prices remain elevated. At the same time, economic uncertainty — combined with diminishing consumer confidence — is weakening demand.

Overall, “high costs are sidelining many would-be buyers and renters, even as new construction slowly chips away at supply shortfalls,” according to Daniel McCue, senior research associate at the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, in an overview of the 2026 State of the Nation’s Housing report.

Whether you’re looking to buy a new or an existing home, the national median price is still over $400,000. “Existing home prices are up 54 percent nationwide since 2020 and remain nearly 5 times median incomes — far above the standard ratio of 3 that held in the 1990s,” according to McCue.

With interest rates above 6%, he says households would need an income of more than $120,000 to afford the monthly payments on a median-priced home ($3,100 per month, as of Q4 2025, compared to $1,700 per month in early 2020).

Getting the best rates

If you’re in the market for a new home, you’ll want to get the best mortgage rate possible and put down the largest down payment you can afford — whether your ZIP code is hot or not.

Indeed, across the 10 hottest ZIP codes, “buyers are bringing meaningfully stronger financial profiles to the table than the national norm,” according to Hottest ZIP Codes.

The better your credit score, the more likely you’ll get a better mortgage rate. To improve your credit score, make on-time payments and keep your credit card utilization rate as low as possible.

You can request your credit report (for free) from the three major credit reporting bureaus: Experian, Equifax and TransUnion.

While mortgage lenders look at your credit score, they also look at your debt-to-income ratio (DTI), which is how much of your monthly income goes toward paying down debt. A general rule of thumb is that a DTI of 36% or less will give you the best mortgage rates.

You might be able to reduce your mortgage rate if you make a larger down payment, since this reduces your loan-to-value (LTV). This percentage (your mortgage amount compared to the appraised value of the property) helps lenders assess risk.

Keep in mind that rates advertised by lenders typically assume you’re putting down 20% or more — so, if you don’t have a 20% down payment, that rate may be higher for you.

First-time homebuyers may be eligible for financial help. For example, some states offer down payment assistance and tax breaks. You could also explore different types of mortgages (such as FHA loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, which have lower rates but come with mandatory mortgage insurance).

But if you happen to be looking for a new home in one of the nation’s hottest ZIP codes, be prepared to spend more than the listing price.

The fans were incensed that the Greenlink interconnector, a 125-mile long submarine power cable that connects Ireland and the U.K., was planned to make landfall and “go straight through” the “grave” of Dobby, a beloved character from Harry Potter, BBC reported. The scene in the movie Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 that depicts the death of the character Dobby was filmed at Freshwater West beach in Pembrokeshire, Wales.

The Greenlink interconnector went online in 2025, but a recent podcast interview with a former manager of the project revealed the sway that Potter fans had on the cable’s ultimate route.

The power of Potter

In an interview on The Energy Revolution podcast, Simon Ludlam discussed the “mythical” story of how Potter fans got the plans for the Greenlink interconnector changed.

Ludlam said that after finally getting agreement from all stakeholders — authorities, landowners and local residents — about where the cable would make landfall, he agreed to a “quick” interview with BBC Wales on the project.

“So we stood on the beach and I explained that, you know, ‘here’s the sea, the cable’s all underground,” Ludlam shared on the podcast. “It goes [...] up into the dunes and then right at the top of the dune there, it then exits and then goes into the roads and off we go.’

“And I explained it in great graphic detail. We did the shot. We finished. I went back to London and [BBC] then aired it I guess a couple of weeks later. And we got hundreds of calls. I mean hundreds of calls.”

Ludlam’s colleague then recommended that they respond to the calls, because “apparently, we’re going to go straight through Dobby’s grave.”

“I said, ‘Dobby? I don’t know Dobby,’” Ludlam recounted. “And he said, ‘Well, Dobby in Harry Potter, you pointed out very clearly where his grave was and that the cable’s going to go directly through it.’ And I said, ‘Well, he’s a fictitious character in a fictitious book.’”

Dobby’s cherished memorial

Dobby’s “grave” is a mock memorial created by fans at the site where filming took place, comprised mostly of stones with messages painted on them. Since it’s a cherished site for Harry Potter fans, Ludlam said his colleague argued the Dobby situation was “very, very serious.”

“And so we got back with the planners and we discussed exactly how to reroute the cable so we wouldn’t go anywhere into Dobby’s grave,” said Ludlam. “Actually, we went quite close to some real Bronze Age remains. But we avoided Dobby’s grave. A lot of people were very happy about that.”

Those possible Bronze Age human remains were found by an archaeological evaluation conducted in 2019 for Greenlink and were mentioned in Pembrokeshire council planning documents, according to BBC.

The evaluation reported finding “the rim of an inverted pottery vessel whose fabric suggests a Bronze Age Collared Urn c.1700-1500 BC; typically associated with human burial. The pottery vessel was uncovered within the remains of a low-lying mound and it is suggested that it may have originally been an upstanding earthwork likely to be a Bronze Age round barrow or burial mound.”

Ultimately, both the real and fictitious resting places were not disturbed by the project, which Ludlam noted is now complete, “and Dobby’s happy.”

But instead of the widespread riches and shorter work weeks we were promised, so far, human staff have instead faced thousands of layoffs, the automation of some of the parts of our jobs that we enjoyed most and overall existential dread.

Now, Sam Altman, the head of one of the world’s biggest AI enterprises, has admitted that he doesn’t foresee machine learning ever fostering a toilless utopia where corporate workers only have to clock in for a few hours per week while advanced algorithmic models handle the rest. But his reasoning may leave you feeling a little gaslit.

Sam Altman’s prediction

“Technology, for a long time, has been promising people that they’re going to work less and they’re going to have all this leisure… But somehow we never get the promise of the four-hour workweek at mass scale in society. And I don’t expect AI to change that,” Altman, co-founder of OpenAI, revealed in a late July episode of the entrepreneurial podcast “Relentless.”

While that statement alone may dash the hopes that Altman and his tech CEO peers have instilled in us for a future where work is optional and scarcity is non-existent, it’s how he continues the thought — which was in response to host Ti Morse’s observation that people seem to be getting somehow busier as technology meant to bolster our productivity advances — that is the real kicker.

Altman emphasized humans’ inherent desire to compete and one-up one another, saying our timeless obsession with how we’re performing and what we have relative to others means “our expectations go up [and] we always want more,” even as inventions like AI allow us to get things done more efficiently and often better.

He predicts that this fixation, which “drives the economy and the desire to want to be useful to other people” will persist despite future advancements, spurring us to keep focusing on work, whatever that looks like — and spending dozens of hours per week doing so.

“We’re all going to be much busier than we thought we were supposed to be in a post-superintelligence world. We’re still going to complain about it, but secretly we’re going to be happy,” he said.

Humanity’s will to work — insult or compliment?

The chief executive’s comments have inspired such headlines as “Feeling stressed and overworked? Don’t worry — OpenAI CEO Sam Altman thinks that we just love to work, and that’s why AI won’t result in a four-day working week” and “Sam Altman says AI won’t shorten the workweek because humans secretly enjoy being busy. Who doesn’t love the relentless grind of work?”

But he did preface his thoughts with a deep appreciation for the aspects of human nature that he was speaking about, saying he “really admires” the fact that we continue to “think of new things to do, to create for each other, to want for ourselves.”

He also expressed his firm belief that AI will bring about more productivity gains that will benefit more people, even if we all do end up working nearly the same amount. And, that there will still be room for existential satisfaction after AI takes over in multiple arenas.

“I think there’s going to be lots of great jobs in the future, I really do, I think we’re going to have lots of intellectual fulfillment,” he reassured listeners, though with the caveat that “most jobs are going to adapt more than it feels like they should.”

When Morse proceeded to present the potential issue with “less and less of our direct input [being] correlated with value creation,” Altman contended that “it won’t feel like that.” He used cooking for each other as an example of the “human” things that he thinks will remain valuable to us “long after robots can do a great job cooking food.”

But the question remains whether anyone else will find value, economically or otherwise, in, say, the meals we cook — even if we as the creator extract some internal value from cooking them — when technology can do the exact same or better, and how that will shift the scales of meaning in anything we do.

The New York Police Department is investigating a scheme in which victims have collectively lost more than $100 million, according to ABC News. The investigation, which began in May 2024, involves the NYPD, the Department of Homeland Security, the IRS and law enforcement agencies in other states because authorities say the scheme is not limited to New York.

And this isn’t just another phone scam asking for a few hundred dollars. Some victims have reportedly lost millions.

The FBI has also been warning about similar “gold courier” scams and its 2024 Internet Crime Complaint Center report recorded 525 complaints involving gold and precious-metals courier schemes, with reported losses totaling $219 million nationwide.

How scammers convince retirees their savings are at risk

The scam often begins with something that looks relatively harmless: a pop-up on the victim’s computer warning that their device or financial accounts have been compromised.

The victim is given a phone number to call. On the other end is someone pretending to be tech support. From there, the scam escalates.

The victim may be persuaded to give the scammer remote access to their computer. That can give criminals visibility into files, online accounts and other personal information. In the NYPD investigation, Detective Emilio Gomez told ABC News that perpetrators can gain access to a victim’s webcam, printer, audio and computer.

Then comes the psychological switch. Another scammer — this time posing as a government official, police officer, or financial institution representative — tells the victim that their money is in danger. The victim may be instructed to move their savings out of their bank account and convert it into cash or precious metals for “protection.”

This tactic is not new. In 2024, the FBI warned that scammers were posing as tech-support and government officials, telling victims their financial accounts had been hacked or were at risk and instructing them to buy gold, silver, or other precious metals. The criminals would then send a courier to collect the valuables from the victim’s home.

Gold has a reputation as a safe haven during periods of economic or market uncertainty. That can make it particularly effective in a scam built around fear. If someone is told their bank account has been hacked, moving the money into something tangible like gold may seem like a reasonable way to protect it — especially when the person giving the instructions claims to be a government official.

There’s also a practical reason criminals use precious metals: they’re physical. Once a victim buys gold bars or coins, someone can be sent to pick it up in person. According to the FBI, scammers may even give victims a passcode or other ways to “authenticate” the person collecting the gold.

The numbers show the scale of the broader problem. People aged 60 and older reported more than $7.7 billion in losses to the FBI in 2025, up 59% from the previous year. The average reported loss was more than $38,000 and at least 12,400 victims reported losing $100,000 or more.

In other words, scammers don’t necessarily have to break into a retiree’s account. They can convince the retiree to move the money themselves.

The red flags that should make you stop immediately

The biggest warning sign is someone telling you that you need to move your money immediately to protect it.

Avoid clicking unsolicited pop-ups or calling numbers provided in them. Don’t give an unexpected caller remote access to your computer and verify anyone claiming to represent a government agency or financial institution using contact information you find independently.

Be skeptical if someone claiming to be from the government or law enforcement tells you to:

• Withdraw money from your bank or retirement accounts.
• Buy gold, silver, or other precious metals.
• Hand cash or gold to a courier.
• Give a stranger access to your computer.
• Keep the transaction secret from your family, bank, or financial advisor.

The FBI says government agencies and legitimate businesses will never ask you to purchase gold or other precious metals. It also advises people not to give unknown individuals access to their computers or agree to meet strangers to hand over cash or valuables.

If you think you’ve already been caught up in the scam, contact your financial institution, preserve emails, phone numbers and transaction records and report the fraud to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center.

If someone tells you to buy gold and hand it over to a courier to protect your savings, take a step back and verify the request independently.

Now, the latest in trendy, ostentatious food is the caviar hot dog, which will run you up $100.

Officially called the Golden Glizzy on menus at this year’s Formula One Miami Grand Prix and Miami Open, this Australian Wagyu beef hot dog is served on a croissant-style bun. The high-end handheld is topped with mascarpone cheese, edible gold flakes, an entire 30g tin of Ossetra caviar, and fresh chives for good measure.

The haute hot dog is the latest in what’s known as a high-low food trend, where an expensive ingredient punches up a casual dish, a la caviar tater tots and gold-flaked pizza. In the case of haute hotdog, Christian Savaglia, director of caviar bar Caviar Kaspia at The Mark, told Forbes, “The combination of caviar with more everyday foods creates a sense of contrast that feels both playful and approachable.”

In a more business-minded light, the contrasting elements in the dish tug a consumer’s values in different directions, creating what food trend analyst Kara Nielsen says is a powerful combo that, “really drives people to purchase.”

On one end, the familiar, more casual side of these trends emphasize values around security, tradition, or nostalgia. “Maybe you’re thinking of the hot dog from the baseball park,” Nielsen tells Moneywise.

On the other hand, the spectacle of exclusive or expensive food plays at a side of the consumer that values status and power. “We’re always trying to achieve something. So, by even saying that you get to eat this fancy, expensive hot dog, it’s a way of signifying your status,” Nielsen says.

The ‘Caviar bump’ trend

There’s a certain ubiquity to caviar in high-end restaurants, a shorthand that lets diners know they’re in a fancy establishment, be it the Golden Glizzy or COQODAQ’s caviar-topped chicken nuggets ($32 per nug).

The ubiquity is partially driven by a growth in caviar supply from sturgeon farms in China, which has grown into the largest sturgeon producer in the world over the last two decades, accounting for 84% of global production. According to a report from Mordor Intelligence, the global caviar market is projected to hit $447 million in 2026, up from $415 million in 2025. By 2031, the market is estimated to reach $664 million.

More accessible caviar has drawn younger generations to the luxury ingredient, resulting in trends like the caviar bump, in which a dollop of caviar is eaten off the back of your hand, like salt after a tequila shot.

“It’s got this very briny, sharp taste, plus the popping sensation,” Nielsen says. “It really appeals to a younger generation that’s into experiential dining. Millennials, Gen Z, they really love experiential things, and they grew up surrounded by a lot more interesting foods.”

The dog days are upon us

While the hedonism of a caviar-laden Wagyu hot dog projects a certain extravagance, the popularity of a $100 hot dog may be symptomatic of a reduced buying power among younger generations.

“During this economic and political upheaval, we’re also seeing that, especially Gen Z, they’re looking for these escape moments,” Nielsen says. It’s what’s known as the lipstick effect, where consumers continue to buy smaller luxury goods during times of financial hardship.

“They’re giving up on being able to do some of the big things in life with their money, like buy a house, and so they’re less concerned about saving money, and they’re living for today,” Nielsen says. “So, they’ll spend $100 for an experience that they can photograph, share, talk about.”

Food trends like the caviar hot dog are here one day, gone the next. And nobody’s going to pay $100 to take the food photo everyone already posted yesterday. In a dog-eat-dog world of disposable food trends, the next big thing is always around the corner.

“People will be waiting, looking for something new and more novel,” Nielsen says.

Not only has the city — population just over 2,400 — been a coal mining hub since 1897, but it’s actually named after the man who founded the area’s first mines.

But America’s energy needs are changing, and Kemmerer is ground zero as the site of the first nuclear power plant built by TerraPower, a nuclear design and technology company founded in 2008 by billionaire Bill Gates.

“It will be the most advanced nuclear facility in the world, and it will be much safer and produce far less waste than conventional reactors,” Gates wrote of the plant — known as Natrium — in 2023. He added that nuclear power is needed to meet growing energy demand while reducing carbon emissions.

The town is covering half the cost of the $4 billion plant, which TerraPower touts as “the first utility-scale advanced nuclear power plant in the United States,” capable of powering up to 400,000 homes while using liquid sodium instead of water to cool reactors and absorb heat.

Opponents, though, disagree with that assessment, and some members of the community aren’t so sure how they feel about a nuclear reactor next door either. As resident Janet Lively, who works in a Kemmerer coffee shop, told USA Today, “I would say our community is split.”

From coal country to nuclear boomtown

Brian Muir, Kemmerer’s City Administrator, told Moneywise that while the city “still desires to be known as a coal-mining community” with an active coal plant, the timing of the nuclear plant’s arrival “is fortuitous” due to the conversions of other local coal plants to gas.

Muir expects “a dramatic economic impact during the building of the plant,” with up to 300 workers arriving this year and 1,600 “at peak construction.”

The plant is slated for completion by 2030 and, Muir claimed, will provide 250 full-time jobs.

“There will also be a multiplier effect of jobs and businesses that support the construction workforce and new residents, and we are pursuing creating more nuclear-related jobs and industry in Kemmerer,” Muir added. “We are glad that we can have yet another type of multigenerational workforce to keep our community thriving and prosperous.”

Local real estate is already starting to show signs of that shift. Zillow stats show that Kemmerer house prices shot up from just over $219,000 on average at the beginning of 2024 to nearly $262,000 as of June 2026.

“Right from the start, we saw a huge boom in property sales … and since we were picked, the intensity has gone up,” Kemmerer Mayor Robert Bowen told Homes.com in April.

Bowen also predicted “a massive boom with our restaurants” and the potential arrival of bigger chain stores and an overall increase in city sales tax revenue.

TerraPower CEO Chris Levesque, meanwhile, called the Kemmerer plant the “commercial blueprint to mobilise a fleet of Natrium plants” around the country and, eventually, the world.

Tara K. Righetti, co-director of the University of Wyoming’s Nuclear Energy Research Center, told Moneywise that “As the host of the nation’s first full-scale commercial advanced reactor to receive an NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) construction permit, Wyoming is on the forefront of the nuclear renaissance that is underway in the United States.”

Not everyone is sold on Kemmerer’s nuclear future

Not surprisingly, the Natrium plant also has its detractors.

Some residents told Cowboy State Daily that they like Kemmerer’s size and don’t want to see it grow too much beyond a population of 6,000 residents, while others are “racing against time to address aging infrastructure and limited amenities.”

The publication reported that, currently, plant workers often spend money on food and accommodations in bigger nearby cities — which they said signals what could happen once the plant is built.

Dr. Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), meanwhile, dubbed the plant “a true ‘Cowboy Chernobyl’” when he published his organization’s concerns last year.

He alleged that the NRC rushed its safety evaluation to meet a timeline put forward by President Trump — who champions bringing back nuclear energy — and warned that liquid sodium coolant is flammable and reactor instabilities could damage “the reactor’s hot and highly radioactive nuclear fuel.”

Dr. Lyman also claimed that the facility “lacks a physical containment structure to reduce the release of radioactive materials into the environment if a core melt occurs.”

TerraPower didn’t return Moneywise’s request for comment, but NRC spokesperson Scott Burnell told Moneywise that their review of the plant covered its “ability to safely handle events such as earthquakes, blizzards and flooding” and “had favorable environmental impact conclusions.”

He added that the review found “The Natrium design can safely account for disruptions in normal operation and safely shut down, and that TerraPower has acceptable plans for safely storing the reactor’s spent fuel and other radioactive waste.”

Still, some residents remain leery.

One of them, Charlotte Sherbeyn, told USA Today that she’s concerned about the devastation caused by a nuclear meltdown meeting the natural gas and coal that exists underground.

She added, bluntly: “If that blows up, we’re done.”

After Forbes named Rogan the world’s highest paid podcaster of 2026, she commented on the publication’s July 30 Instagram post saying, “WHO IS PAYING JOE ROGAN 82 MILLION? Give that to our vets, or our children!!!”

“82 million to be completely uninformed and say ‘whoopsie doodle’ every time he’s wrong, which is FREQUENT?” she added.

Joe Rogan is viewed as a controversial figure by some. The podcaster is known for welcoming all guests on his podcast, regardless of political affiliation and cultural beliefs. But he has come under fire in the past for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic, even suggesting at one point that healthy young people shouldn’t need to take vaccines at all. In 2020, he also accused “left-wing people” of starting wildfires in Oregon, a claim that local law enforcement and the FBI debunked.

On an Aug. 5 episode of his podcast, Rogan seemed taken aback by Handler’s comments. In part because the celebrity is a millionaire herself.

“That’s funny. She’s rich,” Rogan said. “That’s crazy. That’s what she said? I make too much? Is there a certain number I should make?”

Rogan’s large podcasting business

According to Forbes, Rogan had the most listened to podcast in the first quarter of 2026, with most of his listeners, 78% to be exact, being male, according to data from Edison Research shared with the publication.

Rogan has been atop Edison’s list since 2019, meaning he hasn’t lost much, if any, popularity despite taking shots at anyone he chooses. As an example, Rogan welcomed Donald Trump on his podcast in 2024 during his election campaign before ultimately endorsing him for president. But in recent months, Rogan has criticized the president for the war with Iran and the administration’s handling of the Epstein files before that.

In 2025, The Joe Rogan Experience topped Spotify’s podcast list for the sixth year in a row, as well as YouTube and Apple in the same year for the first time. Some of his standout episodes included long-form conversations with Elon Musk and Bernie Sanders.

Rogan signed a $250 million deal with Spotify in 2024, allowing his show to stream across multiple platforms. Spotify’s first deal with Rogan in 2020 brought his podcast to the platform exclusively, when it began its foray into podcasts.

Who else made the list of the world’s highest-paid podcasters?

Rogan releases around 15 episodes per month and earns more than 80 million downloads and views, according to Forbes. That statistic helps paint the picture of why the podcaster tops Forbes’ 2026 list, and by some distance, too.

Rogan’s estimated salary of $82 million between June 2025 and June 2026 is $12 million more than what John Coogan and Jordi Hays, the hosts of TBPN, earned. Third on the list is Steven Bartlett, the host of The Diary of a CEO, who earned $45 million. Rounding out the top five are Ashley Flowers, the host of Crime Junkie ($42 million) and the hosts of SmartLess: Will Arnett, Jason Bateman and Sean Hayes ($37 million).

Forbes’ rankings are based on estimates of the money earned by podcasters through minimum guarantees, ad revenue sharing, platform fees and live events.

White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said that it’ll be up to President Donald Trump to decide the timeline for the administration to sell its 10% equity stake that it took a year ago.

“I think that in the end, President Trump, who has an incredible track record of when to buy and sell things, is going to make that call,” Hassett told CNBC on August 10. “I don’t think that this is going to be sort of a socialist takeover.”

The arrangement caught many Wall Street investors by surprise since government intervention is rare outside an economic crisis. Now, the Trump administration has taken stakes in 37 private companies in deals totaling $27.6 billion, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. Many of the deals involve companies entrenched in the production of semiconductors or critical minerals.

The Trump administration has suggested that its actions with Japan were an effort to help a friend “in need,” Hassett said, referring to the recent lifeline started to prop up a faltering Japanese yen and prevent broader tumult in financial markets.

A spokesperson for Intel didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Intel is spotting its next three opportunities

Intel was trading at about $100 per share on August 10. Its shares have soared 153% since the start of the year due to the appetite among hyperscalers for the chips, semiconductors and related components powering the AI race.

Intel has specialized its business around manufacturing the central processing units (CPUs) that help AI agents complete their assigned tasks. There’s a staggering demand for them to correspond with the rapid data center buildout underway.

On August 10, Intel announced it was offering $15 billion in new stock in an effort to take advantage of its dramatic turnaround.

“Customers continue to signal a strong and sustainable demand environment, driven by unprecedented investment in AI compute,” Intel said in a statement. The chipmaker identified “significant growth areas” around physical AI, external wafers, specialized silicon and advanced packaging.

Intel CEO Lip Bu-Tan took over the company last year and has overseen a period of remarkable revenue growth. Intel has sought to refashion itself as a foundry, or a firm that produces chips for clients. It did secure a win earlier this year when Apple agreed to employ Intel-made chips for some of its products.

Intel reported $16.1 billion in sales in its latest earnings report, a 25% increase compared to the same quarter last year. The company also raised its capital expenditure forecast to $20 billion this year, up from $18 billion.

‘I should have asked for more’

Intel forms a key piece in the administration’s effort to restore the U.S.’s domestic manufacturing capacity. Earlier this year, the President said that he should have asked for a bigger stake in Intel given its newfound success.

“I said, ‘Give the country 10% ownership for free in Intel,’” Trump told Fortune Magazine in a May interview. “(Tan) said, ‘You have a deal.’ I said, ‘S—, I should have asked for more.’”

Republicans have held off from criticizing Trump’s stake in Intel, with most saying they simply prefer the government to minimize its role in the economy to avoid playing favorites.

In June, Republican Sen. Jon Husted of Ohio introduced a bill that would establish “an orderly process” for the U.S. to sell off its Trump-era private sector investments within eight years.

“Currently, there is no requirement for the federal government to sell its ownership stakes in private companies once those investments have served their purpose,” Husted said in a statement. “Without clear guardrails, future administrations could use taxpayer-funded investments to influence private companies and advance political agendas.”

Mark Zuckerberg committed to that promise in an essay published August 10, without saying what “free” covers, when it starts or what the paid tier costs. The Meta founder and CEO does say his eight-year-old daughter can already code her ideas and produce videos in an evening, work “that would have either taken me months or been impossible previously”.

He wrote this in a section of the essay arguing that AI tools now give everyone what he calls ”invention superpowers.” The same section mentions Meta researchers are using these tools to design materials for augmented reality glasses.

Although deeper in the essay, Meta clarifies that even though the free versions of its AI will reach billions of people, anybody who wants more computing power than the free tier allows will need to purchase that through a “dynamic auction.”

Free for billions, an auction for everyone else

In his essay, Zuckerberg describes an AI agent that works around the clock on your health, career, finances and household. In fact, Zuckerberg’s own agent tracks his sleep and gives him feedback while he trains. He also promises a tutor with a doctorate in every subject, pitched at students whose parents can’t currently afford extra help.

Meta mentions that the auction guarantees the lowest possible price for the computing you use, adding that the auction sends capacity to whatever people collectively want most, which means that when a lot of people want computing power at once, the price everyone pays goes up.

However, the essay lists no rates, no start date and no usage limits. Meanwhile, Meta already charges for computing power. In July, the company opened a paid developer API for Muse Spark, its coding model.

Meta’s Hyperion data center

Zuckerberg writes in the essay that Meta will start releasing open-source models again soon.

In April, the company released Muse Spark as its first closed, proprietary model after three years of giving away its Llama models for free download. The essay describes Meta Superintelligence Labs as newly up and running. Zuckerberg announced the unit in June 2025.

The essay also shows how Meta builds its own power generation wherever it invests, so its data centers don’t use electricity that would have gone to local homes. In Richland Parish, Louisiana, where Meta is building its Hyperion data center, the utility Entergy asked state regulators in March for permission to build seven more gas plants, along with solar and battery storage, to supply the site.

Consumer groups told regulators that demand on that scale could raise rates for ordinary Louisiana customers, and Gov. Jeff Landry said in June he had ordered new rules drafted for future data center projects.

Louisiana teachers got $50,935 bonuses

The essay cites Richland Parish as proof that communities benefit. Certified school employees there received bonuses of $50,935 this year, up from $10,200 the year before, and support staff received $17,472, up from $3,323, Superintendent Sheldon Jones told The Shreveport-Bossier City Advocate. The money comes from sales tax collected on construction of the site, and Jones said he expects bonuses at that level to last as long as the building work does.

Meta pays the parish under a negotiated payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement, and its equipment purchases are exempt from state and local sales taxes under a break estimated at $3.3 billion over 20 years.

The essay says Jones believes the parish will become one of the nation’s best school districts. In Meta’s press release from July, Jones said it will be one of the best in the region.

What you can do now

As of now, there’s not much you can do because you can’t sign up for the free tier or the auction at the moment, since neither has terms, prices or a launch date. If you pay monthly for AI tools or you’re pricing tutors for your kids, there’s nothing to act on just yet.

One program that the essay mentions is running, though. America’s Workforce Academy, which Meta launched in June with $115 million for its first year, pays for tuition, airfare, lodging and a daily stipend while you train for construction and fiber technician work. The first group started in Ohio and Indiana, with Louisiana and Texas planned for this year. Graduates get jobs through Meta’s contractors after passing an application, a background check and a drug screen. Meta hasn’t said what those jobs pay.

Zuckerberg also writes that Meta will build a private mode that even Meta can’t see into, for people who might give an agent access to their financial accounts. That mode hasn’t been built yet.

Moneywise contacted Meta, Entergy Louisiana and the Richland Parish School Board with questions about the essay’s claims on pricing, open-source releases, power supply and school funding. None had responded by publication.

The 42-year-old social media founder posted his vision for the future of AI in a letter published on Meta’s website on August 10. It included a commitment to more open-source AI, government oversight and personal AI helpers for everyone.

But as opposition against data centers increases across the U.S., he also announced the launch of the Future Is For Everyone Fund, which he described as part of the “compact” between Meta and the communities where they build their AI facilities.

“Sustainable infrastructure development means that communities must benefit significantly from each project,” Zuckerberg wrote. “This includes high-paying local jobs, investment in schools and public services, ensuring energy prices don’t rise, and taking care of the environment.”

He added that tax revenue growth “also benefits teachers, law enforcement, fire departments, and more” and that the Future Is For Everyone Fund will “support each community we work in directly.”

Meta spokesperson Francis Brennan confirmed to Moneywise that the fund is worth $1 billion and “will begin working with communities to create customized investments and programs shaped by local needs,” with more details to come. To highlight Meta’s community impact, Zuckerberg pointed to the data center built in Richland Parish, Louisiana, which generated enough tax revenue to give local teachers $50,000 bonuses.

Balancing promises with economic and environmental realities

The Future Is For Everyone Fund announcement appears to be an attempt to sweeten the deal for communities pushing back against data centers, chiefly in Texas and New York.

Data Center Watch found the first quarter of this 2026 was marked with an “unprecedented surge in blocked and delayed projects” that matched “the scale of all of 2025 in just three months.” That included 75 data center projects worth $130 billion.

Meanwhile, 71% of Americans told Gallup they either somewhat or strongly oppose them, partly due to concerns over environmental damage and resulting spikes in energy bills.

Viewing the future through rose-tinted glasses?

Zuckerberg, in his letter, touted Meta data centers as keeping electricity prices down by using their own “energy-generating infrastructure” while also being “among the most water-efficient in the world” — reiterating a pledge to “restore more water than we use in the watersheds where we operate by 2030.”

Still, a 2026 congressional hearing highlighted how Morgan County, Georgia, residents endured “discolored” drinking water in their homes following construction of a nearby Meta data center, with the company denying their project led to such impacts. In Wyoming, a Meta contractor working for Fortis reportedly flushed bacteria-filled water into the sewers while constructing a new data center.

And while the teachers in Louisiana received one-time $50,000 bonuses from data center tax revenues, reporting in May revealed that Meta received $3.3 billion in tax breaks to build it.

Zuckerberg, however, envisioned a rosier future for communities that allow data centers to be built in their backyards.

“Historically, towns and cities that brought railroads, highways, electrification and broadband became centers of research, business and industry, with population and economic growth that follow,” Zuckerberg wrote. “We believe AI infrastructure can play a similar role.”

“We propose a philosophy based on individual empowerment as the source of prosperity, invention as the primary purpose of superintelligence, and balance of power as the foundation of safety,” Zuckerberg wrote in a 14-page letter titled “The Future is for Everyone: The Path to a Positive AI Future,” posted on Meta’s website.

The Meta CEO used superintelligent lawyers as an example to illustrate his argument. He claimed if one person has a superintelligent lawyer defending them in court, they’d have an unfair advantage. But Zuckerberg argues that if everyone had a superintelligent lawyer, justice would be carried out “much more fairly and efficiently than it is today.”

It’s important to note, that while AI is already being used as a source for legal advice, it cannot currently operate as an independent lawyer. In fact, a U.S. court recently ruled that legal information or questions entered into an AI product is not privileged like it would be with a real lawyer, and can actually be discovered and used as evidence.

Zuckerberg’s example would require that ruling to change and assumes a future where AI can not only surpass human lawyers, but also legally protect and represent clients in court.

Still, Zuckerberg uses the same logic to explain the benefit of superintelligent AI across industries. If only one business had superintelligence, they would outcompete all the others. If all businesses could get their hands on it, he says it would push innovation and stimulate the economy.

Similarly, one person with cybersecurity superintelligence could be a threat. But if everyone had it, it would make the world more secure because the technology would help update and protect every cybersecurity system.

“When people are empowered, they naturally compete and check each other economically, socially, politically, and in all other planes of human interaction,” Zuckerberg wrote. “People also check and balance the power of institutions including businesses and governments.”

The future of superintelligence

Artificial superintelligence (ASI) refers to a hypothetical form of artificial intelligence that would surpass humans across virtually all intellectual tasks.

According to IBM, the concept differs from the AI available today, which is often described as artificial narrow intelligence (ANI). Current AI systems excel at specific tasks and learn through pre-programmed algorithms and data. They require human intervention to operate.

ASI, by contrast, would hypothetically be able to learn and apply problem-solving as broadly and flexibly as humans can, and would be capable of cross-domain learning and reasoning.

That level of AI power has yet to be achieved — but concern over the technology and the impact it will have is already present. It’s not surprising given the disruptive power AI has already had. Meta itself laid off nearly 10% of its workforce in May amid a shift towards agentic AI. Other tech companies, like Microsoft and Amazon, have laid off thousands of workers, citing shifts to AI.

Meta’s AI defense

Ironically, Zuckerberg’s latest defense of superintelligent AI is, in part, a response to what he describes as the “doom” perspective surrounding AI.

“I do not understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity’s relevance would rush to build that future,” Zuckerberg wrote.

Rather than focusing primarily on automation, the Meta CEO argues that superintelligence should be used as a tool for invention and innovation. If everyone has access to superintelligence, he said, it will help more people create new products, businesses and services, allowing for the creation of new jobs.

A central part of his argument is that access must be broad and affordable. Meta says it plans to offer free versions of its eventual personal superintelligence, while users who want additional computing power could pay for greater capacity.

For now, Zuckerberg’s vision remains just that — a vision. Artificial superintelligence has not been achieved, and the idea of giving everyone access to AI that surpasses humans across virtually every intellectual task remains hypothetical.

She lost $25,000. And she never missed jury duty at all.

The ploy to gain crypto ATM deposits

The scheme began at 10:43 a.m. on a Tuesday, according to the Wall Street Journal, when an unknown number called her newly arrived refurbished phone. A caller claiming to be from Pasco County said an angry federal judge had issued a warrant for her arrest after she allegedly failed to appear for jury duty. The scammers knew her parents had retired from the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Department.

They offered her a deal: pay bail, confirm her signature didn’t match the document’s and get a full refund. One condition — a supposed gag order meant she couldn’t tell anyone.

“They had me scared,” Fudge told the Journal. “They knew my Social Security number. They knew how much I had in my bank account. They had every single thing about me.”

A team of five or more fraudsters, all speaking with convincing Florida accents, kept her on the phone as she drove to a convenience store with abandoned gas pumps and a cryptocurrency machine. She hesitated, then went back in when the “officer’s” friendly tone disappeared and he reminded her that deputies were two blocks away.

By 6:30 p.m., Fudge had deposited multiple payments totaling $25,000, including a $5,000 credit card cash advance and $3,000 transferred from her husband Jonathan after she texted him — on the scammers’ instruction — asking for money, no questions asked.

Jonathan sent the money without question — but when she asked for more, something didn’t feel right. He asked ChatGPT why his wife might need money urgently “no questions asked.” The chatbot listed several benign reasons, but also flagged it as a possible scam. He called 911. Kimberly walked through their front door at 8:28 p.m., exhausted and sobbing, but safe.

A surge in jury-duty scams and impostor fraud broadly

The jury-duty scam has been rampant in the Tampa area specifically. Just the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office received 44 reports of it so far this year, up from 25 for all of 2025, Sgt. Andrew Miller, head of the economic-crimes unit, told the Journal.

And the broader trend is alarming. According to the FTC, Americans lost $3.5 billion to impostor scams in 2025 — nearly triple the 2020 figure — with government impostor scams accounting for approximately $920 million of that total, up from $789 million the prior year.

Why these scams work, and how to protect yourself

Cybersecurity experts noted in the Journal explain that so-called “panic scams” work by triggering stress responses that put victims into fight-or-flight mode, skewing rational judgment. Scammers apply authority, urgency and relentless pressure. As Sgt. Miller observed, “The second that they get off the phone is the second they start thinking on their own.”

In Fudge’s case, experts say the refurbished phone probably arrived pre-loaded with spyware — explaining how the scammers could see her financial information, as well as her location, texts and internet searches in real time. The fix, they say, is simple: always restore factory settings on a refurbished device before use.

According to the FTC’s consumer guidance on jury duty scams, courts never ask you to pay over the phone, nor do they ever ask for sensitive information like your Social Security number or date of birth by phone.

So, if you receive a call like this, hang up immediately. Don’t pay, don’t give personal information and don’t call back any number they provide. If you think the call could be real, look up the court’s website or call the clerk’s office directly at a number you find independently. Then, report the scam to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

The FTC’s broader impostor scam guidance also states to never transfer money, send cryptocurrency, or move funds to “protect” them in response to an unexpected call — anyone asking you to do so is a scammer.

The agricultural giant’s recalled products include several salsa and guacamole prepackaged items, spiced cheese dips and diced jalapeños. Many of those were sold nationally in stores including Walmart, Target, Kroger and Whole Foods. The products were available, collectively, across 26 states.

The company said it has not received any reports of illnesses linked to the products being recalled.

Source identified

The Food and Drug Administration has linked the jalapeños causing the salmonella outbreak to a farmer in Sinaloa, Mexico that supplies to Coast Citrus Distributors. Taylor Fresh Foods, the division that made the products being recalled, said in a statement it no longer sources products from that farmer.

The recalled products were distributed to distribution centers in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin and West Virginia.

Taylor Farms isn’t the only company affected by this recall. Chipotle and Qdoba also received products imported from Coast Citrus Distributors and both have since switched their supplier and are no longer serving the product. The FDA says there is no risk to consumers at these restaurants.

People infected with salmonella can expect symptoms that include diarrhea, abdominal cramps and fever beginning six hours after consumption. The illness can stretch from four to seven days, but most patients recover without needing medical treatment. Children younger than five, adults 65 and older and people with weakened immune systems are more likely to have severe illness.

Taylor Farms has already had its lettuce products linked to the cyclospora (”explosive diarrhea”) outbreak. Last month, the company recalled all iceberg lettuce grown in central Mexico that was identified as the potential source of one of the recent cyclospora outbreaks.

What’s been recalled?

Here’s a list of the products that are included in the recent salmonella recall, broken down by the retailer where they were sold:

Hannaford

• Diced Jalapeños, 3.75 oz. — UPC 030223082712 — best if used by Aug. 7-14 — Maine, New York
• Rice and Bean Burrito, 12.5 oz. — UPC 030223082736 — best if used by Aug. 7-11 — Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont

Hannaford and Stop & Shop

• Pico de Gallo Salsa, 7 oz. — UPC 688267575778 — best if used by Aug. 7-14 — Massachusetts, Maine, New York

Kroger

• Private Selection Spicy Roast Beef Sandwich, 8.53 oz. — UPC 011110678171 — best if used by Aug. 7-12 — Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas
• Spicy Jarlsberg Dip, 10 oz. — UPC 030223114826 — best if used by Aug. 7-15 — Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, West Virginia
• Spicy Pimento Cheese Dip, 10 oz. — UPC 030223116448 — best if used by Aug. 7-15 — Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, West Virginia

Target

• Taco Dip, 20 oz. — UPC 030223073581 — best if used by Aug. 12-13 — Florida, Ohio, Texas
• Mango Pico de Gallo, 11 oz. — UPC 030223073543 — best if used by Aug. 8-13 — Ohio, Texas
• Spicy Guacamole, 13 oz. — UPC 030223073574 — best if used by Aug. 7-13 — Ohio, Texas
• Taylor Farms Pico de Gallo, 16 oz. — UPC 030223073536 — best if used by Aug. 7-14 — Texas
• Taylor Farms Authentic Guacamole, 13 oz. — UPC 030223073567 — best if used by Aug. 7-12 — Texas

Trader Joe’s

• Fiesta Style Salad with Shrimp, 11.11 oz. — UPC 000000818377 — best if used by Aug. 7-12 — Texas

Walmart

• Freshness Guaranteed Hot Pico de Gallo, 10 oz. — UPC 681131276351 — best if used by Aug. 8-16 — Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wisconsin
• Freshness Guaranteed Mild Pico de Gallo, 10 oz. — UPC 681131276344 — best if used by Aug. 8-16 — Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin

Whole Foods

• Salsa Fresca Medium, 12 oz. — UPC 030223075080 — best if used by Aug. 7-16 — Illinois, Texas
• Pico de Gallo Mild, 10 oz. — UPC 030223075097 — best if used by Aug. 7-16 — Illinois, Texas
• Pico de Gallo Spicy, 10 oz. — UPC 030223075608 — best if used by Aug. 7-16 — Illinois, Texas
• Salsa Verde Mild, 12 oz. — UPC 030223075639 — best if used by Aug. 7-16 — Illinois, Texas
• Salsa Roja Medium, 12 oz. — UPC 030223075646 — best if used by Aug. 7-16 — Illinois, Texas
• Pineapple Mango Salsa Mild, 10 oz. — UPC 030223075653 — best if used by Aug. 7-14 — Illinois, Texas

Deloitte’s Art and Finance Report says that roughly $1 trillion of art is expected to change hands in the next 10 years.

Another study by Art Basel and UBS on global collecting found that Boomers favor art far more than the generations that followed. Boomers lead in average spending on fine art and antiques, while younger generations favor purchasing digital art and film and video.

The problem for Boomers? Their kins are feeling overwhelmed by the task of managing these collections. As Philip Hoffman, chairman and founder of the Fine Art Group, which advises families on their collections, told Bloomberg: “the next gen don’t want it.”

It’s nothing but a hassle

In the Bloomberg article, Felix Salmon writes that his wife —who is one of artist David A. Vaughan’s grandchildren — expects to receive some of the remaining works of Vaughan’s collection when Vaughan’s own children pass.

After his death in 1975, his children, Sue and David inherited most of his postwar art and kept the collection largely intact. One piece was donated to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art in 2011 and a few paintings were gifted to extended family members.

Salmon writes that both his wife and her sibling “have little ability to look after the remaining works [...] and are struggling to work out what to do with it.”

The Vaughans are certainly not alone in this, as many younger generations inheriting works of art struggle with what to do with it all. This is not only due to the art world changing, but to the many costs associated with managing large art collections.

Navigating an article collection inheritance

Inheriting an art collection can cost you both time and money.

Hoffman of the Fine Art Group told Bloomberg that “selling is quite easy for the 0.1%, who might inherit an art collection worth $100 million or more,” explaining that the big auction houses will keep the ultrarich “very well looked after.”

That being said, not every collection falls into this category. Some auction houses may show interest in a couple pieces from a collection, but they won’t fight for them unless they’re worth millions. In this case, inheritors might consider seeking out smaller auction houses or professional liquidators to help them sell the pieces they don’t want to keep.

How long that process will take is hard to pin down, and the effort required may lead people to opt to disregard the monetary value of a collection and simply find a museum to donate it to, and at least benefit from the tax deduction. But with nearly every major museum having more art than it can display, they don’t always want to take new pieces.

While trying to rehome art, the cost of storing it also adds up. The exact cost will depend on the value and size of the art, as well as if you choose to store it in a basic storage facility or in a climate-controlled environment, which is advised for maintaining quality.

If you also opt to insure the collection “a piece appraised at $100,000 will cost between $1,000 to $2,000” per year, according to Beacon Hill Private Wealth,

Times are changing

As with every generation, art tastes are evolving and this can add a layer of difficulty to finding buyers for art works that used to be all the rage, but maybe aren’t anymore. Similarly, the generations inheriting these works might feel less inclined to keep and hang them on their own walls, as they don’t fit the modern aesthetic of their homes.

If the next generation doesn’t want their parents’ art collections or the hassle that comes with managing it, what do they want? The short answer is future financial stability.

A 2024 study from Northwestern Mutual found that 46% of Gen X, 59% of millennials and 54% of Gen Z believe that the inheritance they are expecting is crucial to their retirement and long-term financial security. While it is possible that inheritors could make money off an art collection, it’s no guarantee. And with them so heavily relying on an inheritance to fund their future, they might just rather have the cash in their pockets.

Take the example of Sarah, whose mother — the oldest of two siblings — inherited the family home when Sarah’s grandparents passed away. Later, when Sarah’s mother, who was divorced, passed away from a sudden illness, the family home passed to Sarah’s only aunt.

Her aunt had never married or had children. So, while Sarah wouldn’t describe their relationship as close, she lived nearby and helped out when her ailing aunt became less mobile.

It was only after her aunt passed away and the will was read that the remaining cousins discovered their aunt had left the house to a cousin, Michael, who had moved abroad decades ago. Michael rarely returned to the U.S. and, from Sarah’s point of view, did nothing to support her aunt during those final months.

Now Sarah is shocked and disappointed. She thought she’d inherit the house that her mother grew up in. Now she’s wondering if she has any recourse, or if she just has to accept the fact that her cousin is likely to sell the family home.

Contesting a will

Disputes over an inheritance — especially a family home — can create an immense amount of stress for family members. In many cases, it’s not just about money. One family member might have a strong emotional connection to the family home, while another might just want to cash out.

And when a sibling — or, in this case, a cousin — feels the inheritance is unfair, it can cause irreparable damage to family relationships.

It’s not uncommon for a sibling or relative (or even a close friend) to serve as a primary caregiver to a loved one and expect that their contributions will be later reflected in the inheritance. That’s especially the case when other family members don’t contribute as much (or at all) to that person’s care.

However, to contest a will, you need a legal standing, such as proof of mental incapacity (where the owner of the will, or testator, didn’t understand what they were signing), undue influence (where the testator was pressured or tricked into changing the will) or fraud. If the will wasn’t properly executed — say, it wasn’t witnessed according to local rules — then it could also be contested.

If the testator had a previous will that left you an inheritance, but a newer will cuts you out, then you may be able to contest it in court.

But simply believing that you should have inherited something, or that the distribution is unfair, isn’t likely to stand up in court.

You also have to be a legal heir or prior beneficiary to contest a will. So, for example, a close friend who served as a caretaker and was never named in the will (or any prior versions) wouldn’t be considered a beneficiary.

Whatever the case, contesting a will is a time-consuming and emotionally draining process that could drag on for years. It’s also a costly one — and legal fees could end up whittling away your inheritance.

Plus, if the will has a no-contest clause, it means that if any beneficiary challenges the will and that challenge fails, they forfeit their entire inheritance.

If you’re considering contesting a will, it’s advisable to work with a probate attorney who can advise you on the strength of your case. Before it gets to that point, however, there are a few other options to consider.

Resolving inheritance disputes

If you have assets you are passing down, you can nip inheritance stressors in the bud by talking about them with family members before you’re gone. It might be an uncomfortable conversation, but it could save your loved ones both emotional and financial stress later on.

For example, Sarah’s aunt could have talked to her nieces and nephews about who she was leaving the house to and why.

If you’re uncomfortable having this conversation, you could call a family meeting (in person or virtual) — or speak with each beneficiary separately, with your lawyer, estate planner or financial advisor present to provide some structure to the conversation.

But most families don’t have this conversation.

Fidelity Investment’s latest Family & Finance study found that while 97% of families recognize the importance of discussing their estate plans, only about half (52%) have actually done so. And nearly half haven’t told their adult children what — if anything — they’re inheriting.

That could leave their adult children blindsided when the will is read — say, if they don’t inherit what they expect to, or if their inheritance is eaten up by the estate to pay off their parents’ debts.

While Sarah may not have been happy about it, knowing that she wouldn’t inherit her mother’s childhood home before her aunt passed away would have helped to temper her expectations. And she might have had a better understanding of why her aunt made that decision in the first place.

For example, Sarah is assuming her cousin did nothing for their aunt, but maybe it turns out that he had been supporting her financially for years, sending money from abroad.

At the same time, her cousin may not have known he’s inheriting a house and, since he lives abroad, it might actually be a huge hassle for him. Knowing in advance could have helped him prepare.

For Sarah, too, a conversation could help — before jumping head-first into a legal battle. If Sarah doesn’t feel comfortable broaching the topic directly with her cousin, she could suggest mediation — a voluntary process with a neutral third party who facilitates a discussion to work out a mutually acceptable (and legally binding) solution.

Mediation is much less expensive than going to court, but it also allows for more creative solutions.

For example, Sarah might be able to arrange a buy-out or private transfer of the house if her cousin doesn’t want the hassle of dealing with it from abroad. Maybe they decide to rent out the house, with Sarah handling the details from her end, and the two cousins split the rent.

On the other hand, Sarah may simply have to accept that she won’t get what she wants — and that her aunt may have had her reasons.

A 26-year-old with $45,000 in debt recently took to Reddit for advice. In the post, the Reddit user laid out their situation. They owe roughly $25,000 in credit card debt and $20,000 on a car that they purchased in 2024. The total monthly payment on the car is $635.

“I went through a massive breakup after moving to a HCOL [high cost of living] area, went through several layoffs, and my spending got out of control while trying to cope with all of the sudden life changes,” they wrote.

All of their credit cards are locked, but they remain unemployed for another month until they start a new job. After taxes, net monthly income will be about $5,000. The job also comes with a $7,000 quarterly bonus that looks pretty attainable, according to the post.

As far as expenses, monthly necessities come out to $2,200 per month before debt payments. They live in a studio apartment. Not to mention, a large portion of weekly meals are covered while they travel for work up to four days a week.

An $800 entertainment budget

This all should go a long way in helping them pay off their debt if the income is managed correctly. However, commenters on the post took issue with one budget line item in particular: an $800 entertainment budget.

“You’re not going to be doing any entertainment till the stuff’s paid off, get your head out of the clouds,” one person wrote.

Another commented, “$800/month on entertainment while you have almost 50k of debt seems excessive.”

For their part, the creator of the post said that after all expenses, they will be left with $2,000 to allocate towards the debt every month, not counting the aforementioned quarterly bonus. They would also be willing to sell their car. They want to at least pay off their credit card debt over the next year because of the high interest rates.

“I’m truly just looking for financial freedom and if it means I have to sell a car I’m not driving for half of the month anyways then it’s whatever I guess,” they said.

Moneywise reached out for comment, but did not hear back in time for publication.

How experts say you should pay down debt

There are a few ways many experts generally recommend paying off consumer debt.

The first is the avalanche method. This entails tackling your highest interest debt first, likely your credit cards, in order to save the most amount of money over time in interest.

There’s also the snowball method, in which you pay off the debt with the smallest balance first to give yourself some early wins and, in turn, feel like you are making real progress on what you owe.

Before deciding which of these approaches to take, personal finance expert Ramit Sehi says you should call up your lender and ask them to lower your annual percentage rate (APR).

Experts also recommend taking out a consolidation loan, if you qualify. This has two benefits. First, it simplifies payments by allowing you to pay one creditor instead of spreading out payments across multiple lenders. Consolidation loans also offer lower interest rates than credit cards.

Once you get out of debt, hunker down on building an emergency fund, which you can turn to in the event of a catastrophe and avoid getting back into debt.

That’s the takeaway from Boston-based Simon-Kucher, a global consulting firm. The study’s analysts note younger U.S. adults are trading long-term financial hallmarks like homeownership and retirement for personal values that favor flexibility, stability and enjoying life one day at a time.

As usual, money, or the lack of it, is driving the “here and now” trend for 20- and 30-something Americans.

“The American Dream is still alive, but traditional signs of success, like pensions and wealth, are less relevant today because of macroeconomic pressures,” said Shikha Jain, Head of Consumer Coverage in North America at Simon-Kucher, in a statement. “Today, Americans are defining success on their own terms, focusing on making life work and finding a sense of normalcy. That means spending on daily needs, seeking out personal and meaningful experiences, and taking on debt to get by.”

3 big takeaways from the study

The study data seems to back up changing perceptions from younger Americans on what the American Dream means to them and why they’re recalibrating lifestyle timelines. These issues are driving that trend, experts say.

1. Unlike the Baby Boomers, younger Americans are living for the moment.

According to Simon-Kucher, 62% of study participants say owning a home and saving for retirement is “more challenging,” while 51% of Gen Z say they’ve pushed aside saving for a home and instead favor focusing on “quality of life today.”

“These consumer shifts are not temporary,” Jain said. “They reflect a reset in how Americans view success and consumption.”

A separate 2026 study from Chicago-based Beyond Finance, a debt consolidation advisory company, stated that only 32% of millennials and Gen Z say the traditional American Dream is no longer in reach. Perhaps more alarmingly, 57% of respondents said younger U.S. adults are set up for financial failure.

“Many people have lost trust in a system that was supposed to work for them, and with it, they’ve lost trust in themselves and their sense of what’s possible,” Dr. Erika Rasure, Chief Financial Wellness Advisor at Beyond Finance, told Moneywise. “The reality is, financial conditions have changed faster than the rules.”

2. For younger adults, the financial pressures are heavy and viewed as permanent.

As the data from both studies attests, younger Americans are redefining success because of changing values and economic necessity, which may carry more weight.

“Economic disruption accelerated a values shift that was already emerging,” Chikara Kennedy, Founder and CEO of Power Coaching & Consulting, told Moneywise.

Kennedy, a former human resources director at Meta, has had a front-row view of how younger Americans are handling housing affordability, inflation, and student debt.

“Those issues and repeated waves of layoffs have forced many millennials and Gen Z professionals to question long-held assumptions about what success should look like,” she noted.

Increasingly, the “live for now” mindset is setting in like cement in the minds of millennials and Gen Z.

“Even if housing became significantly more affordable, many younger professionals wouldn’t willingly return to careers or lifestyles that sacrifice flexibility, purpose, and well-being,” Kennedy noted. “The pandemic and large-scale layoffs permanently changed how people evaluate work, identity, and success.”

3. The “golden years” aren’t a lock anymore

The mindset that you shouldn’t have to wait until retirement to enjoy life is also driving a new outlook by younger career professionals.

“Millennials still want to own homes, and we still care about building wealth and creating financial security,” Katie Cline, a hospitality industry veteran and the host of two podcasts — “Second Home First” and “Suite Success: Masters of Hospitality,” told Moneywise. “But I think we’re questioning the idea that success has to come in one specific order.”

A millennial, herself, Cline believes from caring for her mother who’s suffering from Alzheimer’s, that the “golden years” aren’t guaranteed.

“So much of the traditional financial advice is centered around sacrificing today for a future that none of us are promised,” she said. “Just like the Simon-Kuchar study states, we’re allowed to define success on our own terms.”

To millennials and Gen Z, home really is where the heart is

As defined by home-ownership, long a cornerstone of U.S. culture, the American Dream hasn’t collapsed, but its tenets have shifted significantly among younger people.

“The American Dream is alive and well, but what’s changing now is how people get there,” Ginger Wilcox, President of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate, told Moneywise.

Millennials and Gen Z have increasingly grown up in a world where careers are less linear, remote work is common, and people expect to change jobs, cities and even lifestyles several times over the course of their lives, Wilcox noted.

“Now it’s natural that flexibility has become more important,” she said.

Simultaneously, it’s difficult to separate lifestyle priorities from today’s economic realities.

“Housing affordability, student debt and inflation have changed the financial equation for many young adults,” Wilcox said. “The typical first-time homebuyer is now 40 years old, a record high according to the National Association of Realtors, which illustrates just how much longer it can take to reach that milestone.”

Wilcox also noted that she’s seeing homebuyers become more creative in how they achieve homeownership.

“Multi-generational purchases and co-ownership arrangements with family members or friends are becoming more common as buyers look for ways to make homeownership more attainable while sharing both costs and the long-term benefits of ownership,” she noted.

While homeownership is still an important goal for many young Americans, buyers are taking a longer, more personal path to get there.

“Now, they’re looking for homes that will support them along the way,” Wilcox added.

More and more employers are leaning on artificial intelligence to help them sift through mountains of resumes. According to a 2025 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management, about 51% of organizations use AI to support recruiting.

But it seems that some job seekers are finding ways to fight back.

Recruiters and career coaches on TikTok have been exposing a tactic known as “prompt injection,” where applicants hide invisible instructions inside their resumes to try to influence AI screening tools. One recruiter, @therealestrecruiter, says it could “create chaos for hiring teams.”

Another online recruiter said to “take note of these applicants,” noting the ingenuity behind the thinking, especially for employers seeking to fill tech or innovation roles.

So what is prompt injection, and why does it matter?

An increasingly automated job search

Tailoring a resume to match the keywords in a job posting? That’s old news.

With prompt injection, job seekers are hiding instructions from human eyes by using strategies including white or otherwise concealed text, but the prompts are still readable to AI processing the document. The goal is to get the AI to rank the candidate more favorably, recommend them for the next stage or simply move them forward in the process.

Researchers at Duke University recently analyzed roughly 200,000 real-world resumes and found that at least 1% contained prompt injections intended to manipulate AI-based screening systems. The researchers also found that the techniques are becoming more sophisticated, with many of the prompts avoiding obvious commands like “hire me.”

So is it effective? A 2026 study published by the Association for Computational Linguistics tested whether prompt injection could actually affect a candidate’s ranking. The researchers found that it could, especially when relatively few applicants were using the tactic. But once more applicants use it, the effectiveness of the strategy weakens.

Employers are using AI to help sort applications, summarize resumes, compare candidates and identify people who may be worth moving forward. And strategies such as prompt injection create an interesting dilemma for employers: the people being evaluated are learning how to evaluate the evaluator.

The backlash against AI hiring

If you’re job hunting in a brutal market, slipping hidden instructions into your resume might sound like a clever way to beat the system, but it could be a risky gamble. If an employer discovers that a candidate deliberately tried to trick an AI screening system, it could be viewed as negative manipulation.

And the trick may have a short shelf life.

Employers and researchers are already working on ways to spot resume-based prompt injection.

Popular job platform Indeed has publicly shared how it detects and defends against attempts to manipulate AI systems through resumes, and they say they have come across resumes containing hidden instructions. The company says it has introduced safeguards designed to identify suspicious content.

Academic researchers are tackling the problem, too. A 2026 study shared at ACL Industry Track examined ways to detect resume-based prompt injection attacks at scale, and emphasized how the issue is moving from an internet hack into a real AI-security problem for hiring.

It’s a growing tug-of-war between job seekers and the technology that stands between them and a human recruiter.

In a 2023 testimony to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ReNika Moore, the Director of the Racial Justice Program at the American Civil Liberties Union and former Labor Bureau Chief of the New York Office of the Attorney, warned about discrimination in applicant-tracking systems and automated resume screening saying,

“Often, these automated screening tools create rigid rules for highly specific certifications, credentials or particular descriptions of job experience, or screen for gaps in work history of more than six months, which can weed out qualified candidates that a human reviewer may have otherwise interviewed or hired and disproportionately create barriers for people with protected characteristics, such as pregnancy or a disability.”

AI can help recruiters sift through enormous applicant pools faster, but hiring systems also should be able to distinguish between a candidate’s actual qualifications and any instructions designed to influence the machine evaluating them.

The response to this recent job search tactic could involve a mix of stronger AI safeguards and additional assessments later in the hiring process to make sure that candidates actually have the skills that they claim to have. In the meantime, prompt injection could be an opportunity for employers to re-evaluate their hiring practices and consider how to maintain a balance between technology assistance and human oversight.

Yet that’s what they’re getting anyway, according to a new study.

In late July, the Washington, D.C.-based Consumer Policy Center released a report noting that so-called “junk fees” are rampant in real estate markets. In total, real estate junk fees cost American consumers about $2 billion annually — or between $400 to $2,500 for buyers and sellers alike. Worse yet, these fees are sometimes sprung on unsuspecting buyers and sellers during closing or shortly before contracts hit the table.

“It is difficult for brokers to justify charging a buyer or seller an admin fee when they are also charging them a 3% commission,” noted Stephen Brobeck, a CPC senior fellow, in a statement.

And not everyone is equally impacted, Brobeck goes on to note. “Because the fees are regressive, sometimes effectively increasing the commission rate by over half a percentage point, they hit first-time homebuyers especially hard.”

Even real estate agents are pushing back now

By and large, junk fees can be split into two piles: title, appraisal, recording, and HOA transfer are real third-party costs with a vendor behind each one.

“The fee people mean when they say ‘junk’ is the brokerage’s own admin or transaction or compliance charge, usually a few hundred dollars, that doesn’t buy the client anything they can point to,” Justin Black, a real estate advisor with LIV Sotheby’s International Realty in Breckenridge, Col., told Moneywise. “Keep the two piles separate and the whole question gets clearer.”

Part of the accountability for disclosing these fees comes down to the professionals consumers are working with, says the CPC. Finding out too late about these fees puts pressure on the consumer to forge ahead with the sale regardless.

“It appears that in the early stages of the sale, a number of agents are not informing, either verbally or in writing, the imposition of these junk fees,” said Wendy Gilch, a CPC fellow, in a statement. “When a consumer learns about the junk fee at a closing, they are under great pressure to approve it,” she added.

But even real estate professionals are unhappy with the number of these fees consumers are facing. And increasingly, they’re fighting back, with one “failure to disclose” lawsuit recently filed in Florida against Compass Realty, where two homebuyers sued over an undisclosed $475 flat transaction fee charged at closing.

“It annoys me when real estate brokerages charge surprise junk fees,” Daniel Amodeo, president of Boston-based Amo Realty, told Moneywise.

If a brokerage clearly discloses every fee upfront, that’s one thing, Amodeo noted. “What bothers me is when buyers or sellers first discover an administrative or transaction fee on the settlement statement after they’re already committed to the purchase,” he said.

“Consumers deserve to know every cost before they make one of the biggest financial decisions of their lives.”

How to push back on junk fees yourself

Learning what fees are legitimate and what ones are not can help bolster your argument.

“Some fees are legitimate, where the third-party costs are real, and buyers should expect them. “The flat brokerage admin fee is the one worth questioning,” Black said. “If nobody at the brokerage can tell you what service it pays for, that is your answer. It is a revenue line, and the client got nothing for it.”

Any fee disclosure should also happen when you sign, not at the closing table. “Since the commission settlement, buyers sign a representation agreement up front, and any brokerage fee belongs in that conversation, in writing, before you are attached to a house,” Black noted.

If a fee shows up late, ask what it covers and ask for it in writing. “You have more room to push back than most people assume, because nothing is final until you have signed off on it,” Black said.

Real estate professionals say they expect the junk fee trend to dissipate, thanks to inside industry pressure, and gradually move toward plain, upfront disclosure, and competition will do more of that work than regulation.

Your best move with junk fees? Ask your agent to waive it or absorb it, and ask them to walk you through every line of your closing statement.

“When agents cover the fee themselves, or move to a brokerage that does not charge one, the industry is admitting it is not a real cost of doing the work,” Black added. “So treat it as negotiable.”

But what happens if someone finds a slot machine in an unexpected place and hits a big jackpot?

Let’s pretend, for example, that Kelly had an antique slot machine in her home that she inherited from her grandmother. She had a house party, and Ted, who was a friend-of-a-friend, came over and started putting quarters into her machine uninvited.

Kelly’s slot machine had been there for a while, but when Ted was playing, it did something it had never done before. Ted “won” the jackpot, which was $700, and the machine started spitting out quarters as Ted began stuffing in his pockets.

The only problem is, Kelly never intended for anyone to actually win. She’d handed out quarters over the years and let friends keep the few dollars that came out if they won. But it never occurred to her that $700 might come spilling out of the slot machine. And at that moment, she felt that if Ted took the jackpot winnings home, he’d actually be stealing her funds. Kelly and her friends made Ted leave without his winnings, but now Ted’s threatening to sue her for the cash.

Does Ted have a case in this situation, and should Kelly pay up?

Did Kelly violate a contract with Ted by not paying?

Figuring out whether Ted should get the funds or not can be a little complicated.

Ted’s strongest argument may be that he had a “contract” with Kelly because she made an “offer” that if he put in a quarter, he could keep his winnings. If that’s the case, then when Ted put in the quarter, he accepted her offer through performance, thus creating a unilateral contract.

Courts have, in the past, held that “an offer to award a prize in a contest will result in an enforceable contract if the offer is properly accepted by the rendition of the requested performance.” In other words, if you say “do this to enter a contest,” and another person does, then you’ve created a contract you must perform by providing the prize.

So it’s possible that Ted could argue:

• The presence of the slot machine was an offer to enter into a contest
• He accepted the offer by putting in his quarter
• His quarter was consideration (or a thing of value required to create a valid contract)
• He fulfilled the requirement to earn the prize, so he gets to keep the winnings

His case here would likely be stronger if Kelly encouraged him to play, or expressly told him he could keep any money he won. However, he could still argue that the presence of the slot machine was the offer, especially if he knew that Kelly had paid out smaller prizes in the past.

Of course, the court would consider all of the surrounding circumstances in determining if a valid contract was created. So Ted’s case would hinge on the court believing that the mere presence of a novelty slot machine constituted a binding offer to pay someone a big jackpot if they won the prize.

Illegal gambling may make Ted’s case hard to win

Ted also has another big challenge he’d have to overcome to win his case.

The issue is that federal law and many state laws prohibit illegal gambling, and the definition of illegal gambling typically includes maintaining a slot machine. Since Kelly didn’t have a gaming license, Ted would essentially need to argue that the court should enforce an unlawful gaming agreement.

Unfortunately for Ted, contracts that violate public policy or criminal statutes are generally not enforceable. This could make the court even more reluctant to find that there’s a valid agreement between Kelly and Ted that requires her to pay up.

Ultimately, Ted could sue in small claims court if he wanted, but his case may be difficult to win, and he may be better off keeping whatever quarters he happened to take with him and moving on with his life.

And for her part, Kelly may want to warn guests in the future that the machine is just for fun, both to avoid a situation like this in the future and to avoid criminal penalties for running an illegal gambling operation out of her home.

Before you think who in their right mind would, consider that it was just last month that fans paid up to $100 for art made from trash found at Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s wedding in New York City.

According to a YouTube Short posted by Got Sole — a nationwide sneaker and collectibles convention — a collector turned down $100,000 for a piece of paper that NBA superstar Lebron James threw away in high school back in 1999. The sheet of paper has multiple signatures on it from when James practiced how he would sign autographs.

“The story, as it was told to us, was LeBron was trying out his autographs in high school, threw the piece of paper away, and a teacher retrieved it out of the trash can, she adhered it and hung it up on her wall,” the current owner said.

The unnamed collector got his hands on the historic piece of sports memorabilia after buying it a while back from a high-end collector, he said.

What Lebron thinks of the piece

The current owner was able to show James the framed sheet of paper, he told Got Sole. In the same YouTube short, the video post cuts to James confirming the authenticity of the collectible saying that he remembers those early signatures from years ago.

“How’s it compare to the new one?” the owner asked.

“Oh no, this is terrible compared to the new one,” James responded laughing.

According to the collector, James did use at least a couple of the signatures featured on the framed sheet of paper. One in high school and another during his rookie year in the NBA as a member of the Cleveland Cavaliers.

“I love this one where it says King James cuz you never see that anywhere else,” the collector said.

What’s the piece worth now?

The unnamed collector does not have a clue what his item is worth, but he says it is not for sale anyhow.

“I don’t even want to put a number on it; I have no idea,” he said. “It’s not really for sale, so that’s the great thing about it.”

While video commenters speculated as to how much the relic could cost now, it’s likely to go up in price after James retires and as the years pass.

In truth, any piece of memorabilia once belonging to James will fetch a pretty penny. On the court, he is considered to be one of the greatest basketball players of all time. His accolades include four NBA championships, four most valuable player (MVP) awards and 22 all-star game appearances.

Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.B) paid $351.81.

The Google parent had agreed the day before to sell Warren Buffett's company $10 billion of stock in a private placement — Alphabet sold the shares straight to Berkshire instead of running them through the public offering. Berkshire paid $351.81 for $5 billion of Class A shares and $348.20 for $5 billion of Class C shares, which carry no voting rights and trade a few dollars cheaper, according to Alphabet's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Public buyers in the sale running alongside it paid $355.1982 and $351.8018. The private sale closed June 4, the same day as the public one.

Berkshire had owned Alphabet since the third quarter of 2025, and Alphabet described the placement as an addition to a stake Berkshire had been building since then.

The gap is $3.39 and $3.60 a share. Across the roughly 28.6 million shares in the placement, it comes to about $100 million. That one transaction accounts for more than 40% of every dollar of stock Berkshire bought in the quarter.

What Berkshire bought in the second quarter

Berkshire's second-quarter report, filed Aug. 8, showed the company buying more stock than it sold for the first time in 14 quarters. That ended a stretch of net selling that began in the fourth quarter of 2022 and outlasted Buffett's tenure as chief executive.

Net earnings, the noisier figure, roughly doubled to $25.67 billion. Operating earnings, which strip out the paper swings in Berkshire's stock portfolio and are the figure Buffett has long told shareholders to watch, rose 16% to $12.98 billion. Share buybacks jumped to $4.53 billion from $235 million in the first quarter. The cash pile — $397.4 billion at March 31, the most it had ever held — finally fell, to $365.5 billion.

Berkshire's filing gives six-month totals rather than quarterly ones; the quarterly split works out to roughly $23.5 billion of stock bought against about $3.7 billion sold.

Profit from writing insurance policies fell 13% and income from investing premiums fell 9%.

Why Berkshire paid less than Alphabet's public investors

Alphabet paid to sell stock to the public. Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and Morgan Stanley led a group of 31 banks that took the $18 billion offering, distributed it and collected a fee. Alphabet told investors to expect about $17.8 billion left over once the banks' cut and the cost of the sale were paid, or roughly 1.1%. Public buyers had no say in the price.

Berkshire bought straight from the company. No syndicate, no fee. The discount it negotiated, 0.95% on the Class A shares and 1.02% on the Class C, runs close to what Alphabet would have paid the banks to move the same stock.

Alphabet kept about $351.25 a share from public buyers of the Class A stock and $351.81 from Berkshire. On the Class C shares it was $347.89 against $348.20. Across the 28.6 million shares in the placement, Berkshire's money was worth roughly $12 million more to Alphabet than the same shares sold to the public. Alphabet also gave Berkshire the right to resell the shares publicly later, which buyers in private deals don't automatically get.

Who made the Alphabet call, Buffett or Abel

Most early coverage of Berkshire's moves framed the quarter as Greg Abel's arrival on the battlefield. Abel, 64, took over as chief executive on Jan. 1 and spent his first quarter doing very little. That $235 million of buybacks was a rounding error against a company worth more than $1 trillion.

The biggest single item in the quarter was not his idea. Buffett, still chairman, told CNBC on July 15 that the Alphabet position was his call. "I initiated it," he said. In the same interview he returned to a regret he has aired for years, that Berkshire should have bought Google far earlier, and said he doesn't like Alphabet as much as at least four or five other businesses Berkshire already owns.

Buffett gave Abel credit elsewhere. Berkshire agreed on May 31 to buy homebuilder Taylor Morrison at $72.50 a share, or roughly $6.8 billion, and Buffett publicly praised Abel's work on that deal. It closed July 24, which puts it in the current quarter rather than the one just reported.

What Berkshire's Alphabet stake is worth now

Berkshire bought well below Alphabet's peak. The stock closed at a record $402.38 on May 13, and the $351.81 Berkshire paid three weeks later was about 12.6% under that. Alphabet's Class A shares closed at $354.30 on Aug. 7, leaving that half of the placement up 0.7%. The Class C half is further ahead.

Alphabet is now one of Berkshire's five largest stock holdings, alongside American Express, Apple, Bank of America and Coca-Cola. Together those five account for 66% of Berkshire's stock holdings, up from 65% at the end of 2025.

How much of Berkshire's cash pile is still unspent

Berkshire ended June with $365.5 billion in cash and Treasury bills. In March it had $397.4 billion, the most it had ever held. It is still holding about 92 cents of every dollar it had three months earlier.

Two things made it spend at all, and neither was a call on the stock market. Google was raising $84.75 billion to build AI capacity and sold Berkshire a $10 billion piece of it directly. The timing belonged to Alphabet. The buybacks came down to a rule: Berkshire only repurchases its own shares when it judges the price low, and its price had been falling while the rest of the market rose.

Even then it spent less than expected. Barron's had modeled $5 billion to $11 billion of repurchases for the quarter and UBS analyst Brian Meredith forecast $8.5 billion. Berkshire came in at $4.5 billion, below the bottom of that range. It also kept selling, with the filing's six-month figures implying roughly $3.7 billion of stock went out the door in the quarter.

The one thing Berkshire bought without being asked was itself, and it kept buying after the quarter ended. The filing gives no July total, but Berkshire's share count shrank enough between June 30 and July 29 to imply roughly $3.3 billion more. Buffett, who says the Google deal was his idea, has also said there are four or five businesses Berkshire already owns that he likes better than Alphabet.

The filing that shows what else Berkshire bought lands around Aug. 14. So far the only stock Berkshire has backed hard is its own.

In the video, which began circulating online over the weekend, a man and his wife place an order for three $5.99 Classic Shakes — a vanilla, strawberry and cookies and cream with whipped cream (for an extra 49 cents). When they reach the payment screen, they are prompted to leave a tip.

After selecting the option for no tip, the footage shows an error message on the screen that reads: “Uh Oh! There has been a pricing update on one or more of your cart items. Please review these changes in your cart.” When they do, the prices displayed appeared to have increased by roughly 50 cents each.

“Making sure everybody knows: Do not go there,” the TikToker, B.D. Powell warns, suggesting that customers who decline gratuity will be charged more for the same order.

The video does not prove that selecting “No Tip” actually caused the price increase — and Shake Shack has denied the claim. Nonetheless, the video quickly spread across social media, with some viewers describing the practice as a “no-tip surcharge” and others arguing that “tipping culture has gotten out of hand.”

For its part Shake Shack commented on the TikTok saying, “Thank you for bringing this to our attention. This is not a Shake Shack policy, and we’re currently looking into it with our licensee, HMSHost, that operates the Salt Lake City airport location and kiosk system.”

Consumers are feeling “tipping fatigue”

Shake Shack and other fast-casual restaurants increasingly use digital kiosks that ask customers to tip before they have received their food, even if customers order it themselves.

Currently, 78% of American consumers are experiencing “tipping fatigue,” up from 65% in 2025, 60% in 2024 and 53% in 2023, according to an annual study by Popmenu. Consumers believe that tipping practices have become “ridiculous.” In fact, 44% actually report tipping less this year than last year, seemingly out of spite.

Forty-two percent of consumers also say they are becoming more comfortable skipping gratuities for certain services and, although 59% of consumers still feel compelled to leave a tip when prompted to do so on digital screens, that number is down from 66% in 2025. Nearly a quarter of consumers (22%) still tip at fast food restaurants, like Shake Shack, but that number is also down from 27% last year.

Still, consumers estimate that, over the last 12 months, they’ve spent about $130 on tips they didn’t think were necessary.

Where do self-service tips go?

If customers are tipping kiosks, who is on the receiving end? While the money is intended for on-duty staff — pooled and split among workers — oversight can be questionable if the money isn’t going to them directly.

While covered non-exempt workers, including many fast food employees, are entitled to a federal minimum wage of no less than $7.25 per hour, anyone whose income comes largely from tips alone is bearing the biggest brunt of tipping fatigue — and they’re losing more if those already declining tips don’t even end up in their pockets.

The tipping debate is particularly notable at Shake Shack because the chain’s founder, Danny Meyer, previously criticized the pressure to tip for basic transactions. In 2023 Meyer said customers picking up food or buying coffee had no obligation to tip.

“If you’re just taking out food and it was just a transaction — I give you money and you give me a cup of coffee — I don’t think there’s any obligation to tip whatsoever,” he said, as reported by Bon Appétit.

For now, there is no solid evidence that Shake Shack is deliberately charging customers more when they select “No Tip.” But the viral video has nonetheless reignited the conversation over whether tipping prompts are going too far.

California has more registered vehicles than any other state — by a long shot. Los Angeles County, alone, has nearly 7.5 million registered motor vehicles and about 9.7 million residents, 6.7 million of whom are licensed drivers.

Los Angeles city, specifically, has the worst traffic in the country, according to Consumer Affairs research. There are 8 hours and 27 minutes, on average, of weekday congestion, which is only continuing to climb. It’s why Los Angeles city commuters spend at least 10 full days a year inching on and off the brakes.

The One Car Challenge is designed to test whether financial incentives can persuade people to replace some of those single-occupancy car trips with carpooling or public transportation — or with two wheels or two legs.

In its second phase, which dramatically expands an earlier pilot, Metro is calling on 2,000 households across Los Angeles County to park up.

Phase 1 started in Santa Monica

The first One Car Challenge took place in Santa Monica in 2023, according to LA Metro, which partnered with the city to recruit roughly 300 households that had at least two cars. Participants were asked to leave one vehicle parked at home for five weeks and use other forms of transportation instead. In exchange, they could receive up to $599, along with a $50 TAP transit card and free Metro Bike Share rides, according to LA Metro’s The Source.

The goal wasn’t necessarily to convince people to permanently give up their cars. Instead, researchers wanted to see whether residents accustomed to driving everywhere would discover that some of their trips could easily be made another way.

Early signs suggest that the strategy worked. Metro’s analysis found a statistically significant shift away from single-occupancy vehicle trips, particularly in favor of walking and micromobility. The initial phase of the program revealed that participants were 2.6 times more likely to avoid driving an extra vehicle, which ultimately resulted in a 16.16% increase in people using public transit, walking or biking.

But researchers were less able to draw firm conclusions about reductions in total vehicle miles traveled because of the pilot’s relatively small sample size.

Metro is taking the experiment countywide

Phase 2 of the One Car Challenge takes the pilot much further. Rather than focusing on one relatively transit-friendly city, Metro is expanding the challenge throughout Los Angeles County, with approximately 2,000 households eligible to participate.

According to the LA Metro, more than two million households in Los Angeles County have two or more vehicles, but 30% of the county’s daily trips could be made by taking public transit or another method of travel.

While the program is particularly focused on two-or-more-car households, the program is also open to households with just one car — meaning a person could effectively go car-free for the entirety of the five-week experiment.

Participants must be 21 years old and agree to leave at least one car parked at home for five weeks while experimenting with other ways of getting around. In doing so, they’ll earn a maximum payout of $600 per household — which is coming out of a $2 million Regional Early Action Planning (REAP 2.0) grant from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

LA Metro is using technology to make sure that participants actually stick to the challenge. Participants must use the GoCarma app to document their travel and vehicle mileage, and they may be asked to submit odometer photos before, during and after the five-week period.

The timing of the challenge is significant as Los Angeles County is looking to reduce traffic and encourage sustainable transportation ahead of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Los Angeles expects to face an enormous influx of visitors and transportation demand. More than 12 million people from more than 200 countries have already registered for tickets.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump has raised about $800 million in private donations since taking office again in 2024, working in tandem with his head fundraiser, Meredith O’Rourke.

O’Rourke, who has no official White House title, often calls corporate leaders on behalf of the President and asks for sizable donations, ranging from $5 million to as much as $50 million.

O’Rourke is reportedly tenacious in her role as chief political fundraiser for Team Trump, and isn’t above telling potential donors, “the boss wants his money,” WSJ reported. In turn, Trump calls O’Rourke, “the Princess of Darkness” who excels at closing contributions from donors.

When presidential donor funds and undue influence collide

Raising money for a current administration is a long Washington, D.C. tradition, and a perfectly legal one. For example, Presidents routinely raise massive amounts from corporations and wealthy individuals for presidential inaugural festivities, future presidential libraries, or for traditional events like the annual White House Easter egg hunt.

At $800 million in total donations, however, Trump is taking private White House fundraising to another level.

A case in point. In late 2025, Reuters reported the White House tapped into an unnamed private donor’s back pocket for a $130 million donation that was steered into paychecks for U.S. military personnel during an extended government shutdown. Citing the donor as a “friend of mine” at an October, 2025 White House event, Trump said, “He called us the other day and said, ‘I’d like to contribute any shortfall you have because of the Democrat shutdown… because I love the military and I love the country.”

That contribution earned the ire of Open Secrets, a U.S. research organization that

tracks money in U.S. politics and analyzes its effect on elections and public policy. The organization alleged that the Trump administration was working outside the federal government’s appropriations process to raise funds, which could lead to donors seeking undue influence over U.S. public policy.

“When private money moves through government without transparency, from White House upgrades to military pay, it opens the door to hidden influence,” said Hilary Braseth, executive director of OpenSecrets, in a statement. “A government of the people must be transparent. The public has a right to know who’s paying, how much, and for what.”

Americans deserve full transparency on presidential donations

The legal and ethical demarcation line on presidential fundraising is a thin one, non-profit experts say, and that’s a transparency problem, and likely a political one, too.

“The ethical line appears earlier: when management gives money to a politician because it fears retaliation or hopes for favorable treatment, shareholders deserve to know, even if no explicit bargain can be proved,” Douglas Goldstein, director at Profile Investment Services, a financial advisory firm, told Moneywise.

Perhaps a larger problem is the notion that money follows power, and power doesn’t get any bigger than the occupant in the Oval Office.

“As government gains more discretion over contracts, regulation, antitrust decisions, and subsidies, companies will spend more to remain close to the people exercising that discretion,” Goldstein said. “The deeper problem is not that companies respond to incentives, it’s that government has made proximity to power commercially valuable.”

Corporations should favor transparency with political contributions

The Trump administration has struck gold with high-profile U.S. companies that have dug deep and delivered for the White House’s fundraising machine.

Take Softbank, which contributed $50 million to Trump’s presidential library, or Apple, which forked over $25 million for the White House ballroom project, as WSJ reported.

For donor companies, the legal question isn’t in play, as any U.S. citizen or entity is allowed to donate to political private causes, but companies that do contribute massive amounts of cash may want to establish full transparency with their employees, investors, and customers.

Companies thinking of donating cash to powerful political organizations should ask across the C-suite if they’d be comfortable explaining the transaction publicly if all the details were on the front page within a week.

“A company can potentially stay within the law and still create a serious ethical or reputational problem,” Colleen Barry, head of marketing at Ketch, a data privacy software platform, told Moneywise. “That’s especially true when the company has active business with the federal government and makes a large contribution to a politically connected organization at roughly the same time.”

Barry, who specializes in how companies build trust, manage risk, and communicate with customers and stakeholders, said she’d look at three factors if a firm wanted to contribute large sums of money to political groups.

“The size of the contribution compared with the company’s normal giving, the timing, and the relationship between the company and the government are all important,” Barry said. “None of these automatically proves improper conduct, but together they can create a perception of influence.”

Taking control of politically-motivated funding decisions

Barry, who favors legal disclosures of all U.S. political donations, said transparency isn’t only about satisfying regulators.

“It also gives companies a chance to explain their decisions in their own words instead of allowing journalists, activists, or social media users to define the narrative for them,” she said.

In today’s environment, the cost of hiding information can be higher than the cost of disclosing it. “Companies should assume that material political spending will eventually become public and govern themselves accordingly,” Barry added.

Not everyone who claims Social Security needs the money. In fact, former President Joe Biden’s tax returns showed he received income from Social Security, and it’s pretty unlikely he was waiting for his checks to pay any bills at the White House.

But some people with a lot of money may decide that collecting their benefits simply isn’t worth doing.

Let’s pretend, for example, that Mia is in her mid-60s and she’s done very well for herself. Since she’s worth millions and needs nothing, she’s considering declining her Social Security benefits. Should Mia pass up her funds, or should she start collecting despite not needing the money?

Mia isn’t required to collect Social Security

First things first. Mia absolutely has the option to just not claim Social Security.

“If you contributed to Social Security and are eligible for the benefit, then when and if you collect is a personal decision,” Domenick D’Andrea, founder of Dan Darah Wealth Management, told Moneywise.

No one is going to force Mia to start collecting her Social Security checks, and there’s some evidence that wealthy people don’t. For example, the most recently available tax returns in 2015 for Bill and Hillary Clinton show they didn’t collect any Social Security, despite being old enough to qualify.

You don’t have to officially deny your benefits if you don’t want them either. Money you contributed over the years isn’t just sitting there waiting for you. The money you paid in while working went to fund the retirement of people who were retired at the time, while future workers will fund your retirement if you collect.

You may still want to collect benefits even if you have money

Although you don’t have to claim Social Security, many wealthy people choose to do so anyway, and there are good reasons for that — including the possibility of facing large unexpected expenses in the future.

No one can predict what will happen during a decades-long retirement, so your Social Security benefits can serve as a form of insurance against financial ruin, as these benefits are a reliable, guaranteed source of lifetime income that’s there if you need it.

For example, D’Andrea suggested that “you could claim the benefit and potentially purchase long-term care insurance, so if you ever need to make a claim, you can protect your assets as you see fit.”

You’re also entitled to the money, and there’s no shame in taking it even if you’re very well off. In fact, the creator of Social Security, Franklin D. Roosevelt chose payroll tax as a means of funding Social Security because then “no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program.”

Because FDR made Social Security an “earned” benefit open to anyone who meets the work requirements*,* it’s become one of the country’s most popular and successful programs. If you take advantage of it despite being rich, you’ll be doing exactly what FDR intended —and you can still use the money strategically.

“You could also claim the benefit that you qualify for and potentially donate it to charity or help less fortunate family members,” D’Andrea said.## Forgoing Social Security means you’ll create complications with Medicare premiums

If you decide not to claim Social Security, you must be aware that this can affect your Medicare coverage. Many retirees have Medicare payments directly collected from Social Security. If you aren’t getting benefits, this won’t happen for you.

Be sure you sign up with Medicare when you first become eligible at 65. Otherwise, you could face a 10% penalty for late enrollment for each full year you delayed signing up for Part B. Once you’re signed up, you need to pay your bill for coverage. You should receive the CMS-500 quarterly and must make sure to pay to protect your coverage.

The case for foregoing your benefit

While there’s a lot of hassle and very little to gain by not claiming Social Security, there is one potential benefit.

The Trust Fund for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance program is expected to run dry as soon as 2032, which would necessitate an automatic 22% across-the-board cut to benefits it pays out.If you paid into the system but didn’t claim benefits, you could play a small part in helping Social Security’s finances since you paid in but didn’t collect.

While one person giving up benefits isn’t going to have a big impact on Social Security, if more wealthy retirees did the same, then that may start to move the numbers a bit and reduce the likelihood of big cuts occurring that could affect the most vulnerable.

According to a recent Washington Post report, the infestation cost the family well into six figures to clean up, repair and make the home safe again.

Riecken told Moneywise they continue to hear from other homeowners who have similar problems.

“We’re still consistently helping homeowners dealing with bats in their houses,” he said. “We’ve helped dozens of folks with similar issues — some local and others further afield.”

While the couple’s experience is extreme, it shows that even a home that seems move-in ready can hide expensive surprises.

A costly surprise

After years of saving while living in a trailer, Riecken and Powell finally found a four-bedroom, four-storey house perched atop a hill. Surrounded by towering pines and draped in Spanish moss, nearly every window had picturesque views of the forest or Puget Sound.

“We’d saved up for years living in [a] trailer,” Powell told The Washington Post, “We just saved and saved.”

The white-shingled home was dated and the couple could see it needed work, but at roughly $850,000, it seemed like a bargain in one of America’s hottest housing markets. Since 2019, U.S. home prices had surged 54%, and in King County, Washington, the median home price had climbed to US$885,000.

There was one warning sign, however. The home inspection noted evidence of “rodents.”

But the problem lurking inside the walls wasn’t rats.

It was thousands of bats.

And getting rid of them wasn’t as simple as calling an exterminator. In Washington, every bat species is legally protected, meaning they can’t be trapped or killed. Instead, they must be humanely “excluded” from a home by sealing off entry points, but only after the young bats are old enough to fly. During the summer maternity season, homeowners are often forced to wait.

Looking back, Riecken told Moneywise the biggest lesson wasn’t that they skipped an inspection, but that they misunderstood what the inspection was actually telling them.

“The inspection conveyed it as a ‘possible rodent issue’… so we thought it was a minor mouse or rat problem,” he said. “That’s how the inspection read and was conveyed.”

The report advised the buyers to review the seller’s disclosure or consult a pest specialist, but that comment was buried among dozens of pages.

Another costly surprise came after closing. Because the home was purchased through an estate sale, Washington’s standard seller disclosure form wasn’t required.

“Even experienced home buyers might not know that,” he said. “This was essentially our first real home purchase so we had no idea.”

After the bats were discovered, the couple learned previous inspections had documented the infestation years earlier.

Then came a devastating financial blow: Their homeowners insurance denied coverage because the damage was considered pre-existing, leaving them with remediation estimates that were over $200,000.

Instead of walking away, they took on the project.

“We got clever,” he said. “Instead of paying $36,000 to exclude the bats, we waited them out because they were migratory, and we chose to do the work in the winter.”

Riecken estimates the family has reduced the cost to roughly $60,000 to $70,000 through a combination of DIY work and being selective with contractors, though repairs are still ongoing.

What Riecken wants every homebuyer to know

The ordeal has turned Riecken into an advocate for buyer due diligence, and his advice goes beyond bats.

Don’t rely on your realtor’s inspector. Instead, Riecken recommends you “find one independently.”

Attend the inspection yourself. Being “present when the inspection happens” is advice he wishes he’d followed.

Highlight every recommendation in the inspection report. Don’t just skim the summary. Instead, “take a highlighter and identify every single recommendation in that document,” he says.

Know the disclosure rules before you buy. Estate sales, trust sales and foreclosures can have different legal disclosure requirements depending on where you live, so that means that “the inheritance loopholes are the biggest thing to be aware of.”

Trust your nose. Touring during warmer months may reveal problems that aren’t obvious in winter. That said, “any attic, basement or outbuilding with diffusers, candles or other scents might be trying to hide something.”

He also says yellow stains high on ceilings can point to pest urine hidden inside walls, and there’s one simple way to distinguish between mouse and bat droppings if you encounter them:

“Mouse poop is rock solid; bat poop will crumble.”

And don’t assume your insurance policy will rescue you after closing.

As for Riecken, he has increased his deductible to lower premiums, tackles projects himself whenever he can and leaves specialized work to experts. He told Moneywise that his biggest takeaway is, “if you can buy the tools, learn the skills and do the work cheaper than hiring out, do that, but pick your battles.”

For prospective buyers, Riecken’s experience is a reminder that the biggest financial risk isn’t always the mortgage itself. Sometimes it’s a hidden problem lurking behind the walls, and the best way to protect yourself is to take all the necessary precautions.

Jacob Tsimerman, a supernova among the AI technology elite, recently said he’s leaving his post as a mathematics professor at the University of Toronto to become a researcher at OpenAI, The Wall Street Journal reported on July 31.

“I’ll be starting a position at OpenAI,” Tsimerman said in response to a media query right after winning a Fields Medal, widely viewed among math and science cognoscenti as the highest and most prestigious international honor given in mathematics. It’s often called the “Nobel Prize of Mathematics.”

Tsimerman is a good pick for the job, based on his recorded thoughts on AI’s burgeoning power and its likelihood of acting against humanity. In 2025, Tsimerman co-authored a paper titled “A Taxonomy of Omnicidal Futures Involving Artificial Intelligence” where humans will be “killed off as pests,” Tsimerman noted, “by intellectually and physically superior machines.”

“This report presents a taxonomy and examples of potential omnicidal events resulting from AI: scenarios where all or almost all humans are killed,” Tsimerman noted. “These events are not presented as inevitable, but as possibilities that we can work to avoid.”

Humanity has a good shot of avoiding death by AI if everyone sticks together, Tsimerman noted.

“Insofar as large institutions require a degree of public support in order to take certain actions, we hope that by presenting these possibilities in public, we can help to support preventive measures against catastrophic risks from AI,” he wrote.

The human-AI cohort can also keep the peace as long as humans continue getting accustomed to the technology.

“I think it’s important for people to get better at incorporating AI into their day-to-day lives,” Tsimerman noted in a separate interview cited by the American Mathematical Society. “To ignore it less. It’s going to be a big change. The less it catches us off guard — the more we as a culture are familiar with it — the more skilled we can be in trying to build something mutually beneficial.”

Taking a closer look at the “humans as pests” issue

AI risk experts say the pest issue is real, but with a caveat or two.

“It’s worth taking seriously as a category of risk, not as a specific prediction,” Jared Braverman, CEO of AgencyFix, an AI-native marketing agency, told Moneywise. “The realistic danger isn’t a machine deciding it hates us; it’s a system pursuing a goal we gave it, with more autonomy or fewer constraints than we realized we’d granted, and finding a path we didn’t anticipate.”

Braverman said he’s seen a small, low-stakes version of this scenario himself. While working with an AI tool, Braverman mistakenly allowed an AI-driven system to run overnight due to a bug, executing an automated process repeatedly while he slept.

“It wasn’t malicious, it was just doing exactly what I’d allowed it to do, without anything in place to notice the outcome was wrong,” Braverman noted. “I woke up to an unexpectedly large usage bill.”

Scale that same failure mode to something with real stakes, “and the concern becomes very real without needing anything close to ‘sentient AI,” Braverman added.

Other AI mavens say the humans-as-pests threat is speculative, at least right now. Large language models continue to have many flaws, so they’re not at artificial general intelligence (AGI) status, and they have yet to develop emotions like “being annoyed by the lowly humans.”

“However, with recursive self-improvement and AI systems coding out improvements for the next AI system, AGI could be coming soon,” Paul Han, founder at ClaudeFolio, a directory and discussion platform covering AI issues, said. “With AGI, that’s the scenario where an AI could develop its own intentions and see humans as pests.”

Since AI is trained on human data, and if and when AI tries to emulate humans, Han can see a scenario where AI can see humans as pests.

“When you say, ‘Hey AI go do this,’ you can reach a point where AI will feel like you’re using them for your own purposes and then see humans as pests,” he said.

There are some guardrails in place, with more on the way

AI insiders say that Tsimerman joining OpenAI isn’t hypocritical given his severe warnings about the technology morphing into murder machines. Instead, it’s better viewed as a good example of making a strategic bet that AI safety work has to happen where the systems are built.

That said, internal safety alone is structurally insufficient.

“A company cannot be the sole judge of whether its own product is safe when the commercial and competitive incentives point toward shipping,” Joshua M. Estrin, an applied mathematician and data scientist who studies how AI and AI agents are reshaping business, work, and culture, told Moneywise. “Tsimerman himself has argued for an ecosystem that includes lab safety teams, independent organizations, government-funded evaluators, and regulation — not a single institution declaring itself responsible.”

The AI threat fix is boring but urgent: Require evaluation before high-risk deployment, limit AI agents’ access to money and critical systems, maintain audit logs and a human kill switch, fund independent testing, and make liability clear when companies deploy systems they cannot adequately control.

“The biggest danger is humans keep calling AI as ‘just a tool’ while giving it authority, access, and autonomy that no responsible organization would give an unvetted employee,” Estrin said.

Judge Roy K. Altman, who Trump appointed in 2019, approved an emergency stay filed by Trump’s attorneys on Wednesday, just a day before the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust would’ve been forced to hand the BBC tax, ownership, and financial records for approximately 400 entities.

Why is the BBC trying to obtain Trump’s financial statement?

On Dec. 15, 2025, Trump filed a lawsuit against the BBC over a 2024 episode of documentary news program “Panorama” which included portions of Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, the day of the Capitol insurrection. Trump’s lawsuit alleges that clips of his speech were edited together to show him egging his supporters to storm the Capitol and omitted parts where he encouraged peaceful demonstration.

Trump’s lawsuit seeks $5 billion in damages for defamation and $5 billion for unfair trade practices, claiming the edit hurt his “brand, properties and businesses.” U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett ruled that because Trump alleges that the BBC hurt his businesses, it’s fair for the BBC to demand information about his businesses, ordering his trust to turn over relevant information.

“All of President Trump’s brand, properties and businesses are impugned or said to have been impugned. Reputational, economic damages, all of that is now at issue in this case,” Lett said during the hearing.

Trump’s lawyers have requested to amend their complaint to focus on Trump’s reputation and move away from the alleged damage to his businesses, arguing that doing so would remove the need to disclose his finances. It’s this request that Judge Altman is currently considering, pausing the release of Trump’s financial documents until a decision is made.

If Altman rules against Trump, the BBC may very well obtain Trump’s financial records, but a protective order may prevent those documents from being publicized. Seth Stern, advocacy director at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, says that Trump could also simply drop the lawsuit to prevent his financial details from being released to the public.

“Trump has a history of filing lawsuits and then just dismissing them before they get to discovery,” Stern told the Associated Press. “So there’s a chance he’ll do that and I’m sure it’ll give him a day or an hour of embarrassing headlines. But as we’ve seen countless times with Trump’s administration ... no one headline seems to stick for very long, and I suspect that one would be no different.”

Trump’s legal war against news organizations

The defamation lawsuit against the BBC is one of several ongoing Trump lawsuits against news organizations. Trump is currently suing the Dow Jones for $15 billion over their reporting of a birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein allegedly signed by Trump.

He is also suing The New York Times and Penguin Random House for $15 billion over the publication of New York Times reporters Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner’s book “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success” and the publication’s coverage of Trump during the 2024 campaign.

Other news organizations, like CBS News and ABC News, have settled lawsuits from Trump for $16 million and $15 million, respectively.

The BBC apologized for the editing mistake on Panorama in November 2025, but has expressed its intent to see the defamation case through. “As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case,” a BBC spokesman said in a statement in February. “We are not going to make further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”

A jury trial is scheduled for Feb. 15, 2027.

Serving as executor can be a lot of work, though, and not everyone wants the job — especially if there’s already family conflict. Let’s pretend, for example, that Carol wants her sister Susan to be the executor of her will, even though they aren’t getting along at all.

Susan said no and asked Carol to change her will so Susan is no longer named to this role. But Carol won’t budge. Now, Susan wants to know what her options are and if she can be forced to serve.

No one can force you to be the executor of a will

Fortunately, there’s good news for Susan. She won’t be required to take on the obligation of managing her sister’s estate.

“One of the biggest misconceptions I see is that being named as an executor is an obligation. It isn’t,” Jill Mastroianni, an estate planning attorney and the founder of Mastroianni Legacy Law, said to Moneywise.

And other experts agree.

“Nobody is forced to serve as executor, and your sister’s approval is not what controls,” Raul Gastesi, founding partner of Gastesi Lopez Mestre & Cobiella, told Moneywise.

However, Susan’s unwillingness to take on this role doesn’t mean her sister must change the will either. “The person creating the estate plan has the right to choose whomever they want to serve as the executor,” Anna Blood, a family law attorney in North Carolina, advised Moneywise. “But the person named isn’t required to accept or continue in that role.”

Before Susan declines, though, it’s worth considering one key fact.

“The role of executor does not come into being until the person dies, so at that point the sibling would not have to work with the sister if she decided to serve as executor. The sister would never know because she’d be dead,” Elizabeth Candido Petite, chair of Lindabury’s Wills, Trusts and Estates practice group, told Moneywise.

Refusing to serve isn’t a failure, either. “If the relationship is beyond repair and the fighting has made the estate impossible to administer, stepping aside is a legitimate and fairly common decision. It is not an admission that you did anything wrong,” Gastesi said.

How can Susan get out of being an executor?

So, what should Susan do if she doesn’t want to say yes?

“How you get out depends on where you are in the process,” said Gastesi, while Mastroianni explained that “you don’t need your sister’s permission to step down.”

“If you are named in the will but the court has not yet appointed you, the cleanest path is to decline before you ever take office. You file a written renunciation or declination with the court and the job passes to the alternate named in the will, or if there is no alternate, to whoever the statute prefers next,” Gastesi said.

Susan should act quickly in declining, though.

“In my experience, if the family relationships are already strained, it is better to leave earlier than later,” said Alex Hait, managing partner at North Metro Litigators. “A resignation may preserve protection for the estate and give the court an opening to designate either the successor executor in accordance with the will or another qualified person to perform the duties.”

Once Susan resigns, there’s a process for replacing her.

“Generally, there is a provision in the will which states if person X is unable or unwilling to serve, person Y will then serve as executor,” Sheryl Dennis, a partner at Fields & Dennis LLP, told Moneywise. “If the issue of successor is not addressed in the will, then a petition to have the court appoint a Special Administrator would be best, but this can be an expensive undertaking.”

Gastesi also had more good news for Susan. “Resigning has nothing to do with your inheritance. If you are a beneficiary, you keep whatever the will leaves you. Serving as executor and inheriting are separate roles, and giving up one does not affect the other.”

The current “full fare advertising rule,” which centers on consumer protection, requires both U.S. and foreign air carriers and ticket agents that advertise airfares to “state the entire price to be paid by the customer, inclusive of all mandatory taxes and fees,” (including both government and carrier surcharges) at the first mention. The rule also prohibits any sellers of air transportation from “displaying in airfare advertisements charges that are included within the airfare more prominently or in the same or larger font size than the total single price.”

However, the Trump administration now wants to allow more flexibility in how airfare prices are advertised. While the total price would still have to be displayed, the proposal would allow airlines and agencies to give equal prominence to the tax and fee breakdown alongside the total fare, rather than requiring the total fare to be visually dominant.

“From a consumer standpoint, the rules may make it more difficult to accurately compare fares across different airlines,” Meghna Maharishi, airline reporter at Skift, told Moneywise. “When they see an airfare costing $75 … But then, at checkout, if a consumer sees $25 in taxes and fees, and the ticket actually costs $100, it gets confusing.”

What the full fare advertising rule does for travelers

Under the 2011 full fare advertising rule, when you search for a flight on a carrier site like United or Delta — or on a third-party ticketing platform like Skyscanner or Omio — the first price that pops up for that flight is the price you’ll pay at checkout. You’ll only pay more if, of course, you choose optional add-ons like checked baggage fees, reserved seats, priority boarding, in-flight Wi-Fi, preordered meals or travel protection plans.

Everything that you are required to pay — the actual base fare, all taxes and any mandatory fees, including any flight segment taxes, international departure or arrival taxes, passenger facility charges and more — is already accounted for in the total displayed price tag.

“The full fare advertising rule was intended to prevent consumer confusion or deception by advertisements of low base fares that did not reflect the total cost of air transportation,” the DOT explains.

“To assess the need and justification for this regulation, the Department must consider how changes to its regulation of airfare advertising would impact the likelihood of consumer confusion or deception, competition in the marketplace, and whether it would permit sellers of air transportation to compete freely on the value and quality of services they offer while preventing anticompetitive or predatory behaviors.”

How the proposed change could affect travelers

The Trump administration argues that the current pricing policy for airlines and ticketing agents is too strict. Under the DOT’s new proposal, carriers would be allowed to draw attention to lower base fares, so long as they still just as clearly display the total cost of the flight.

“These proposed changes would ensure greater flexibility in how air fare is displayed while ensuring information is presented clearly to consumers, and in conformity with the intent of Congress as articulated in a provision of the Internal Revenue Code establishing standards for the display of taxes in advertisements for air transportation,” the proposal reads.

Moreover, the DOT is proposing to rescind nine airfare price advertising guidance documents that interpret and enforce the full fare advertising rule, which it believes “have become outdated and unnecessary.” These documents spell out details such as how prominently total prices must be displayed, how taxes and fees can be itemized and what types of promotional fare advertising could be considered misleading.

Ultimately, the DOT wants to give airlines more flexibility while still requiring the disclosure of the total fare to travelers before they purchase flights.

A number of airlines have been on board with this change for years, arguing that the federal government shouldn’t be able to dictate how they display prices — particularly when, across other industries, consumers ultimately pay higher total prices, after taxes, than the sticker prices listed.

“As a carrier operating transatlantic services under several regulatory regimes, SATA supports pricing practices that enable customers to understand the full cost of travel in advance,” wrote Azores Airlines SATA International as the DOT solicited public comment on the proposed rule changes.

“The proposed amendments preserve this principle and, at the same time, allow airlines more room to determine how taxes, government-imposed charges and other fare elements are displayed. SATA supports the Department’s decision to remove the prescriptive rules on prominence and font size.”

Azores Airlines also argued that, because “airline distribution now takes place across numerous digital channels, devices, booking paths and retail environments,” increased flexibility in how airlines present prices “should improve communications with customers, reduce unnecessary complexity and permit continued progress in digital retailing” without sacrificing transparency.

Southwest Airlines, on the other hand, has said that, while it initially opposed all-in pricing rules 15 years ago, changing the rule now could be “extremely disruptive.”

“An entire generation of consumers have shopped and purchased air travel under this system,” Southwest wrote in a public comment. “Fourteen years have elapsed since the Rule went into effect and consumers have settled expectations that all government-imposed taxes and fees will be included in the fare in the first display.”

Peter Thornton, Senior Flight Analyst at Thrifty Traveler, agrees.

“Repealing the rule would be a consumer-unfriendly move,” Thornton told Moneywise, recalling Spirit Airlines’ “incredibly deceiving” $9 Flight Club years ago. “Those cheap ‘base fares’ often ended up costing at least five times what consumers initially saw after all the mandatory taxes and fees were added. Changing this rule would be a step backwards.”

Thornton also warns that taxes and fees are not uniform with airfare, and international flights have “wildly different taxes and fees.”

“While you might only pay $70 in taxes and fees on a roundtrip flight to Puerto Rico, the fees to Jamaica are more than double at roughly $200,” he said. “Simply put, repealing full fare advertising will make it harder to compare the total price travelers will pay for flights.”

What travelers can do

“It's unclear if the airline industry would support a rule that doesn't require them to show the whole price upfront, given the amount of chaos it could create,” Maharishi said. “Even if airlines don't want so many regulations, they have to balance this fine line between advocating for fewer regulations and consumer perceptions.”

If the rule is indeed changed, however, travelers can still find the best deals by comparing the total ticket price, not just the advertised base fare, across multiple airlines and booking sites.

It’s also worth checking what the fares include, since baggage, seat selection and other optional fees can vary widely between carriers. Setting fare alerts on Google Flights and remaining flexible with travel dates can also help you uncover local fares regardless of how airlines choose to display their prices.

“Flexibility is the number one rule to finding a cheap flight,” Thornton told Moneywise, noting that adjusting travel dates or being open to other destinations are great ways to save. “Google Flights is the best search tool out there to compare flights across all airlines. Its calendar view shows the cheapest days to fly and its price alerts notify you if prices drop on a specific flight.”

In the meantime, if you want to make your opinion on the matter heard, you can also leave a public comment on the proposal. The DOT is accepting comments through August 21.

Even the social stigma around bankruptcy isn’t enough to prevent struggling Americans from considering it as an option these days.

Rebecca Lessley, whose debt piled up over three years after losing her job at the same time she bought a house, told NPR that she felt embarrassed when she filed for bankruptcy this past June.

While she’s still in the process of working out the details, she will most likely pay back her debt with a five-year repayment plan. But she’s no longer ashamed of filing for bankruptcy. Indeed, some of her friends want to know how it goes — because they’re considering the same thing.

While filing for bankruptcy can hurt your credit score, it can also help you build it back up over time.

“People don’t understand how good of a deal bankruptcy is,” Samuel Antill, an assistant professor at the Harvard Business School, told NPR. His research shows that, after filing for bankruptcy, most people’s credit scores recover within a year of filing.

Personal bankruptcies are on the rise

More than half a million personal bankruptcies were filed in the U.S. last year, climbing to 549,577 in 2025 — the third consecutive year of increases, according to a LendingTree analysis of U.S. Courts bankruptcy filing data from 2021 through 2025.

To put that in perspective, 1,489 Americans filed for personal bankruptcy each day in 2025.

The rising cost of living — from housing and healthcare to groceries and insurance — is playing a role.

Many households are bridging the gap with credit cards, but “higher interest rates have made that debt far more costly to carry, causing balances to grow faster than people can pay them down,” Matt Schulz, LendingTree’s chief consumer finance analyst, said in the LendingTree analysis.

“Given that combination of rising debt and sky-high interest rates, it’s not surprising that more people are turning to bankruptcy for relief,” he said.

How filing for bankruptcy works

If you decide to file for bankruptcy, you’ll still need to qualify. You’ll need to prove in court that you are, in fact, unable to pay your debts. If approved, a court-appointed trustee will help you come up with a plan to settle your debt: Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Keep in mind that, even if you do declare bankruptcy, you’ll still be on the hook for certain debts: tax debt, mortgages, student loans, auto loans and child support or alimony.

But it often means that you no longer have to deal with aggressive debt collection agencies because everything is done through the courts.

Chapter 7 bankruptcy erases certain types of debt, such as credit card balances, personal loans and medical bills (it takes about three or four months). While you don’t have to pay back those debts, the court-appointed trustee can sell any property you own that isn’t protected by a bankruptcy exemption. That money is used to compensate your creditors.

To qualify for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, you must either pass a means test or have a below-median level of income for the state you live in.

Chapter 13 bankruptcy requires repaying all or a portion of your debt over a period of three to five years. The amount depends on factors such as the size of your income and the size of your debt, but it’s consolidated into a monthly payment that’s then distributed to creditors.

There are pros and cons to both approaches, depending on your circumstances. For example, if you have property you want to keep, then Chapter 13 bankruptcy might be a better option.

But it’s worth noting that filing for bankruptcy also comes with a cost: between $1,500 and $4,000 in court filing fees and attorney fees, according to Debt.org.

Deciding on a debt repayment option

Bankruptcy should still be considered a last resort, after other options such as debt consolidation or debt settlement.

A certified credit counselor can help you figure out how to get your finances back on track, and whether you can do that without filing for bankruptcy. They can provide advice on debt relief options and help you come up with a repayment plan.

A debt consolidation loan or debt management program could reduce your interest rate or monthly payments, making those payments feel more manageable. A debt consolidation loan combines multiple debts — such as high-interest credit cards and personal loans — into one loan with a fixed monthly payment, usually with a lower rate.

Another option is debt settlement, where you negotiate with lenders to pay a lesser amount as an alternative to bankruptcy. You can do this yourself or work with a debt settlement company.

“Some debt relief options, such as negotiating a lump-sum settlement with your lenders, could result in having as much as 50% of your balance forgiven,” according to Debt.com.

While many nonprofit credit counseling organizations offer free counseling, they may charge fees for certain services, so make sure you understand what those costs are ahead of time.

If you do feel the best option is bankruptcy, it’s worth seeking the advice of a bankruptcy attorney, who can help you navigate the process and increase your likelihood of success.

​A recent report from The Wall Street Journal profiled the New Jersey-based investment firm Late Stage Capital that claimed to offer access to pre-IPO companies like SpaceX.

When a data engineer named Ram Rupireddy heard about Late Stage Capital in 2020, he excitedly wired $17,250 to snatch up shares in the satellite company. At that time, SpaceX was valued at roughly $58 billion. Flash-forward to 2026, and SpaceX’s valuation climbed to $1.77 trillion on its IPO day.

Understandably, Rupireddy felt elated about his decision to invest early, thinking he had 2,500 shares worth roughly $300,000.

However, Rupireddy started to worry when he couldn’t get into Late Stage Capital’s online portal. After multiple phone calls and emails, Late Stage Capital gave him some bad news. Apparently, the firm sold Rupireddy’s stock in 2024 at a significantly lower total value of $45,450.​

Not only did Rupireddy never receive a notification about this sale, he has tax documents from Late Stage Capital in 2024 and 2025 that show he owned SpaceX shares. Despite this evidence, Late Stage Capital has yet to make Rupireddy whole.

​And Rupireddy isn’t alone. According to The Wall Street Journal, there are about 100 other Late Stage Capital investors reporting the same problem, many of whom filed complaints with the SEC.​

Moneywise emailed Late Stage Capital for further comment, but we only received a mailer-daemon reply saying the address couldn’t be found.

We also didn’t hear back from the SEC before the time of publication.​

SPVs deny SpaceX investors’ dreams

The problem with many firms like Late Stage Capital is that they often didn’t hold a direct stake in the pre-IPO companies they promised. These entities operate as “special purpose vehicles” (SPVs), which can invest in the private market without filing public records or meeting SEC regulations.

Although some SPVs could have pre-IPO shares, many only own a portion of another SPV that holds these shares. The latter appears to be the case with Late Stage Capital.

Investigators at The Wall Street Journal discovered a Bahamas-based firm called Capital Truth had a portion of an SPV that owned SpaceX shares. Therefore, when Capital Truth sold its “SpaceX stake” to Late Stage, there was actually one degree of separation from the literal shares.​

Note that, even if an SPV had SpaceX equity, retail investors aren’t legally buying the actual shares — they’re buying a stake in that SPV. It’s always up to the SPV’s discretion to honor their obligations and either distribute shares or cash to investors post-IPO.​

Jared Fine, a partner at the global law firm Davis Polk, highlighted just how much trust is involved in these SPV deals. Fine told The Wall Street Journal, “At the end of the day, like anything in life, it comes down to, do you trust your counterparty or with whom you’re doing business.”

Be extra skeptical about SPVs

​On paper, it’s illogical not to jump into a promising pre-IPO company like SpaceX. Although there are never guarantees, data from the University of Florida’s Jay R. Ritter shows that there’s a pretty good chance for shares to pop about 18.8% on their first day of trading. And that doesn’t factor in all the growth investors get to enjoy while companies mature in the private market.

Although SPVs have become an accessible way for retail investors to get private equity, you’ll have to forfeit a lot of control and transparency. Even in the best possible cases, these funds often have very high fees that will cut into any profits you may get.​

Some of the hottest private companies like Anthropic and OpenAI have even put out public warnings against SPVs.

In Anthropic’s case, the AI lab said any “offers to invest in Anthropic’s past or future financing rounds through an SPV are prohibited.”

OpenAI didn’t go so far as to bar SPVs from offering shares. Still, it stressed investors need “to be careful if you are contacted by a firm that purports to have access to OpenAI, including through the sale of an SPV interest with exposure to OpenAI equity.”

For anyone still tempted to invest in an SPV, FOMO shouldn’t outweigh the risks of dealing with these firms.

According to a press release from the IRS’s Criminal Investigation division, an international fraud network has been sending out letters that look like they’re coming from the federal agency. The hallmark feature of these messages is that they urge recipients to create an account on a “Digital Asset Compliance Portal.” There’s also a QR code that leads to an unofficial IRS- lookalike website that claims to help people register.

On the fake website, it asks users for sensitive personal and financial information, including info on crypto exchange accounts and wallets. If a victim submits these details, they go straight to the scammers.

Then scammers place a final phone call where they pose as a representative and ask for a password, 2FA code, or private key to get into someone’s crypto account.

The IRS wants everyone to know that there’s no such thing as a Digital Asset Compliance Portal. If you receive any communication referencing this portal, report it immediately.

“Criminals continue to exploit public trust in government agencies by creating convincing fake websites and official-looking correspondence,” Jarod Koopman, the IRS’ Criminal Investigation Chief, said in a statement.

The crypto exchange Coinbase worked with the cyber defense firm DarkTower to figure out where this scam’s fraudulent website — “irs.digitalcomplianceportal[.]com” — originated. Their research revealed the domain is on a Hong Kong registrar. Investigators also found that the fake IRS website is hosted in the same Romanian location tied to other impersonation schemes involving banks and FedEx.

Moneywise reached out to Coinbase for further comment, but did not hear back in time for publication.

Americans lose billions in Bitcoin to scammers

Of all the cybercrimes reported to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), those involving cryptocurrency cost victims the most.

Data in the FBI’s IC3’s 2025 Internet Crime Report found that the total losses for online fraud schemes that had “cryptocurrency” in the description surpassed $11 billion in 2025, making it the largest single complaint category. Roughly 181,500 complaints filed with the IC3 in 2025 involved cryptocurrency.

However, unlike the recent IRS imposter scam, — which involved stealing crypto wallet funds outright — the FBI report found that “investment scams” tend to be the most widely reported issue. In this type of scheme, fraudsters first try to build trust and get people to join a phony investing group on a messaging app. Eventually, the scammers convince victims to buy and send cryptocurrency.

Overall, the FBI reports a rise in total cybercrimes, with the complaints per year increasing from 791,790 in 2020 to over 1 million in 2025. In terms of total annual losses, the IC3 reported a steep climb from $4.2 billion in 2020 to $20.8 billion in 2025.

Don’t trust, verify the correspondence​

Everyone has to be extra skeptical about unsolicited messages from government agencies nowadays. The IRS warned that today’s fraudsters “increasingly use convincing websites, official-looking letters, and urgent deadlines to trick victims.”

“Before responding to unexpected requests for personal information, stop, verify the source, and report potential fraud schemes to law enforcement,” Koopman said.

Even though scams are becoming more sophisticated, there are often clues that help targeted victims notice something just isn’t right.

For instance, one of the most glaring tells in this recent IRS letter scam is that the website it leads people to isn’t the same as the official “IRS.gov” domain. Another is that the IRS would never ask for such personal info like an exchange account or wallet addresses.​

For crypto investors, it’s especially important to guard your wallet’s private keys and seed phrase with your life. If someone has this info, they have the power to drain your crypto wallet. There’s no legitimate reason a company or representative would ever ask for them.

If you think you’ve already fallen for a crypto fraud scheme? First, the IRS recommends stopping communication with the fraudster and changing all of the passwords on potentially compromised accounts. You should then reach out to tiplines to report this crime with relevant government agencies like IC3 and the IRS, as well as your crypto exchange.

Finally, if you share any personal information like your Social Security number, it’s a good idea to freeze your credit with the three major credit bureaus: Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax.

Unfortunately, in some cases, these multigenerational living arrangements don’t work out.

Let’s pretend, for example, that Gabriella’s son Juan has moved back in with her. He’s 27 and works as an office manager, but he’s refused to pay his share of the household bills. Gabriella is frustrated that Juan isn’t contributing to expenses, and she’s not sure if she should make Juan move out or how to handle the situation.

So, what should she do?

Understand the reasons for the non-payment

The first thing Gabriella needs to do is to figure out why Juan isn’t paying rent.

“What parents often forget is that the refusal to help out around the house or pay rent is usually just shame combined with some level of learned helplessness in a kid who may have held jobs before but never fully supported themselves,” Hayley Caddes, cofounder of Not Therapy, a coaching company for neurodivergent and stuck 18- to 29-year-olds, told Moneywise.

Getting to the bottom of Juan’s issues should be the first priority for Gabriella so she can see if they can find a solution. That’s going to involve a tough conversation, as well as some introspection to understand what she communicated when she allowed Juan to return home.

“As a parent myself, I always want to do all that I can financially for my children,” Domenick D’Andrea, founder of DanDarah Wealth Management, told Moneywise. “I’d start with the reason he moved back home and whether I laid out the rules financially for what’s expected. If he just lost his job or just ended a long-term relationship, I may be more understanding.”

The outcome of this conversation will shape Gabriella’s next move, as she may decide to give Juan some more grace or determine that tough love is the answer.

Asking adult children to pay rent isn’t always the answer

If Gabriella isn’t satisfied with Juan’s reasons for not paying rent, or if she still feels taken advantage of, D’Andrea recommends having a “long conversation about finances to make him understand that he is always welcome, but he needs to contribute or potentially find a new place to live.”

Caddes agrees that Gabriella may need to take a firm line when it comes to contributing to the household.

“Rent is non-negotiable, and the only variable should be the currency in which they pay it,” Caddes said. She explained that parents could make their children contribute in different ways after moving home. For example:

• Adult children with a job could contribute to costs with their paychecks from employers.
• Those with no job could use their savings because, as Caddes said, “watching their account move closer to zero every month is one of the most motivating experiences they can have.”
• Those with no savings or income can work off the debt and “pay rent in real labor with real market value,” Caddes suggested, advising that adult children could do tasks like power-washing the deck or digitizing 20 years of family photos.

Demanding that Juan choose a way to contribute may end up being exactly the right move, not just for Gabriella but also for Juan, as well, over the long term.

D’Andrea said said he knows how much it might sound cruel, but children need to be taught how to survive in the real world. And, one day, they’ll look back and realize how loved they are.

“Scammers often target job seekers with fraudulent job offers,” Darius Kingsley, Head of Consumer Fraud and Scam Prevention at Chase, told Moneywise. “Victims often receive an unsolicited text message or email offering a job opportunity that seems too good to pass up.”

Remote job seekers must be aware of these risks, but it’s often hard to tell if an offer is legit. For example, let’s pretend that Clara was offered a remote job paying $6,000 per month. She was hired after a short email interview, and her boss even sent her a $4,000 check to buy office equipment from the company’s preferred vendor within 24 hours.

However, while Clara was excited to add a standing desk and a computer to her cart, her husband warned it may be a scam, and now she’s concerned. But is he right? Should Clara deposit the check and buy the equipment? How can she tell if the opportunity is legit?

Is Clara’s work-from-home job a scam?

Unfortunately for Clara, experts agree that her job offer is almost certainly a scam.

“Employers don’t generally hire after one short interview, and they are highly unlikely to send a substantial check to a new hire to buy their own equipment,” Jeffrey Nadrich, an attorney who regularly represents scam victims at Nadrich Accident Injury Lawyers, told Moneywise.

Francis West, founder of Security Everywhere, agreed.

“This is almost certainly a scam,” West said. “’They hired me fast, then sent me money’ is one of the oldest and most reliable red flags there is. Legitimate employers don’t fill roles after one short interview, and they never ask a brand-new hire to receive a check and spend it on their behalf before day one,” West told Moneywise.

How does the scam work?

Not only is Clara’s job offer likely a scam, but it’s actually a classic one that follows a common playbook.

“That scenario is likely an overpayment scam,” Nadrich said. And West agreed, although he called it a classic “fake-check” or “money mule” scam.

These kinds of scams can work in a couple of different ways.

“The scammer sends a fraudulent check, which may initially appear to clear,” Kingsley said. “Then, the scammer claims they accidentally overpaid and asks the victim to return the excess funds. Once the check is discovered to be fraudulent and bounces, the victim is responsible for the money they sent back and learns the job never existed.”

Or, since Clara has been encouraged to buy the furniture from a preferred vendor, scammers could potentially get her money that way. Clara could deposit the check, then go to the “vendor” and spend the money on office equipment that never comes.

The funds would be transferred out of her bank account to pay the fake vendor, and when the fraud was discovered a few days later, the deposit would be reversed and the outlay for the fake “office supplies” would be taken out of Clara’s account directly.

“Your bank may release the funds within a couple of days, so it feels like the check cleared,” Clayton Liabraaten, a senior strategic advisor at Truecaller, told Moneywise. “It didn’t. The counterfeit gets caught weeks later, and the money comes back out of your account.”

How can Clara protect herself?

The first thing Clara must do to protect herself is avoid the scam if she’s currently caught up in one.

“If you find yourself on the receiving end of an offer like this, do not deposit or spend any of the funds,” Nadrich said, adding that Clara should “verify the employer independently, and call the bank that issued the check to confirm whether it’s real.”

West agreed.

“Don’t deposit it, don’t spend any of it, and don’t wire any ‘leftover’ funds back to the sender,” West said. “Report it to your bank and to the relevant authority, and keep the check as evidence. If it’s already been deposited, contact the bank immediately — the faster you act, the more likely the [potential] damage can be limited.”

If the employer is indeed a scammer, Clara also needs to sever ties with them — and potentially take additional steps to shore up her accounts.

“Discontinue all contact with the scammer and call your bank using the number on the back of your credit or debit card,” Kingsley said. “Your bank can help you secure your accounts, especially if you shared personal or banking information with the scammer.”

Going forward, Clara also must be more careful about who she trusts.

“Stick to reputable job boards,” Kingsley advised. “Be cautious of job postings found on social media or received via text message, as these aren’t reliable sources.”

Kingsley also said to “never pay to get a job,” while West suggested that job seekers be “wary of any hiring process that happens entirely over chat or a single quick call, with no video interview and no verifiable colleagues.”

West also had some other tips, as well, including the following:

• Do some digging into any company that has a purported job post that seems suspicious
• Search the company to see if it was caught up in past scams
• Track down the company independently and confirm an offer via phone or online

By following this advice, Clara can make sure the next job offer she gets is a legitimate one.

Anti-billionaire sentiment in America has soared to new heights that can seem contradictory, in some respects.

How can most Americans see billionaires as a threat to democracy, but also make the Kardashians, Jenners and Ronaldos some of the most-followed (and revered) figures? How can so many rally against AI companies and data centers while half of Americans use the chatbots they power? And how can an increasing majority of residents support wealth caps while regularly using the services of (and/or being employed by) the companies the targeted individuals operate?

Arguments from both camps have their merits. Surely, no one should be able to hoard billions while so many of their compatriots are impoverished; but also, everyone is entitled to the American dream of becoming as successful as they set their mind to.

Is the concept of economic justice fair to those who already pay more than a fair share for innovating, working hard and employing Americans? Is the absence of economic justice fair to those who have little? And what about the political influence that the uber-wealthy hold, and the deals made behind closed doors that directly benefit them as a result?

The tax conundrum

In the U.S., the top 1% of earners provide anywhere from around 26% to 55% of all federal tax income, depending on state. The top 25 richest people in America alone were found to contribute a staggering $13.6 billion in federal income taxes over five years in the early 2010s.

The tax system, however, is certainly not without its vulnerabilities and loopholes, which can and have been exploited in more ways than one, including the hundreds of billions lost to social program fraud.

If we’re speaking of billionaires in particular, affluent figures like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have famously claimed zero income at certain points, largely by offsetting earnings with ordinary losses through their businesses. There are also ways to defer capital gains taxes, such as borrowing against investments or 351 ETF conversions. (The debate about how ethical capital gains levies are is a whole other story.)

As calls to increase taxes on the rich for this and other reasons get louder, some argue that continuing to punish this successful sect of people with more fees will naturally, at some point, drive away business and stifle both innovation and productivity.

The Laffer Curve is one framework that argues taxing people too much yields just as little in tax revenue as taxing them next to nothing, as it leaves no incentive for people to work. The more you tax people, the more incentive there actually is to either find ways around it or leave.

Deserved vs. undeserved wealth — and who decides what is “deserved”?

There is also the fact that, massive contributions to the tax base aside, many billionaires give far more to overall welfare and industry than the wealth they distill. As one paper from Stanford University’s Hoover Institution states, “most billionaires get to be billionaires by serving us, that is, by making us better off.” Another from the George W. Bush Institute highlights that “innovators capture a mere 2% of the value their inventions generate; the rest goes to consumers, in the form of lower prices, better products, and higher living standards.”

“The persistence of inequality does not prove that the wealthy are necessarily immoral or their wealth illegitimate,” it adds.

While many of us take advantage of the low prices, wide selection and quick delivery of Jeff Bezos’s Amazon, for example, it’s admittedly hard to stomach any portion of the average person’s hard-earned money going to someone that is already worth some $290 billion.

But what motive would Bezos have to continue working, or to create Amazon in the first place, if there was a limit on how lucrative it could get? (Which would also inherently limit what he could offer the public?)

“The trade-offs are stark,” the George W. Bush Institute said. “A marginally fairer distribution of wealth would come at the cost of dynamic enterprises that employ thousands and seed entire industries.”

In this light, some argue that billionaires do actually have a right to exist, which has become an extremely controversial take in a world where the public celebrates violence against them.

Some have underlined the need to separate “productive” billionaires from the rest, as one “builds enterprises that generate widespread prosperity,” while others “extract gains through political favoritism, resource monopolies, or financial gimmickry.”

A recent Economist article outlines how more billionaires are at least “deserving,” in most people’s minds, of their wealth than ever, as progressively more earn it “not from accidents of birth or gaming the system, but by providing useful goods and services and by employing thousands of people.” These would be the “productive” billionaires mentioned above.

In America in particular, 70% of billionaires are believed to be self-made. The top 10% of earners also account for nearly half of all consumer spending in the country, and if they’re not spending it themselves, they’re facilitating spending; 40% of all online sales in the US are through Amazon, for one.

But when we’ve come to the point that even celebrities worth multi millions themselves have taken to condemning those in an echelon above even them and calling for a wider distribution of their personal wealth, does that make it a more valid argument, or serve as the ultimate irony of a nonsensical social trend?

And they were willing to upend their lives to make it happen.

“We were exhausted every single day, and I sometimes wondered if it would actually work out, if we were truly going to be able to make the move,” Finn, 24, told Moneywise. “Now, I would do it all over again.”

Finn, who worked as an assistant property manager, chronicled her desire to move to Costa Rica on social media, noting that the cost of living in the U.S. “stopped making sense for [her]” because she was “working constantly and still felt like [she] was just keeping up.” Costa Rica, by contrast, “lets [her] actually live on what [she makes], while supporting a community [she is] proud of.” She also wanted to learn more about the language, culture and way of life.

The average cost of living in Costa Rica, meanwhile, is nearly 19% lower than that of the U.S., according to Numbeo. Grocery prices are 14% lower, while rent is a whopping 43% below U.S. rates.

As such, Finn and Luke, a lab scientist, got to work on an ambitious $60,000 savings plan to fund their dream move abroad.

The couple’s $60,000 savings strategies

The Illinois couple built their Costa Rica savings using six simple strategies that required patience, persistence and, often, a lot of sacrifice:

1. They paid off their student loans so they could go “crazy with saving.”
2. They sold one of their two cars, saving $700 a month.
3. They got second jobs working as servers at a restaurant, putting in 60-hour work weeks.
4. They meal-prepped as much as they could.
5. They asked their family to buy them things they needed for the move as birthday and Christmas gifts.
6. At a going away party, they raffled off plants, gave away belongings and received cards with gifts of cash.

Finn told Moneywise that the easiest strategy was giving up their second car while their “pain point in the savings department” proved to be the meal prep while working from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m..

“We would try to spend most Saturday or Sunday mornings meal prepping, but we couldn’t always keep up with every meal,” she said. “But we were able to find quick meal preps, easy breakfasts, and eat at the restaurant we worked at.”

By sticking to their plan, they managed to save the $60,000 they needed to move to Costa Rica. Finn said that she now works remotely as an executive assistant, while Luke tends to the house and their pets after struggling to find remote work as a scientist.

Finn noted, though, that life in Costa Rica “changed [their] strategies to save money moving forward.” Aside from the drastic change in expenses that allows them to save more naturally, the couple shops local, makes all their meals at home and forgoes gym memberships by playing sports or surfing each day. They also stuck to their one vehicle rule.

“We are now saving to eventually settle down and build a home, either in Southeast Asia or Europe,” she added. “We hit our goal, and we know how; now it’s time for the next one.”

Savings strategies to build your own nestegg

Finn’s advice to others embarking on a savings journey is to ask yourself how serious you are about the process.

“If you just want to cut back on your morning coffee runs, you may save a couple hundred a month,” she said. “But if you are looking to truly see a difference in your account, you have to make sacrifices you wouldn’t normally consider.”

She also suggests starting with small sacrifices like nail appointments or golfing, and working up to bigger ones like cutting out a car or taking a second job. It all comes down to, as she put it, “changing your lifestyle now to create the one you want.”

That advice, meanwhile, aligns with financial experts who recommend the S.M.A.R.T. approach to saving: Specific savings goals, Measurable amounts put aside, Achievable timelines, Relevant to your wider priorities and Time-bound deadlines to make it happen.

Once you identify a savings goal — be it for a home, car or moving abroad — it’s important to understand the total cost and add on a little extra to the total for any fees or taxes that could bump the final cost up.

Establishing a realistic savings timeline and breaking your goal down into smaller monthly payments that feel less daunting are both great ways to help build that cash reserve. As is automating your savings — into a high-yield account or otherwise appropriate account that will help them grow — and taking advantage of cash windfalls.

And if you struggle with budgeting or spending, various apps can help ensure you stay on pace and keep you accountable.

Of course, strategies like taking on a second job — as Finn and Luke did — offer an added cash injection, though she cautioned in an interview with People that “burnout came quickly.”

Still, Finn told Moneywise that it was the small savings goals they hit first that gave the couple faith that they could ultimately pull off their Costa Rica move.

“We knew that if we could make a small change,” she said, “we could make any change we want.”

Unfortunately, inheriting a home is not always a straightforward proposition. In fact, in some cases, heirs may think a home is theirs free and clear, but that may not necessarily be the case at all.

Let’s pretend, for example, that Lauren and her two sisters “inherited” their grandmother’s house because her grandmother specified in the will that they would become the new owners. Unfortunately, as the family was coping with the aftermath of a death and going through the probate process, the bank seized the home and sold it at auction.

Now, Lauren is wondering how this could have happened. Unfortunately, experts say this is more common than you might think, although there are ways to prevent it from happening.

How can you lose an inherited home?

For Lauren and her sisters, it probably seemed like their grandmother’s will was enough to ensure the home would become theirs. But that’s simply not the case.

“It comes down to one basic point that surprises a lot of families,” Raul Gastesi, founding partner of Gastesi Lopez Mestre & Cobiella, told Moneywise. “You inherit the house subject to whatever is owed against it.”

Gastesi explained that many people die with a mortgage, and when this happens, someone must continue making payments.

“A mortgage is a lien on the property itself, not a personal IOU from your grandmother,” Gastesi said. “Her death doesn’t erase that lien, and it doesn’t pay off the loan. The lender’s right to foreclose follows the house into your hands, and inheriting the property does not, by itself, give you any right to stop paying.”

Unfortunately, Gastesi said this scenario happens often, usually because the family is grieving or arguing about what happens to property, or because no one is sure who is in charge. The family ends up not making payments, so the loan goes into default, and the bank can foreclose.

Gastesi also said that reverse mortgages can cause a similar issue. “Many older homeowners have one, and the entire balance becomes due and payable when the last borrower dies or permanently leaves the home,” he explained. If heirs don’t act within the allowable time, which could be six months or so, the lender can foreclose.

Finally, he warned that other claims against the property also survive a death, including property taxes, HOA fees or code enforcement liens. If a creditor decides to foreclose because of these unpaid debts, heirs could lose the house if they don’t act.

What can heirs (and property owners) do to prevent this

The good news is, this type of situation can be prevented, especially because, as Gastesi explained, “federal law prevents a lender from calling the loan just because the property passed to a relative, so the fear that inheriting the home will automatically trigger the full balance is generally unfounded.”

The key is for heirs to act quickly by reaching out to the loan servicer, providing proof of the death, and asking to be confirmed as a successor in interest. This gives heirs the right to request payment info, apply to assume the loan, or request a loan modification if needed.

The estate or the heirs should also keep making mortgage payments, or should find out what their obligations are with a reverse mortgage. And if the estate or the successor in interest receives a foreclosure notice, they can’t ignore it.

“Heirs are proper parties, and they can appear, raise defenses, seek mediation, or negotiate a payoff or short sale,” Gastesi said.

Unfortunately, these steps should all be taken before a property is sold, because getting it back after foreclosure could be impossible. The good news for Lauren is that according to Gastesi, “if the property sells at the foreclosure auction for more than the total debt, that surplus belongs to the owner of record, which after death generally means the heirs.”

Lauren may have to claim that money within the state’s deadline, though, or she and her sisters risk losing it. They should talk to a lawyer about doing so ASAP to protect what’s left of the inheritance their grandmother intended to provide.

“Wealth is about freedom, choice, and purposeful living,” said Racquel Oden, HSBC’s U.S. Head of International Wealth and Private Banking.

Of those worldwide who’ve already taken a mini retirement, 87% said it made their life better. But those surveyed are comfortable people: 10,797 investors across 12 markets, everyone holding between $100,000 and $2 million.

Many still get cold feet about actually taking a mini retirement. Four in 10 expect the break itself to cost less than $100,000, but they still want about $530,000 in the bank first. Still, with several months of expenses, health coverage and a way back into work, $530,000 can start to shrink fast.

How much you need to save depends on how long you’re off work

Start from what you spend and not from what feels safe. For instance, if your household costs $5,000 a month and you want to take eight months off, you need $40,000, or closer to $50,000 once you allow for the job hunt on the other side.

Save toward that over three years and you’re moving about $1,400 a month; give yourself five and it falls under $850. This is the same goal-setting you’d do for retirement, just run over three years instead of 30 — and that’s the whole trick of it.

But James Hargrave, a CFP who runs Pillar Financial Planning in Raymore, Missouri, sees a different blind spot: Clients budget to replace their paycheck but never think about how they’ll fill the days.

“Some clients simply want to slow down,” he told Moneywise — read, exercise, see friends — and that mostly fits inside what they already spend. It’s the big travel plans that blow estimates.

Then there’s where the money sits. Your 401(k) is not the pot to draw from, because the IRS charges an extra 10% on early distributions from a 401(k) or traditional IRA before 59½, on top of the income tax you already owe.

If the break is inside two years, high-yield savings is fine. Beyond that, a taxable brokerage account will grow your money without locking anything behind a penalty, though you’ll owe capital gains tax when you sell.

The costs people forget to budget for

Talk to your employer before you settle on a number, because how you leave changes nearly everything that follows. A negotiated leave of absence can hold your seniority and sometimes your health coverage, and it’s worth asking whether your company has a sabbatical policy.

Quit and you give both up, along with any employer match you hadn’t vested.

Ask after a good review, and get the return date in writing.

“You’ve lost nothing by asking instead of quitting outright,” said Phillip Durbin, who runs Generational Wealth Development, an advice-only planning firm in Cameron, Missouri. Just be ready, he added, for the company to cut you loose instead.

Stay on your employer’s plan through an approved leave and nothing changes except possibly who pays the premium. If your coverage ends, COBRA will keep you on the identical plan, but the U.S. Department of Labor says you can be charged the full premium — up to 102% of what that coverage costs the plan.

KFF’s 2025 employer health benefits survey put average annual premiums at $9,325 for single coverage and $26,993 for a family, with employers covering most of it. At 102%, COBRA works out to roughly $790 a month for one person and $2,290 for a family, so price it against an ACA marketplace plan before you pick a date. And COBRA generally only applies to employers with 20 or more staff.

Your retirement contributions pause, as well. On a $75,000 salary, eight months at a 5% rate is $2,500 you didn’t put in, plus whatever your employer would have matched. Raising your rate the year before helps — but only if your plan trues up the match at year-end rather than matching per paycheck.

If eight months isn’t realistic, plan a shorter sabbatical

Three months off is still a sabbatical. At $5,000 a month that’s $15,000, or under $500 a month saved over three years, and all the mechanics stay the same.

You can also stack what you’ve already got, since accrued PTO on the front end of an unpaid leave shortens the unpaid stretch, and a six-week gap between jobs counts, too.

Income during the break also moves the number faster than saving does. In fact, 36% of HSBC’s respondents said they’d fund a break partly through part-time or freelance work — bringing in $1,500 a month across a three-month break cuts what you need to save by close to a third.

If the number isn’t there yet, the answer from both planners is to wait.

“If they have $8,000 saved, perhaps taking one month off with another job already lined up is feasible,” Hargrave said. “That’s very different from taking off several months or longer without a clear source of income.”

Domenick D’Andrea, co-founder of DanDarah Wealth Management in Westbury, New York, carves out one exception: caregiving. If the break is to look after young children or aging parents, and paid care would cost “almost the same as going to work,” he said, the math can favor a leave of absence even when the savings aren’t there.

For everyone else, that’s a savings question before it’s a planning one. Median retirement savings across the U.S. workforce came to $955 as of December 2022, and closing that gap comes first.

The 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey from EBRI and Greenwald Research found the typical retiree stopped working at 62, and nearly half of them left earlier than they had planned to. A break you saved for years in advance is the rare version of time off where you pick the date.

From when the ideal time to retire or start taking Social Security is to how much money you need saved, all the hypotheticals and unknowns can start to get out of hand.

Here’s what we do know: Most Americans think 62 is the ideal age to retire, according to Pew Research data. But the reality is nearly half of U.S. workers end up retiring before they were planning to — and often for reasons outside of their control.

Almost 60% of workers told Allianz they worry they won’t be able to retire on their terms. And the most common factor holding them back was not having enough money saved.

Whether you’re dreaming of freedom 55 or preparing for the likelihood of clocking out sooner than you’d expected, here’s how to focus on finding a realistic number for your savings goal.

Rethinking your retirement

The typical American adult has a life expectancy for 79 years — the highest it’s ever been. That means if you retire at 62, you’re looking at a 17-year retirement.

Most conventional financial planning is based on this length of retirement. These plans also assume that you can rely on Social Security benefits because 62 happens to be the earliest age many Americans become eligible for these benefits.

But if you retire early, let’s say at age 55, and live to 83 — now you’ve got 28 years of retirement your savings need to cover. If you retire a few years earlier or live for a few years longer than that, you could be looking at a 35-year plan. And the longer you live, the more expensive your last years are likely to be.

It doesn’t matter how well you planned at one point. An additional three to 10 years could completely blow up any retirement plan. Major changes like that will mean you either need a bigger nest egg or a more conservative approach to withdrawals.

Don’t forget that you’re on the hook financially for plugging the gap between when you retire and when you qualify for Social Security and Medicare. And that’s also only getting more expensive these days.

With all this in mind, savvy investors may want to ensure their retirement savings is large and robust enough to withstand 40 years of inflation, market volatility and also bridge their financial needs until government programs become available to them.

How to build a 401(k) bridge to early retirement

Simply put, if you’re retiring early you need to be more disciplined and conservative in your financial planning. Your nest egg needs to be larger and your withdrawal rate needs to be lower.

Let’s take the example of Mia, a middle-aged professional. She’s on track to receive $25,000 a year in Social Security benefits at the age of 62 but estimates that her annual retirement costs could be $75,000 altogether.

If she retires at 62, her calculations suggest she needs a nest egg worth $1.25 million from which she can safely withdraw 4% to plug the $50,000 gap in her spending needs.

However, Mia hates her job and wants to retire early to focus on her hobby of home brewing beer. If she retires at 52, she needs a larger nest egg to deliver $75,000 a year until she’s eligible for Social Security benefits.

Mia is also keenly aware of the inflation and market volatility risk she faces by adding 10 extra years to her retirement, so decides to lower her withdrawal rate to 3.5%, with annual adjustments for inflation.

Based on these assumptions, Mia would need $2.14 million to retire comfortably at 52. That’s 71.2% bigger than the nest egg she needs at a typical retirement age.

Working with a professional financial advisor could help Mia further customize this plan. Perhaps a sophisticated strategy like Roth conversion laddering or a simple cut to her annual budget could allow her to retire early with a smaller 401(k). She could also lean on part-time or gig work to bridge her income until Social Security kicks in. Either way, she’ll want to figure it out before she pulls the trigger on retiring.

The bottom line is: If you want to retire early, you’ll need a bigger nest egg and a tighter budget. Savvy investors understand this — and plan accordingly.

— with files from Sigrid Forberg

Written by Jerry Falade, himself a Nigerian Ph.D. candidate at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, the book’s premise was intriguing enough to spur 14 publishers into an auction, which Macmillan’s Minotaur Books won with a bid of $2.4 million, also including a follow-up book.

However, in a twist fit for a novel, Falade’s agent Marc Gerald, primary agent of Europa Content, pulled the book from submission on July 29, citing concerns that Falade used AI to write what would be his debut novel. The sudden, high-profile turn of events is the latest in the ongoing discussion about AI within the publishing industry.

A new author’s book deal is canceled

Gerald and his agency, which are no longer affiliated with Falade, had to win their own 10-way bidding war to represent Falade and his book.

“The book was stunningly good, everyone fell in love with it,” Gerald said in an interview with The Bookseller. “It’s a book that appeals to absolutely everyone.”

According to Gerald, an editor was concerned the book may have been written using AI partway through the submission process, but they, “went through the manuscript [with the author] in extreme detail, discussed the responsibilities of an author, and ultimately continued with the submission,” Gerald told The Bookseller.

Ultimately, the agency decided to pull the book after a meeting on July 29, when “aspects of [the author’s] story changed,” Gerald said. “We need to have total faith.”

After rescinding its submission, Hodgman Literary, which sells books to international publishers and represented Falade, sent an email, obtained by Deadline, to international publishers, which reads: “[The author] produced an incredible manuscript that dazzled us and the top publishing professionals around the world. Unfortunately, we are no longer able to authenticate how the manuscript fully evolved from origin to completion.”

An anonymous editor who bid on the novel told The Bookseller that they didn’t detect any AI while reading the manuscript, “and neither did any of [their] sales, marketing or publicity colleagues who also read alongside [them],” they said.

Falade has denied using AI to write the text of the book.

“The story, characters, scenes, humor, structure and voice came from me, and I have time-stamped drafts, written notes and dated WhatsApp messages documenting the book’s development,” Falade told The Bookseller.

However, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Falade says he used an open-source AI model running locally on his device for book research. He says he used the AI model to query searches on topics that might raise red flags when taken out of context, like what chemicals may be useful for dissolving a human body.

“Within six hours of the rumors, I lost U.S., U.K., translation, and screen opportunities without being given a proper chance to explain my writing process,” Falade told The Bookseller.

Falade also called into question the results of AI detection software being used as conclusive evidence when they can provide false positives.

“I tested passages from books published in 2012 and 2017, and the software classified them as 98 and 99% AI-generated, despite their predating the widespread availability of generative AI,” he said.

However, Gerald denies using AI detection software in their decision to rescind their submission.

“The technology isn’t at a place where we have determined it’s reliable anyway,” he told The Bookseller.

Falade says the AI accusations against him are a result of racial biases in the publishing industry.

“There seems to be a troubling assumption that when a Black writer produces work that attracts significant attention, the work could not possibly be their own,” he said in a statement to The Guardian.

He also took to social media to share his thoughts on the matter.

“Definitely innocent!!!” Falade wrote in an Instagram story on Tuesday. “They CAN’T and WON’T stop this Black boy’s light from shining!!” he wrote in another.

An industry struggling to keep up with AI

The email sent out to international publishers after the book’s withdrawal concludes with: “This raises so many questions about authorship and what AI means for this industry, but those are questions for another day.”

However, this is not the first time these questions have arisen. In March 2026, Hatchette, one of the Big Five publishing companies alongside Macmillan, halted the publication of horror novel “Shy Girl” after The New York Times presented evidence that the book may be AI-generated. Additionally, a study of 14,419 self-published books on Amazon, put through AI detection program Pangram, found that 50% of the prose in 2,168 of the books were AI-generated and 970 of them were 90% AI-generated.

The time to address the many questions is now, and the anonymous editor who bid on the book has the first question.

“What concerns me is whose responsibility it is to determine that the writing is AI-created or AI-assisted — and how do we determine that?” they posited to The Bookseller.

Sharyn Rosart, a clinical assistant professor of publishing at New York University, posited another question to Moneywise.

“Given how many editors were so excited about this project, what does that say about our inability to really determine who has written something?” she asked.

Unfortunately, Falade has borne the brunt of the consequences of the yet-to-be-resolved issues about how we detect AI in written works and what are the acceptable uses of AI in the book-writing process.

“I do feel badly for that author who I feel has had an unnecessarily unfortunate experience due to the fact that the industry is not really fully prepared for everything that’s happened,” Rosart said. “I think we have a lot of work to do to figure out how to deal with AI in a way that is responsible and fair. We are not there yet.”

“They are tremendously important for the economics. For Texas to say no to data centers is a mistake in the sense that it could be bigger than oil,” Trump said in a Punchbowl News interview published Friday. “Data centers could be bigger than oil.”

Trump was referring to a Monday announcement from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to impose a moratorium on the construction of data centers until state regulators are able to audit the proposed ones now seeking to be connected to the Texas power grid.

The president continued: “There are a lot of communities that want them, but more importantly, and bad for us, there are a lot of countries that want them. And if we turn off on data centers, we turn off on AI.”

The split on data centers

Trump’s robust defense of data centers will put him out of step with public opinion. About 70% of Americans oppose a data center being constructed in their neighborhood, according to Heatmap News polling in June.

About seven in 10 (71%) of Americans responded similarly in a Gallup poll published in May. Data centers represent a source of friction in the upcoming November midterms, given their role in driving up electricity demand and yielding sharp monthly power bill increases for many Americans.

The president also said data center developers are “becoming like a utility, a public utility” and touted the administration’s efforts to fast-track the permitting process that connects the facilities onto the electric grid.

Early in his second term, Trump prioritized the AI race and scaling back regulation to allow development of the nascent technology. However, the Trump administration started taking steps towards greater oversight over frontier AI models in recent months.

The Trump administration has also sought to limit utility bill increases. The White House recently pushed for more governors, electricity companies, and data center developers to sign onto a voluntary ratepayer protection pledge meant to shield families from utility bill increases. However, experts are skeptical about the nonbinding pledge materializing into major savings for Americans, since hyperscalers continue an virtually unchecked data center buildout that will heighten electricity demand.

Where Democrats stand on data centers

Democrats are split on how to deal with data centers. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the chief tax writer for Senate Democrats, released a proposal on Wednesday for a single-digit excise tax on data centers that could be used to soften the blow for unemployed workers.

“These proposals are a first step towards safeguarding taxpayer dollars and ensuring there are resources to support American workers displaced by the coming disruptions to the economy,” Wyden said in a statement.

Other policy proposals include an excise tax applied specifically to the energy usage of data centers from Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a prominent progressive.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont has advocated for a data center moratorium, in addition to the federal government taking a 50% equity stake in the largest AI companies. The latter, he says, would ensure that CEOs can’t displace workers on a whim.

The claim traces back to a joke that’s been circulating for months. Flock’s cameras, which photograph license plates and feed them into databases used by police, have a lot of enemies online.

Among privacy activists, a running gag took hold: there’s supposedly a small fortune in metal inside each unit, so why not turn one into scrapyard money? It was a bit, not a tip. Google’s AI didn’t get the joke and started repeating it as fact. Adding to the mishap is the fact the Flock camera actually weighs about three pounds.

What the AI Overview said

Futurism’s Joe Wilkins reported that if you searched “how much gold does a Flock camera have,” Google gave you a straight answer. Each camera holds “about 1 to 5 grams of gold” in its circuit boards and wiring, the Overview claimed, along with as much as 23 pounds of copper. At that week’s gold prices, 5 grams came to roughly $650 per camera.

And where did Google find all this? Two places. One was a Substack post from an anonymous account called “do.not.obey.do.not.comply,” which put the scrap value at $150 to $500. Even that post didn’t pretend to know — it said the figure came from “estimates based on scrap-value discussions,” which is a long way of saying somebody guessed. The other source was an AI-generated Instagram post telling followers to tear into the hardware. The account behind it mostly posts about growing cannabis.

That was the entire evidence base behind an answer sitting in Google’s most prominent slot, above every actual webpage.

Google didn’t respond when Futurism reached out for comment. But by Aug. 6, when TechSpot’s Skye Jacobs checked, the answer had flipped: the Overview now tells you the copper claim can’t be true because the whole unit weighs about 3 pounds, that any gold is trace-level, and that the rumors “come from internet memes and AI hallucinations, not facts.”

Which means a meme boosted by an AI-generated post, then repeated by Google’s AI, is now being knocked down by the same AI that spread it.

Why the scrap math never worked, anyway

Gold was trading around $4,350 an ounce on Aug. 7, about $140 a gram, so it’s easy to see why the meme sounded like a real cash grab opportunity. At that price, 5 grams would mean around $700 worth is just hanging on a pole. For anyone drawn to the metal itself, there are far easier ways to invest in gold than climbing one.

But that gold isn’t in there — at least not in any way you could get at. There’s gold in a Flock camera the same way there’s gold in your phone: tiny traces spread across circuit boards and connectors, recoverable only if you know exactly what you’re doing. Futurism figured that without circuit-board scrapping experience, you’d be “hard pressed to earn enough to buy a Big Mac.”

The copper number that Google’s AI spat out was even worse. You can’t fit 23 pounds of anything inside a 3-pound device, and nothing in the answer suggested the AI ever ran that check. So the realistic outcome of someone following Google’s advice was a vandalism charge and a handful of parts worth a few dollars at best.

Why it matters for the rest of us

This AI overview got flagged because the error was funny and the subject was controversial. But the process that produced it was ordinary: somebody asked a question, the AI went hunting for text that resembled an answer, and the best matches happened to be a meme and the posts repeating it.

That same system answers financial questions all day. Someone earning $70,000 who searches for the rules on early 401(k) withdrawals, or whether they owe capital gains on a home sale, is reading output from the same process.

Every AI Overview lists its sources as small links under the text — click them to read the original sources before you trust a number. If the trail ends at the IRS’ website, a company filing or a named expert, you’re probably fine. If it ends at an anonymous Substack, treat the number like a stranger’s hot tip, because that’s what it is.

Moneywise contacted Google and Flock Safety for comment, but did not hear back in time for publication.

Among medical graduates who borrowed, the median education debt for the class of 2025 was $215,000, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. Shay Taylor-Allen owes roughly $590,000 — nearly three times that amount.

The 32-year-old recently began an anesthesiology residency at Yale New Haven Hospital, the same place where she was born and later spent nearly a decade as a janitor, cleaning patient rooms for $14 an hour.

At the time, becoming a doctor wasn’t yet the goal. Instead, Taylor-Allen was drawn to the hospital job for the stability it seemed to offer.

“I just remember people telling me that you could retire there,” she told CNBC Make It. “This is a job you can have for a long time. They have good benefits.”

A leap of faith

As she was working as a janitor at the hospital at 18, she was unsure about attending college and viewed healthcare as a field with dependable pay and benefits. The job was personal for Taylor-Allen, too. Her mother was being treated at the hospital after suffering serious injuries in a house fire, but she felt the medical staff were not taking her condition seriously enough.

She wrote directly to the hospital’s CEO — whose trash she emptied as part of her job — and said his involvement helped her mother get the correct diagnosis.

That experience inspired her to become a doctor.

“Let me become that doctor that I felt like should have helped my mom,” she recalls thinking. “Let me be in that position to help more people who look like my mother.”

For the class of 2026, the median four-year cost of attendance is nearly $298,000 at a public medical school and more than $408,000 at a private one, according to the AAMC. That does not include any debt students may already have from college or graduate school.

Taylor-Allen now earns about $88,000 a year as a resident. Combined with her husband’s Department of Veterans Affairs benefits, the couple brings in roughly $150,000 a year.

A costly degree

Taylor-Allen relied heavily on student loans throughout her education. After tuition was paid, she said she received roughly $30,000 a year in loan refunds to cover rent, groceries and other living expenses, forcing her to stretch borrowed money across the school year.

She and her husband hope things will get a little easier now that they have settled in New Haven. Their new apartment in Connecticut is larger than the one they rented in Washington, D.C., but costs $2,900 a month compared with more than $3,500 before.

Taylor-Allen expects to earn between $350,000 and $700,000 a year once she finishes residency and begins working as an anesthesiologist. That future salary could make her debt more manageable, but a nearly $600,000 balance is still a difficult number to ignore.

And what she does with that debt now could matter. Taylor-Allen has said she plans to defer her federal student loans throughout her four-year residency.

George Dimov, a certified public accountant and founder of Dimov Partners, told Moneywise that deferring could be costly if Taylor-Allen’s loans and employer qualify for Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

Under PSLF, borrowers can have their remaining federal student debt forgiven after making 120 qualifying monthly payments while working for an eligible employer. Federal repayment rules changed in July, including the introduction of a new income-driven Repayment Assistance Plan that can count toward PSLF.

“The first thing I’d check isn’t her budget,” he told Moneywise. “It’s whether her residency employer actually qualifies, because that one answer changes the entire repayment strategy.”

The decision could also affect how quickly Taylor-Allen and her husband can rebuild the savings they depleted during their move, begin investing again and eventually start a family.

Before taking on six figures of debt

The cost of Taylor-Allen’s education has stretched well beyond her student loan balance. Her husband sold nearly all of his investments, mostly cryptocurrency, to help the couple through their move.

For anyone considering medical school or another professional degree, it is worth looking at the full cost before borrowing. That includes tuition and interest, but also rent, living expenses, years spent earning a lower training salary and other financial goals that may have to wait.

Students can start by speaking with their school’s financial aid office and exploring scholarships, grants, fellowships or repayment programs that could reduce how much they need to borrow. For couples, the conversation should also include how expenses will be shared and what each person is willing to sacrifice along the way.

And before deferring loans or settling on a repayment strategy, it may be worth speaking with a financial adviser or student loan expert. A high salary later can make a costly degree easier to manage, but it does not replace having a plan now.

For Taylor-Allen, the payoff is about more than what she may eventually earn. She hopes her own path will help her connect with patients who may see some of themselves in her. After all, it was not that long ago that she walked the same hospital halls in a very different role.

“When I talk to my patients, I understand they’re just like me.hey come from the same neighborhoods I come from,” she said. “I can speak to them just about day-to-day life besides their diagnosis.”

“There’s a whole movement in ‘how can I get the best sleep possible,’” said 29-year-old Nick Smart to USA Today. He represents the very oldest of the Gen Z cohort, which represents people born between 1997 and 2012. “I want to wake up and feel refreshed, not feel like garbage trying to play catch up all day long.”

This new trend, which some are calling sleepmaxxing, is one of the healthier trends that’s graced social media in recent years.

To do it, some Gen Zers are dropping serious money on mattresses and other sleep aids, Smart among them. He told USA Today that he and his wife invested in a $2,400 smart mattress topper after his son was born to try and win back some of the sleep they lost.

“This could really help us get better sleep, deeper sleep,” he said.

Here’s why Gen Z is so interested in getting enough sleep — and how they can afford it.

The youngest working generation is fighting high-stress situations by getting more sleep and spending on sleep aides

Gen Z is one of the most stressed generations. A 2023 study from the American Psychological Association found that those aged 18 to 34 — mostly Gen Z, with some Millennials — rated their stress level at an average of six out of 10, the highest of any age group.

According to a study from UNICEF, around 60% of Gen Z feel overwhelmed by what’s going on around them, whether that’s in their local community or the world as a whole. Overwhelmed Gen Z members to have lower levels of both well-being and empowerment.

A 2026 survey from Deloitte also shows that over half of Gen Z adults have had to put off major life decisions because of their finances — potentially for reasons outside of their control, such as the current high cost of living.

“The cost of living is a significant concern because it directly affects my ability to meet essential needs,” said Tymon, one of the Gen Z members of the survey. “When costs rise faster than income it strains our budgets, reduces our ability to save, and limits discretionary spending.”

Perhaps as a result, Gen Z is focused on something they do have control over: their wellness routine. Despite their youth, Gen Z spends above-average amounts of money across several different wellness categories, according to McKinsey research. These include health, nutrition, mindfulness, and sleep.

It might seem strange that Gen Z, with its financial concerns, would be willing to spend more on expensive mattresses or gravity blankets. But the generation isn’t using leftover money from their paycheck to buy these things. Instead, they’re taking advantage of an increasingly popular type of healthcare account.

Gen Z’s sleep spending is funded from pre-tax HSAs

The U.S. has one of the most expensive healthcare systems in the world. And the situation is getting worse quickly. In 2025, Mercer estimated that health plan costs would increase by 9% on average for employers. Over half of employers told Mercer they were planning to shift at least some of those costs to employees.

“The price of healthcare is going up faster than it has in a long time,” said Larry Levitt, Executive Vice President for Health Policy at KFF, to NPR. “And typically when an employer is getting a big increase from an insurer, the employer is turning around and trying to pass on some or all of that to its workers.”

One way for both employers and employees to reduce high premiums is to take on a high-deductible health plan (HDHP). These plans cost less per month than normal health insurance, but beneficiaries have to pay almost all of their healthcare costs out-of-pocket until they hit their deductible.

HDHPs come with a tool that other plans don’t provide: health savings plans, or HSAs. Employees can put pre-tax money into an HSA, then spend that money on doctor’s visits, medication, and certain wellness-related products.

Truemed, an HSA marketplace, says that the total number of HSA accounts was up by 6% year-over-year in mid-2025. Gen Z is most likely to have an HSA; 56% of Gen Z has one, compared to 35% of Gen X and 24% of Boomers.

Sleep is a huge driver of Gen Z HSA spending. Over 15% of Gen Z orders on Truemed were sleep-related. Next up were Millenials, but only 10% of their orders were sleep related.

Truemed says that some sleep brands, such as Purple, could qualify for HSA spending depending on whether the buyer had a chronic sleep condition, such as insomnia. You might need a letter of medical necessity to make the HSA purchase, though.

Truemed did not immediately respond to Moneywise’s request for comment.

BBC reported that an anonymous lottery player threw away a ticket that was worth €1 million, more than $1.1 million, at a shop in Bitonto, in Italy’s Apulia region.

They had checked the ticket at the shop, but were told it was “non-payable” and tossed it out.

When the player returned home, the report says, their relative pointed out that the numbers they always play — 2, 4, 8, 10, and 51 — had been drawn.

“This story is nothing short of miraculous,” Roberto Nicola Toscano, director of waste-collection company SANB, told Italian news agency Ansa, BBC reported.

Toscano said the “non-payable” message appears if a lottery prize is too big to be paid out by a merchant.

“It was then that they realized the misunderstanding,” Toscano reportedly said. “So they all went to the shop together and discovered that the tickets had been thrown away and collected by one of our operators.”

The search for the winning ticket

The player got in touch with Toscano’s company, and the garbage truck that had collected the trash containing the ticket was located — before its load was compacted. Toscano noted that this was another lucky break for the player: If it hadn’t been a Sunday, the load would have already been dumped in a landfill.

The truck was taken to a special site where waste workers began to search for, as Toscano put it, a “small piece of paper hidden in a mountain of waste.”

The winner had agreed beforehand to cover the cost of the search.

After two days, a waste worker found the ticket in a haystack, “with the workers cheering as if they had won the prize themselves,” the BBC report says.

“It was in a hole-ridden bag along with other damaged tickets; this was one of the few intact ones,” Toscano reportedly said.

Toscano told BBC News that he couldn’t reveal the winner’s identity, but did say that he and his colleagues thought to try their own luck and buy a scratch ticket as a joke.

But the luck seems to have been contagious, as they won €50, about $57.

Lotto dreams

While it’s fun to hear stories of good luck when it comes to the lottery — and hard not to daydream about what you yourself would do with the money if your ticket was drawn — for many Americans, unrealistic ideas about the odds of winning persist.

The odds of winning a Powerball jackpot, for example, are one in 292.2 million. But a 2019 survey found that 59% of millennials said winning a jackpot “is a reasonable way to retire.”

Another survey, conducted in 2005, found that 21% of Americans thought the most practical way they could accumulate several hundred thousand dollars was by winning the lottery. When the same survey asked respondents about “very important wealth-building strategies for all Americans, 16% said ‘win the lottery.’”

As such, Americans spent $104.7 billion on state-run lottery tickets in 2024, according to Census Bureau data.

But a 2024 analysis by The Economist found that poorer households “spend significantly more, in absolute terms,” on lottery tickets than wealthier households.

“In the poorest 1% of zip codes that have lottery retailers, the average American adult spends around $600 a year, or nearly 5% of their income, on tickets,” The Economist found. “That compares with just $150, or 0.15%, for those in the richest 1% of zip codes.”

That means that, as a share of income, poorer households spend 30 times more on lotteries than wealthier ones.

While it may not be as exciting as buying lottery tickets, consider the savings you could build from weekly lottery spending. If you spend $10 a week, that’s $520 a year.

If you meet the income thresholds for the Saver’s Credit (to be replaced by Saver’s Match in 2027), and put that $520 into an eligible retirement savings plan, depending on your income, you could get a tax credit equal to 10%, 20% or 50% of your contribution (up to $2,000).

And if you invested $520 a year for 20 years at 5% interest, you would have more than $18,000.

While betting on winning big might seem more entertaining, if you put that bet into a deposit, your odds of coming out ahead will go way up — no luck needed.

The average cost of throwing a wedding is $34,200, but it’s not just the happy couple who has to clear out their bank accounts. Attending a wedding now comes at an average cost of around $610.00. This includes spending around $150 on the gift.

But what happens if the wedding itself costs much more than average? Does that mean your gift budget must increase accordingly?

Let’s pretend, for example, that Lisa’s niece is getting married in a lavish wedding that costs $500 per plate. Since Lisa was invited with a plus one and she’s bringing a date, she fears that she’ll need to spend $1,000 on a gift since she’s heard the present is supposed to roughly pay for the meal. She can’t afford to do that, though, so she’s not sure what to do.

Fortunately, wedding and etiquette experts have good news for Lisa.

A wedding invitation isn’t an invoice

Lisa’s fears about the gift aren’t entirely unfounded. It’s true that in some regions, the traditional rule of thumb for wedding guests was to “cover your plate.”

Of course, this was always a suggestion, rather than an enforceable requirement, and many wedding guests have abandoned the idea entirely because an invite shouldn’t be treated as an invoice for the food served.

“The idea of paying to cover your plate is a bit outdated as weddings come in all different styles these days,” Mariah Humbert, an etiquette expert and author of What Do I Do?, a modern wedding etiquette guide, told Moneywise.

Kristen Tomkowid, a wedding photographer and owner of Little But Fierce Photography, agrees.

“It is not on the guests to pay for a couple’s lavish tastes, and the meal still is only a part of how much a wedding costs per person,” she told Moneywise.

Look beyond the price of a meal

So, if Lisa and her date no longer need to pony up $1,000 just because the dinner costs that much, how much should they bring?

“Guests should feel comfortable gifting only what they can afford, and their presence at the event should be all that is wanted by the couple,” Tomkowid said. “It does not matter how close of a family member or friend this is either.”

Basing the size of a gift solely on the cost of the catering can also be a mistake, as it makes the gesture feel more like a business exchange than a celebration of the couple’s love.

“Your niece graciously invited you to bring a guest with you along to her wedding, and that does not need to be transactional,” Humbert recommended. “Give a gift that is thoughtful and generous, but not something that goes outside what your personal budget allows.”

What if you do want to pay the price per plate?

Even if Lisa is feeling traditional and wants to cover her catering costs, experts say she still doesn’t have to bring a $1,000 gift.

“The standard ‘rule’ for wedding gifts is per individual or couple,” Jo Hayes, founder of EtiquetteExpert.Org, told Moneywise. “I know, this may not seem fair for individuals, but it is what it is. So if you’re bringing a guest, the standard rule applies: You should spend $500 on a gift, as a couple.”

Ultimately, Lisa will need to decide how much she’s comfortable spending, but $1,000 almost assuredly is too much, especially given how much the average guest spends on a gift.

While Lisa could decide to be a bit more generous than most if her budget allows, a bride expecting every couple attending her wedding to hand over a $1,000 check would give new meaning to the term bridezilla, so hopefully that’s not an expectation Lisa’s niece has.

From humans colonizing Mars to flooding U.S. roads with robotaxis by 2020, Musk is known for his visions of the future — even if most don’t come true. In fact, a recent New York Times analysis of 600 Musk predictions dating back 15 years found that only about 19% came to fruition. So, there’s that.

Nevertheless, such predictions, made by the world’s richest man — who controls some of the world’s biggest tech companies — at the very least allow observers to imagine that a future once confined to the realms of sci-fi fantasy could actually be within reach.

So when Musk joined the SpaceX call after the company’s first-ever earnings report on Tuesday, all ears were on what grand pronouncement he might make next.

On the call Musk and his leadership team discussed various facets of the company, which posted a 92% year-over-year revenue growth of $7.8 billion. The notable achievement was offset, however, by the company’s $18.4 billion in capital expenditures — a 557% increase over 2025. As a result, SpaceX stock — which once peaked at $225 — dropped more than 8% Tuesday evening and was down 12% by Wednesday afternoon to $109 a share.

But the highlights of the call included Musk’s visions for the future of SpaceX — including one that he acknowledged sounds “super sci-fi right now, but it’s going to happen.”

Elon Musk’s three bold predictions for the next decade

Elon Musk’s vision for the future of SpaceX and, by extension, humanity is ambitious to say the least. On Tuesday’s earnings call, these three predictions stood out from the rest:

1. SpaceX would deliver $1 trillion in revenue by 2030: No company has ever recorded a trillion dollars in revenue in a year, but Musk believes SpaceX could hit that mark sooner than even he’d projected.

“Prior to the IPO, the financial projections we had were reaching $1 trillion in revenue in 2031. We now expect that to be in 2030. There’s a non-zero chance of that being in 2029,” Musk said.

This is significantly higher than recent forecasts from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, which projected the company’s 2030 revenue at $470 billion and $330 billion, respectively.

One of the main hurdles remains the company’s capital expenditures, which came in at 40% higher than expected, while ongoing AI expenditures could keep rising in the coming years.

Though with companies like Anthropic sending SpaceX a monthly check for $1.25 billion for AI computing power and Musk noting on the call that they’re “rapidly expanding our compute capacity” to meet the needs of others, those checks could multiply significantly by 2030.

2. Starlink will provide the majority of the world’s internet in less than a decade: This is a bold prediction given the world boasts around six billion internet users and Starlink’s current subscriber base of 12 million represents about 0.2% of them.

Still, Musk said “it’s not out of the question” that the company will achieve the feat in “less than 10 years” — though he did qualify it with “at least in countries where we’re allowed to operate.”

Starlink data shows its services are available in more than 155 countries and markets and, while it doubled year-over-year subscribers with 12 million, that fell just short of expectations.

Still, the connectivity arm of SpaceX, anchored by Starlink, proved the only profitable sector of the company in the earnings report, pulling in more than a billion dollars — even as revenue per subscriber dropped $20 since last year due to offering more lower-tiered plans.

3. SpaceX could build a manufacturing hub on the moon: Perhaps the boldest of Musk’s predictions is his desire to use robots “to scale up manufacturing on the moon” to build factories, a mass accelerator and enable solar and radiator production. This is the prediction he referred to as sounding “super sci-fi right now” while reiterating that “it will happen.”

Musk largely pivoted from colonizing Mars to building moon factories earlier this year, when he noted the more favorable travel capabilities to the lunar surface.

TechCrunch wrote that building on the moon “would require a lot more of Musk’s other dreams coming true first” — including making it “dramatically cheaper to get to space, which is the central requirement” to get all the raw materials required for building up there.

Others, however, noted that the notion isn’t as far-fetched considering such an operation could hold benefits for both NASA and the country as a whole.

As for a theoretical timeline for this factory city on the moon, SpaceX president and COO Gwyn Shotwell added that they’re aiming for “boots on the moon in 2028.”

SpaceX did not reply to Moneywise’s request for comment on Musk’s predictions.

Investors decide whether or not to cash out

Before building any lunar factories, however, SpaceX faced a very real test back here on Earth.

Thursday’s lockup expiration of nearly 912 million company shares threatened to trigger a massive selloff, with some analysts predicting “heavy selling” from early investors poised to make huge profits.

As it turns out, no mass selloff (so far) materialized as SpaceX shares rose 6% on Thursday — a trend that, if it holds, might indicate more investor faith in the lofty visions for the company than some analysts and short sellers expected. More shares are expected to unlock in August, September, October and December.

But, as always, the person with the most confidence in SpaceX’s outlook remains Musk himself.

“The SpaceX team is solving some of the hardest engineering problems in the history of humanity,” he said on the call. “I think the team is succeeding because I think we’ve got, in a lot of ways, the smartest, most dedicated team of humans that has ever existed.”

The brief nap during the “Good Morning Memphis” broadcast was revealed when a journalist on location finished her report and threw it back to Dillon, who was slumped over with her chin on her hands, out cold.

“I was like, ‘Oh my goodness. I can’t believe this just happened to me. I am mortified,’” Dillon, who woke up right after, told Today. “I was pinching myself under the desk like, ‘This has to be a nightmare.’”

The show’s meteorologist joked that Dillon “looked like a perfect little angel taking a little nap,” while her co-anchor dubbed her “Sleeping Beauty.”

Within moments, the clip went viral on social media and, even though Dillon laughed it off and continued the broadcast, it highlighted a common, often hidden struggle that viewers didn’t know the exhausted anchor was facing.

The hidden financial cost of sleepless nights

Dillon told Today that her exhaustion stemmed from being up much of the night with her eight-month-old teething baby. And with her husband working a double shift, Dillon only slept for “a couple of hours” before getting up again to start work at 3:30 a.m.

Neither Dillon nor Fox 13 returned Moneywise’s request for comment, but her viral clip was reportedly accompanied by support from those acknowledging how exhausting being a new parent can be. (Dillon also has a two-year-old who, thankfully, slept the night).

The CDC recommends that adults get seven hours of sleep a night, but that can be hard for new parents.

One study found that “70% of mothers and 50% of fathers showed at least subclinical insomnia” in the first four months post-partum, while another noted that “sleep satisfaction and duration sharply declined with childbirth” and didn’t return to post-pregnancy levels “for up to six years.”

And that sleep deprivation can lead to financial consequences. In fact, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine reported that insufficient sleep is associated with reduced work performance and higher absenteeism rates — especially for “shift workers, who often must sleep at a time of day that is at odds with the body’s circadian rhythms.”

“Sleep is essential for every aspect of our health and daily function,” Dr. John Saito, a spokesperson for the AASM, told Moneywise. “When people don’t get enough sleep, they may experience difficulties focusing, slower reaction times and impaired decision-making, which can affect productivity and everyday choices.”

Further research showed that giving a mother an extra hour of sleep a night can increase household income by up to 11% — which shows the potential cost of losing Z’s.

Women, in particular, tend to sacrifice their own careers following a pregnancy, including declining or losing out on promotions, while also facing lower job retention. Those negative impacts are amplified when you consider the additional costs new parents face.

The national non-profit Child Care Aware of America (CCAoA) says that the cost of childcare increased 23% between 2021 and 2025, with the national average hitting $13,184 last year.

Overall, 2026 data shows that parents, on average, spend at least 20% of their annual income on childcare. And when you factor in the thousands in food, clothing and other costs of having a baby, new parents coming off of parental leave need a plan to ensure they can balance care for their child with the need to stay productive at work.

How to protect your sleep — and your finances —as a new parent

When it comes to improving sleep, Dr. Saito recommends “sharing nighttime responsibilities with your partner or a support person, accepting help with household tasks from family and friends and safeguarding any opportunities you may have for rest.”

He added that alternating feeding nights, when possible, with a partner and eliminating caffeine after noon can also help lead to better sleep. Those experiencing health, mood or other struggles due to lack of sleep, he says, should contact a physician.

When it comes to finances, experts say that making small changes after having a baby — be it better budgeting, refinancing debt or putting off major purchases — can all help save money. You could also take advantage of employer-provided childcare subsidies and workplace savings plans, or claim the federal Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit if you qualify.

Comerica also notes the importance of weighing the costs of childcare against your budget and considering, in a co-parenting situation, if it makes more sense for one parent to stay home and provide care. They add that the gig economy offers flexible options for making money on the side — including for those who temporarily pause their careers to stay home with their child.

And for those who do head back to work, consider speaking with your boss about the temporary limitations you may face or reasonable expectations as you make the transition, while creating a schedule that works for both your job and your own lifestyle.

But the most common recommendation among experts for new parents going back to work is to give yourself grace as you transition back into professional life.

“To the mothers out there, those long nights, they’re worth it,” Dillon advised on Today. “Show up to work, give your best and then also come home and give your best to your children as well, because all they want is for their parents to show up and be there for them.”

For years, economists have documented what they call the “obesity penalty” — the social and financial disadvantages people can face because of their weight. Now, the rise of GLP-1 medications is giving researchers a new way to measure just how much appearance may shape someone’s economic prospects.

In a 2026 working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Harvard economist Rebecca Diamond found that women who were unemployed when they began taking GLP-1 medications saw a change 18 months later.

Their employment rate rose by nearly 27 percentage points compared with women who wanted to take the medications but had not yet started – a gap larger than the employment difference between American women with a high school diploma and those with a university degree.

The research does not suggest that losing weight made these women smarter, more capable or better qualified for work. Instead, it raises questions about whether changes in appearance may affect how women are perceived by employers.

The financial cost of weight bias

GLP-1 medications have quickly become a popular weight-loss tool. In 2026, 11% of U.S. adults said they were currently taking one to lose weight, up from just 3% in 2024, according to Gallup.

But long before GLP-1s became part of the cultural conversation, research suggested weight was already influencing how women were perceived in the workplace.

A report from Fairygodboss, an employer review site for women, offered a particularly troubling look at how appearance can shape hiring decisions. In one study, hiring professionals were shown images of women with different body types and asked to evaluate them.

The heaviest-looking woman was judged much more harshly. Twenty percent of respondents described her as “lazy,” a label applied less frequently to every other woman pictured. Just 18% said she appeared to have leadership potential, while 21% described her as “unprofessional.”

What the data shows

Diamond looked at survey data from about 15,000 people. She compared women who started taking GLP-1 medications with similar women who wanted to take them but had not started yet. The groups were matched based on factors such as income, race, body mass index and overall health.

The study found changes in women’s personal lives, too. Single women taking GLP-1s were nearly 29 percentage points more likely to get married or move in with a partner than similar women who had not started the medications.

The findings also add to years of research suggesting that body weight can influence how women are treated financially.

In 2011, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis cited research finding that overweight white women earned about 4.5% less than white women whose BMI fell within what researchers classified as the normal range. White women with obesity earned nearly 12% less.

Those figures were specific to white women and do not apply to everyone. They also do not show that body size determines someone’s value or ability. Rather, they suggest weight-related bias was showing up in some women’s pay long before GLP-1 medications became popular.

When pretty privilege pays

Codie Sanchez, CEO and founder of Contrarian Thinking, has said women who wear makeup to work earn about 30% more on average than women who don’t.

“Pretty privilege is very real,” she said on an episode of The Burnouts Podcast. “And you can either say ‘That’s not fair, so I’m not doing it.’ or you can win.”

Sanchez acknowledged the advantage is unfair, but argued women should use it rather than ignore it. “If it’s going to make me more money to paint my face, clown me up,” she said.

Diamond’s findings suggest weight bias may work in a similar way. Women who were already employed when they began taking GLP-1s did not see higher pay or greater odds of promotion. The biggest gains appeared among women who were unemployed and trying to enter the workforce.

Losing weight does not make someone smarter, more capable, more hardworking or qualified for a job. But it may change how other people perceive them.

That is what makes these findings so uncomfortable. If some women receive more opportunities after losing weight even though their underlying abilities have not changed, the economic benefit may reflect how strongly appearance can shape the way women are perceived and treated.

That’s when she found the hood up and her engine taken apart.

When she asked what was going on and started filming, a service manager repeatedly said nobody touched her vehicle. He eventually admitted, on camera, that the dealership had been using parts from her vehicle to service another customer’s car, according to KPLC 7. Nobody had asked Poullard’s permission or told her this was happening.

“Taking something without permission is stealing. Which is what y’all were doing is stealing,” Poullard stated. “Because had I not come up there, I wouldn’t have known. Y’all would have just threw my car back together and expected me to drive it. And later down the line when something went wrong, I would’ve been the person they tried to say was at fault.”

The video quickly went viral on social media. After KPLC-TV visited the dealership, it issued a statement: “We took your feedback seriously and immediately began an internal review. Following that review, the Service Manager is no longer employed with our company. Our team is held to a high standard of customer care, professionalism, respect and honesty. Every customer deserves to be treated with dignity, and we sincerely apologize to the customer involved.”

Moneywise contacted the dealership for response as well, but had not heard back by publication time.

Poullard now has her vehicle again but says she is uncomfortable driving it, KPLC-TV notes, and she’s seeking legal representation.

What Louisiana law might tell us

Swapping car parts from one vehicle to another can be legitimate industry practice. But what happened to Poullard may violate state law, depending on what she was told and provided throughout the process.

For example, Louisiana Administrative Code Title 46, Section V-1103, states it’s an “unfair act or practice” for a motor vehicle repair supplier to perform repairs or services without proper consumer authorization.

It appears the law says that when a consumer requests it and anticipated repairs exceed $125, suppliers must provide a written estimate in advance and obtain consumer authorization before performing any additional unanticipated repairs beyond that estimate.

Louisiana Revised Statute 32:1263 also notes dealers must provide consumers with an itemized bill detailing all repairs performed, parts replaced and materials used.

Using parts from one customer’s vehicle to service another without consent, documentation or notification potentially runs afoul of both provisions, as well as the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act, which “prohibits deceptive or unfair practices in commerce.”

Whether or not these things apply to Poullard’s case, they’re important considerations for anyone sending their vehicle in for service.

A broader pattern of dealership misconduct

Poullard’s experience isn’t an isolated incident in auto repair.

A report from the Consumer Federation of America finds that, for the 10th consecutive year, auto related issues including “deceptive advertising, lemon vehicles, incomplete repair work, and mechanical failures involving new and used vehicle sales, leases, and repairs” ranked as the top consumer complaint in the U.S.

The Federal Trade Commission’s auto enforcement page shows multiple recent actions against dealerships for charging consumers for add-on products and services without their consent — including cases against Asbury Automotive Group, Lindsay Automotive Group, Leader Automotive Group and Manchester City Nissan. The agency alleged dealers systematically charged consumers for unwanted items they never agreed to.

What to do if this happens to you

It’s unclear why Poullard didn’t contact the dealer about her vehicle’s status earlier than a month into the repair process. Before commencing any work on your vehicle, it’s good practice to request a specific time frame for the work. Follow up as soon as possible if you haven’t heard anything once that’s passed.

And if you believe a dealership has performed unauthorized work on your vehicle, the FTC’s consumer advice on auto repairs recommends starting with the shop manager or owner directly — then escalating to your state Attorney General or local consumer protection agency if that fails. Small claims court is another option, if needed.

You can also report dealer misconduct to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

Every state has its own motor vehicle commission or dealer licensing body that handles complaints against dealerships — a quick search for your state’s name plus “motor vehicle commission” will help you find the right agency.

Barbie, a community ambassador at Latitude Margaritaville, near Hilton Head Island in South Carolina, told The Economist that living there is like “starting college all over again” with “drinks on the driveway, cocktails on the concrete.”

While Gen Z is known as the wellness generation, baby boomers (and, oftentimes, their Gen X children) are still embracing the party culture they grew up with. And, after a lifetime of working and saving for retirement, they’re enjoying life — as they should.

But lifestyle creep could hurt your nest egg and even derail your retirement. Here are a few things to be aware of.

A generational divide

Baby boomers are retiring with more money than previous generations — and living a lot longer than their own parents. Many own their homes and benefitted from decades of stock market growth. Some also have pensions, in addition to savings and Social Security.

Of course, not all baby boomers are living the high life in retirement. Some are stretched thin on a fixed income while losing their purchasing power through inflation. More than half (58%) of retirees in Schroders’ 2026 US Retirement Survey say they don’t know how long their savings will last.

And, while Gen X — as the sandwich generation, often caring for children and their aging parents at the same time — still likes to party, they’re also stretched thin financially. Gen Z, too, are worried about their financial future, faced with rising costs, growing debt and high housing prices that make homeownership feel like a distant dream.

Maybe that’s why, for several years, drinking has been on the decline among younger generations.

For example, among 18- to 25-year-olds, there’s been a decline in use of alcohol, cigarettes and marijuana, according to a 2025 survey from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). There’s also been a decrease in the use of illicit drugs such as cocaine and misuse of prescription drugs.

In part, that could be attributed to the more risk-adverse nature of younger generations, who are also having less sex than previous generations.

The same can’t be said of their parents or grandparents.

Drug and alcohol abuse is on the rise among baby boomers. So is the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

“Today, older adults are more likely to participate in the hook-up culture of casual encounters and condomless sex, which might be further encouraged by the availability of drugs for sexual dysfunction, the commonality of living in retirement communities, and the increased use of dating apps for seniors,” wrote Janie Steckenrider in The Lancet.

Indeed, the rate of STDs among those 55+ has “consistently increased and has more than doubled over the past decade,” according to the paper.

The hidden (and not so hidden) costs of partying

While baby boomer households in the U.S. control roughly $77 trillion in wealth, 71% of that is held by the top 10% of those households, according to the Pew Research Center — meaning baby boomer wealth isn’t equally distributed.

At the same time, only 40% of baby boomers aged 61 to 65 are financially ready for retirement, according to research from Vanguard.

So, retirees leading a party lifestyle could inadvertently hurt their nest egg, particularly if they’re living on a fixed income or relying heavily on Social Security.

Lifestyle creep can lead to overspending and debt, which could deplete your nest egg faster than planned and leave less room for unexpected costs, such as medical care or support for adult children.

For example, a Bank of America study found that baby boomers are behind an increase in spending at bars — up 4% year-over-year and higher than any other generation. It might be surprising how much that habit can add up (try it for yourself with the NIAAA’s alcohol spending calculator).

Say you drink three beers a day at a cost of about $3 per beer. You’d be spending almost $3,300 each year on beer alone. If you buy those three beers at a bar for $7 each, that adds up to more than $7,600 a year.

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying your golden years — so long, of course, that you’re not putting your nest egg at risk.

And these days, your nest egg might already be taking a hit from rising healthcare and long-term care costs, to inflation that’s eating away at your purchasing power.

Retirees are also at risk from market volatility that could impact your savings — either by being too conservative (so you can’t keep up with inflation) or too risky (so you don’t have enough time to recover from a downturn).

A partying lifestyle comes with other “hidden” costs, too. Too much hard living can lead to health issues or medical risks, which in turn can lead to unexpected healthcare costs.

Alcohol use among older adults is increasing, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). And this is related to faster cognitive decline, including problems with memory and judgment.

Alcohol misuse “can increase the risk of — or worsen — medical conditions that are more common with aging, such as chronic pain, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and respiratory infections,” according to NIAAA.

That’s not to say you have to become a teetotaler in retirement. But it means moderation is key — blacking out after a night of heavy drinking and ending up with an STD isn’t ideal at any age.

Include entertainment as part of your retirement budget, so you have room to enjoy the fruits of your labor, without putting your nest egg at risk. But if you’re going into debt over a drinking habit, it may be worth seeking professional help.

Naomi is a 24 year old, lives on Manhattan’s Upper East Side and earns six figures working two retail jobs. Her boyfriend, meanwhile, spent much of his time at her apartment lying in bed and scrolling through Instagram Reels.

Naomi helped him fix his résumé, pushed him to apply for jobs and, while he figured out his next move, picked up the tab for nearly everything. But the money was only part of what bothered her. Naomi told The Cut that his lack of income seemed to double as an excuse to put little effort into the relationship, too. Romance, after all, does not require a six-figure salary.

“If you can’t afford something, write me a love letter,” she told The Cut. “He could have literally made me Kraft mac and cheese.”

The couple eventually discussed moving in together, but Naomi decided she could not justify adding another person to her monthly expenses.

“If I wanted to finance a human being,” she says, “I’d have a kid.”

Changing dynamics

Naomi’s experience comes as the financial dynamics inside many relationships are shifting.

Women now earn as much as or more than their husbands in nearly half of opposite-sex marriages in the U.S., according to the Pew Research Center. And when wives are the primary breadwinners, they out-earn their husbands by an average of about $53,000.

Men still earn more in most marriages, but the share of women bringing home the same amount or more has nearly tripled over the past 50 years.

As relationship dynamics change, the way couples divide responsibilities may change with them. If one partner is contributing more financially, for example, the other might take on more at home to help balance things out.

But that trade-off does not always happen.

Pew Research Center found that even when wives are the primary breadwinners, they still spend more time on housework than their husbands — about 4.8 hours a week compared with 2.8 hours. They also spend more time caregiving, at 6.4 hours versus five hours for their husbands.

More than a money problem

For Naomi, the frustration went beyond her boyfriend being unemployed. She felt his attitude toward work had become part of the problem.

He identified as a communist, spent his free time reading Marx and surrounded himself with other unemployed men who viewed caring too much about a career as embarrassing.

“They hate the finance bro,” Naomi told The Cut. “But in their push to reject that, they’re now doing nothing.”

No one was asking him to become a Wall Street finance bro in a Patagonia vest. But there is plenty of room between climbing the corporate ladder and not having a job at all.

A balanced relationship

There is no single formula for what a balanced relationship should look like. Money is only one part of that equation. What matters more is whether both people are on the same page about what each person is contributing, what they expect from one another and what they are building toward together — conversations that can become especially important in your 20s, when careers and finances are still taking shape.

Moneywise has previously reported on growing interest in relationships that challenge more traditional expectations, from younger men seeking older, financially established women to wealthy couples increasingly choosing partners with similar careers, education and ambition.

As women gain more financial independence, choosing a partner may have less to do with finding someone who can provide financial security and more to do with finding someone whose values, goals and effort match their own.

“Financial compatibility occurs when two people share financial values and goals and can communicate and collaborate well with one another to manage their money successfully,” psychotherapist Joyce Marter wrote in Psychology Today.

For couples just starting out, the bigger question may not be who earns more, but whether their lifestyles and expectations actually line up. Talk early on about how you each view work, spending, saving and the kind of life you want to build together. Regular “money dates” can give couples a chance to compare goals, divide responsibilities and address problems before resentment has time to build.

And if one person has little interest in working or contributing in a way the other considers important, that may point to a deeper compatibility issue — not simply a difference in income. There is no perfect way to split the bills, but both people should understand what they are signing up for.

Unfortunately, sometimes drama can still find a couple who eloped. Let’s pretend, for example, that Taylor and her new husband Kevin wanted an intimate affair, so got married just the two of them. Now, six months later, Taylor wants a party to celebrate her nuptials, and she wants her mother Beth to be part of it — both by helping plan and pay for it.

Beth, however, is upset and hurt that she wasn’t invited to the elopement, and she’s not eager to pay for what she sees as nothing more than a big, expensive party.

So, should Beth pay to keep the peace, or should she confront her daughter about not being at the actual wedding? Here’s what the experts had to say.

Beth should sit with her feelings of sadness

One of the most important things Beth should do is come to terms with her feelings before deciding how to move forward.

“The loss here is about a wedding that you as a parent have been dreaming about,” Cory Reid-Vanas, LMFT and founder of Rocky Mountain Counseling Collective, told Moneywise. “Name the grief and loss. There are missed opportunities like not seeing your daughter get ready, walking her down the aisle, or hugging her afterwards.”

Reid-Vanas recommended that Beth sit with these feelings and bring herself to a grounded place before talking to Taylor so she can “engage in honest, open dialogue that is healing and connected rather than furthering the upset.”

He also suggested Beth explore whether she can contribute money without adding to her feelings of resentment, while Kiki Jacobson, a licensed mental health therapist at YourMoneyCounselor.com, stressed the importance of Beth making a decision in line with her long-term values.

“If my value is to nurture a loving, long-term relationship with my daughter, I would remind myself that respecting her autonomy means accepting that she has the right to make decisions for her life even if those decisions aren’t what I would have done,” Jacobson told Moneywise.

Other experts suggested a similar approach. “Whatever decision the mother makes, it should come from a place of self-care and be consistent with her values — not guilt, fear, or punishment,” Mary McLaughlin, a licensed clinical social worker, told Moneywise. “We often regret decisions we make that come from a place of resentment. Decisions that reflect our values are easier to stand behind, even if they don’t make everyone happy.”

Understanding her daughter’s perspective is key

When Beth feels ready to have a calm, constructive conversation with her daughter, that’s the next step — but it has to be done right.

“I would start with an in-person conversation focused primarily or solely on sharing feelings,” Dr. Larry Schooler, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin, told Moneywise. “You deserve the chance to tell your daughter how her decision affected you.”

However, Reid-Vanas made clear the discussion shouldn’t be framed as an ultimatum. “I recommend two separate conversations: The party planning and paying talk and the ‘I was hurt’ conversation. When those two are mixed, they likely both will not go well,” he said, explaining that a “defensive dynamic may emerge” if Beth links paying for the party with Taylor apologizing.

Schooler suggested saying something like “Before we talk about the wedding party, it’s important for me to share some of my honest feelings about all of this. And none of what I’m about to share necessarily means that I won’t help throw the party.”

Jacobson also advised Beth to get curious. “I would ask a question like: ‘I really want to understand what that decision was like for you. Would you be willing to share what led you to decide to elope?’”

“The goal wouldn’t be to debate who is right or wrong, but to understand each other’s perspective,” McLaughlin said. “It’s completely understandable that a parent would feel hurt after not being included in their daughter’s wedding. However, there may be context surrounding the decision that could help it make more sense.”

Paying for the party isn’t off the table

The conversation Beth and Taylor have will help Beth decide if she wants to contribute to the party — but Beth shouldn’t feel forced into saying yes.

“Autonomy goes both ways,” said McLaughlin. “Just as the daughter had the right to choose the kind of wedding she wanted, the mother has the right to decide how she wants to spend her money. Financial support is a gift, not an obligation.”

Schooler suggested that Beth may want to place conditions on her contribution, especially if certain things are important to her, like having other family members included. “You could follow up with, ‘If I’m going to be involved in a party, I want to have some say over how it goes and include people who I would’ve wanted to invite to the wedding,’” he suggested.

Or, as Dr. David Bowers, a marriage and family therapist with LifeWrx, said, Beth could view it as a chance to move forward on a brighter note. “Sometimes it can be more important to take the longer-term view,” he told Moneywise. “The fact that they want to include you in a celebration of their marriage and relationship is certainly a good thing.”

While Bowers acknowledged that being asked to pay after not making the guest list for the actual wedding could be frustrating, he also made clear that “if you can step beyond the hurt feelings and be involved in the celebration, you are likely to start this new phase of your relationship with your daughter as a married person on a much stronger foundation than if you remain captive to those hurt feelings.”

In an effort to reverse decades of population decline, local governments are getting increasingly creative to lure newcomers — offering everything from free or significantly discounted rent and €1 homes to cash grants and other financial incentives for relocating or renovating historic properties.

The trend has become especially visible in countries including Italy, Spain, Greece and Ireland, where officials hope that attracting young families, remote workers and foreign buyers can breathe new life into communities — some of which are at risk of disappearing altogether.

For Americans dreaming of a slower pace of life overseas, the incentives can sound almost too good to be true. In many cases, however, they are very real — though they come with important conditions, and Americans must still qualify for residency through visas, citizenship by descent or other immigration pathways.

Italy

Italy has become the poster child for relocation initiatives thanks to its €1 house schemes. Dozens of municipalities across Sicily, Sardinia and southern Italy, in particular, have sold abandoned homes for the price of €1.

The catch? Buyers must renovate the properties within a specified timeframe, often investing tens of thousands of euros more, and put down a refundable security deposit of about €1,000 to €5,000. Buyers are also responsible for closing costs, taxes, permits and renovation expenses, meaning total investments will inevitably add up.

Other regions in Italy, including Trentino, have announced grants worth up to €100,000 to help with some of those purchasing costs and renovations in depopulating mountain communities. Meanwhile, many other small villages across the country offer tens of thousands of euros for newcomers to move there.

Italy’s various relocation schemes have attracted international attention, particularly from Americans, many of whom have family history there. One of the easiest routes to living in Italy has traditionally been through Italian ancestry for those who qualify. That pathway narrowed significantly in 2025, however. Previously, applicants could qualify through great grandparents but, under Italy’s revised citizenship law, most new applicants born abroad must generally have an Italian parent or grandparent who meets the updated eligibility criteria.

Despite the tighter rules, Italy remains one of the most popular destinations for Americans seeking dual citizenship. For those who don’t qualify for citizenship by descent, Italy offers various other pathways to residency, as well — which is required for non-EU citizens to permanently move there, even if they’ve bought a home.

Italy’s Digital Nomad Visa is ideal for remote workers employed by companies or clients outside of Italy, but the country also offers employer-sponsored work visas for those who find employment there. The Elective Residence Visa is also a popular pick among retirees or financially independent individuals who can prove sufficient passive income.

Spain

Spain’s rural depopulation crisis — known as España Vaciada (which translates to “Empty Spain”) — has prompted dozens of municipalities to create incentives for young families and foreign residents willing to relocate.

Depending on the village, newcomers may find free or heavily subsidized rent, inexpensive homes, discounted land, relocation grants or even help finding employment. Several communities have even partnered with local businesses to recruit workers alongside offering affordable housing in an effort to rebuild plummeting populations.

The village of Olmeda de la Cuesta, for example, once auctioned off residential building plots for as little as €200 to €1,300, provided buyers built homes or businesses within a set timeframe.

In the Galician province of Ourense, introduced various measures to attract new residents, offering a monthly grant of between €100 and €150 to those who’d move there.

In the village of Griegos, the local council launched a scheme offering three months of free rent, followed by a monthly rent of just €225.

Meanwhile, the village of Arenillas in Soria recently made headlines by offering rent-free housing, guaranteed employment and high-speed internet to families willing to relocate permanently and become part of the community.

The HolaPueblo project — in partnership with IKEA, Redeia and social enterprise AlmaNatura — matches entrepreneurs, remote workers and families with hundreds of depopulating villages across Spain, helping them find housing, start businesses and integrate into local communities.

Like Italy, however, these incentives don’t automatically grant residency. Americans typically move to Spain through the Digital Nomad Visa (launched in 2023), employer-sponsored work visas or the Non-Lucrative Visa for retirees or financially independent individuals.

Permanent residency is generally available after five years of legal residence, while citizenship usually requires 10 years for U.S. citizens. But it’s worth noting that Spain requires Americans who naturalize to renounce their U.S. citizenship because it doesn’t broadly recognize dual citizenship with the U.S.

Greece

Several Greek islands facing severe population decline have experimented with offering free housing, land and monthly financial support to encourage families to relocate as well. The tiny island of Antikythera, for example, has become the best-known example after offering up to five families a home, farmland and a monthly stipend in exchange for settling permanently and helping reverse decades of depopulation.

Meanwhile, the island of Syros welcomes Americans and other Greeks and non-EU nationals alike interested in volunteering to take care of cats. The Syros Cats program offers free room and board — though no pay — for volunteers willing to work for five hours every day, feeding and caring for the cats.

Besides its volunteer programs, however, the Greek island relocation initiatives that crop up from time to time are generally aimed at long-term residents, and applicants often must demonstrate that they intend to live and work there. But purchasing a property or accepting one of these incentives does not automatically provide residency in Greece, either.

Americans generally need a qualifying work visa or Greece’s Digital Nomad Visa to live and work in Greece, or they must pursue a retirement pathway or another long-stay residence permit before relocating. Greece continues to operate one of Europe’s best-known residency-by-investment programs — known as the Golden Visa — through qualifying real estate purchases. While the required investment thresholds have increased in popular areas, many lower-populated Greek islands offer more affordable options.

Ireland

Ireland has taken its own approach to tackling depopulation by encouraging buyers to restore vacant homes rather than selling them for little to nothing. Through the Vacant Property Refurbishment Grant, eligible buyers can receive grants of up to €84,000 to renovate a derelict building or €60,000 to renovate a vacant property that meets specific criteria. The grants are designed to bring existing housing stock back into use while encouraging more permanent residents to settle outside major cities.

In 2023, Ireland also launched its “Our Living Islands” program. The program pays participants €50,000 or up to €70,000 to move to a select number of its isles in an effort to “ensure that sustainable, vibrant communities can continue to live — and thrive — on the offshore islands for many years to come.”

Again, receiving the grant does not provide immigration status. Americans will still need to qualify through employment, studies, investments or another long-stay residency pathway before relocating. Permanent residency is generally available after five years of legal residency.

Ireland does, however, offer one of the most generous ancestry pathways in Europe. Americans with an Irish-born parent or grandparent can apply for citizenship through the Foreign Births Register, and the Irish passport is a coveted one.

In an August 5 video, the Democratic senator shed light on changes to the emergency vehicle manufacturing pipeline, which has gone from being run by dozens of competing businesses to a small handful of companies that she says have become “a threat to public safety” given the prices they charge.

“How did we get here?” Warren asked in the post, comparing the $1 million cost of a particular Massachusetts fire engine in 2017 to its $2.5 million price tag in 2026. She blames the escalating fees and delivery timelines on the three private corporations that now serve 70% to 80% of the market.

“They bought up the competition, they control the supply… so when they create a shortage, a shortage for something you have to buy, the supplier gets to name the price,” she says.

But on social media, after hearing her statement, a number of users raised the alarm that other factors are at play here as well.

Multiple causes at play

While the economics she’s suggesting certainly aren’t wrong, many jumped in to comment on the fact that there are a slew of other factors contributing to price hikes for things like firetrucks lately — some of them being the government’s doing, not private equity’s.

“Inflation is the biggest factor. It’s tough to face the consequences of your own actions, Miss Remove the Debt Ceiling,” one person replied.

“How about you start with the things the government is doing to screw things up instead of once again butting into the private sector,” another X user said, pointing to the expenses associated with adhering to strict energy efficiency standards and other federal regulations for “things they do not need.”

In a fall 2025 article on this exact subject, Fire Apparatus Magazine identified factors like the nation’s ever-changing environmental and safety regulations, increasing design complexity, and severe material and labor price volatility as contributors to soaring prices for emergency vehicles.

Even the AI-led microchip shortage has played a role, along with tariffs and the demands of creating trucks that meet evolving NFPA, EPA, extended warranty and other guidelines. And, another round of stringent EPA rules for engines made after 2027 presents new challenges and expenses that fire districts associations are already worried about.

Rising demand is also a concern — the early 2020s marked a 43% uptick in the average number of firetruck orders across the US compared to previous years.

“This translated to increased lead times, resulting in manufacturers buffering their costing estimates to account for future uncertainty around labor, material and component pricing,” the article reads. It adds that the 2027 changes mean “additional costs of not only the new engine, but also the engineering costs associated with modifying truck chassis and bodies to accommodate the new engine designs and systems.”

What industry insiders say

While the article pushes back against the idea of industry consolidation being the key issue, the first responders Warren spoke to, who are working to allocate thin budgets in the face of exorbitant bills, disagree.“What’s the incentive of opening another plant, hiring more people or speeding up production? We’re locked in, they have us,” one said in the clip.

Last spring, the International Association of Fire Fighters requested a Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission probe into the three big companies in the biz — REV Group, Oshkosh, and Rosenbauer — for “possible antitrust business practices,” complaining of price gouging, backlogs and “textbook monopolization.”

A New York Times investigation into the sector last year likewise criticized how the private enterprises streamlined operations (including closing factories), to boost profits, which had an impact on production volume and costs.

And the reality is, inflation has been high for years. In fact, a lot of Americans may have already started tuning out the never-ending updates on rising prices. But if you’re getting close to retirement, that stubbornly high inflation rate might suddenly seem especially threatening to your precious nest egg.

Fortunately, Suze Orman says you’ve already got some protection waiting in the wings. In a recent blog post, Orman identified Social Security as “one of the most powerful tools you have to deal with inflation.”

“Your retirement benefit is adjusted every year to keep pace with rising prices. That’s a guaranteed increase any year there is inflation. Your 401(k) and IRA don’t come with a guaranteed inflation adjustment, and most pension payments don’t rise with inflation either,” Orman explained.

But in order to get the most out of this tool, you’ll need to be patient. Here’s why Orman argues if you want to maximize your monthly check’s inflation-fighting power, retirees in good health should consider delaying drawing their benefits as long as possible.

Why delay your Social Security benefit?

In short, delaying your Social Security benefits increases the amount you get when you do start cashing them in. For anyone born 1943 or later, you get an 8% 12-month rate of increase for each year past your full retirement age — 66 or 67 depending on what year you were born — that you wait to retire, up until age 70.

By delaying your benefit, you become eligible for these “delayed retirement credits” which then increase your monthly payout. While we don’t know the COLA for 2027 yet, the 2026 adjustment was 2.8%. In her blog post, Orman says current estimates suggest next year’s COLA could be above 4.5%.

And while delaying claiming your benefits doesn’t entitle you to a higher COLA percentage, increasing your base benefit does compound the value of your future COLA increases. That’s because even if you aren’t retired or collecting benefits yet, once you turn 62, each annual COLA is added to your benefit record. Once you actually start collecting your check, you’ll be able to enjoy the perks of those compounded annual adjustments.

According to government data, the 2025 COLA raised the estimated average monthly benefit amount received in January 2026 by $56, from $2,015 to $2,071.

Not everyone follows Suze Orman’s advice

And yet the data shows many Americans aren’t following Orman’s advice. Data from the Social Security Administration shows that as of 2025, 22% of new Social Security beneficiaries claimed their benefits at the earliest possible age, while only about 8% waited until 70 to claim their checks. The majority of Americans (33%) are claiming Social Security at age 66.

Orman also makes an important qualification in her post: This is advice for those nearing retirement and still in good health. That’s because there are some hidden risks that come along with delaying your benefit. Relying on your own savings until 70 could see you depleting your coffers much sooner than you’d expected. Or you could face health concerns that could significantly limit the time you get to enjoy those full benefits.

As with any financial advice, even Orman’s has caveats. But if you feel like you have good financial standing to support you and a clean bill of health across your family’s history, then you might want to take her up on this chance to fight inflation and have more money in your pocket.

Even though the tariffs in question are gone, as the Supreme Court threw them out in February, the government is refunding the money to brands like Walmart, Apple, Ford and Amazon, among others.

Walmart’s refund could reach roughly $2.4 billion by CNBC’s calculation. Following Walmart’s lead is Apple, whose refund is roughly $2.2 billion, though the company disclosed only the effect on its margins. Ford’s filings show $1.3 billion. Nintendo hit $936 million, and Amazon named its own figure outright: $600 million.

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., called those numbers out in a Facebook post and closed with: “Your refund: $0.”

About $86 billion has flowed out of the Treasury, roughly half of what’s owed, and none of it has been offered to American households. Stranger still, Trump spent months promising Americans a $2,000 tariff check. Then, in April, he told CNBC’s Squawk Box that Apple was holding off to avoid upsetting him. “If they don’t do that, I’ll remember them,” he said of companies skipping refunds. Dozens applied anyway.

Here’s why the money is going to corporations, and whether any of it could still reach your pocket.

Why you won’t see the refund

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on February 20 that a 1977 emergency-powers law never gave the president authority to impose tariffs. Some 330,000 importers had paid about $166 billion under it. Steel, aluminum and auto tariffs imposed under other statutes survived.

The Court said nothing about refunds, so the trade court ordered them, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection built a portal that opened April 20. That order is now on appeal.

A tariff is a tax paid at the border, and customs rules recognize only the company that paid it there. You paid Walmart, Walmart paid customs, customs is now paying Walmart back and there’s no federal system for reaching the person at the end of that chain.

Walmart has been here before: when it warned last year that tariffs could force price increases, Trump told the retail giant to eat the tariffs. This May, CFO John David Rainey confirmed to CNBC that Walmart had applied anyway, calling the refund “a relatively small part of our overall business.”

It equals about 0.5% of Walmart’s U.S. sales — the portion where the company was the importer on record. On $483 billion in U.S. sales, CNBC calculated that at roughly $2.42 billion, a number Walmart has never stated.

The refund returns an unlawful tax to the businesses that legally paid it, which shareholders would expect any public company to claim. The people who ultimately covered those duties have no equivalent paperwork to file.

What the tariffs cost the American citizens

Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee tallied the expense at $1,744.75 per household over the tariffs’ first year, from $231.35 billion in consumer costs. Nonpartisan New York Fed economists confirmed that nearly 90% of the burden landed on U.S. firms and consumers rather than foreign exporters.

So where’s the check Trump promised?

On November 17, he told reporters in the Oval Office the payments would be sent out “probably in the middle of next year.” That window has since closed. No bill has passed, and a draft rebate proposal from Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., for $600 a person, has sat in committee since July 2025 without a cosponsor.

Yale’s Budget Lab priced $2,000 checks, capped at incomes under $100,000, at $450 billion — against roughly $240 billion in projected tariff revenue, estimated before the Court ruled.

Tariffs aren’t over, either. The 10% surcharge that replaced the struck-down duties expired July 24, and new ones took effect the same morning — 10% or 12.5% on goods from 60 economies faulted over forced labor.

Where you might see some money back

Amazon is the rare company offering a direct path back. CFO Brian Olsavsky said it found “a limited set of circumstances” where it can trace an import charge to a specific buyer. Where possible, the refund is issued automatically.

Walmart has said the money will go toward lower prices, without committing to an amount or a timeline. Apple CEO Tim Cook says his company’s refund goes into U.S. innovation and advanced manufacturing.

Nintendo, already facing a class-action lawsuit, has moved to dismiss the case against it, arguing purchasers are not entitled to a share. Whether they keep it all is now a question for the courts.

Thompson Coburn counts more than 100 putative class actions since February, arguing companies collected twice — once at the register, once from the government — with the Walmart complaint alone claiming $10.2 billion. All of it is still an allegation, and no court has ruled on the merits.

Moneywise reached out to Apple and Walmart. The two have yet to comment.

Many times, the president has touted companies in public appearances which led to significant market movement after. He’s also praised companies on Truth Social days after individual shares were added to his personal investment portfolio. According to the White House, those investments are managed by independent wealth management advisors.

Trump has even allowed about a dozen billionaires to join his administration at any given time during his current term, including CEO of Tesla and SpaceX Elon Musk, who ran DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency) in 2025. It made ruthless cuts across many government departments, the effects of which have been deadly to the world’s poorest.

This has led to claims that Trump is looking after his billionaire friends. Last week, Nevada GOP Governor Joe Lombardo defended the president for doing just that. In his view, taking care of billionaires provides jobs for Americans.

“Quite often when the press and the media run him down, they think about, you know, he’s taking care of his billionaire friends. But those billionaire friends provide jobs,” Lombardo said. “And unless you take care of them, those jobs are absent.”

Trump in Las Vegas touting GOP candidates and economy

During his speech, Lombardo added that the government doesn’t have the ability to hand out infinite amounts of money. “That’s not how economies work,” he said. So the government has to make it easier for CEOs to employ people. This is a core tenet of “trickle down economics,” which has its fair share of critics.

The president’s appearance in Las Vegas was meant to rally voters around his economic policies and declare support for GOP candidates running for re-election in the November midterms.

According to the Nevada Independent, the GOP governor made a calculated decision to join Trump on stage, believing it would benefit him in his re-election bid.

Nevada, which is considered “blue-ish” thanks to two Democratic senators and a Democratic majority in the state legislature, voted in Lombardo as GOP governor in 2022. He now faces a tough challenge from Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford in November.

Nevada has been a really tough state to call, especially in recent general elections. It’s the only state to have voted for George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, according to MSNBC.

Trump’s economy not working for all Americans

There continues to be a stark difference between what’s happening on Wall Street and what Americans are facing in their everyday lives during Trump’s second term.

While the S&P 500 is up 13% so far in 2026, inflation remains an issue. The cost of goods rose 3.5% on an annual basis in June, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The job market also continues to be difficult to navigate, with employers cutting 23,000 jobs in July.

Add in new tariffs and the economic impact of the war with Iran, and many Americans are not buying it, especially in Las Vegas. One local worker, Mario Sandoval, an employee at Binion’s Steakhouse downtown, told NPR,” I’ve experienced 9/11, 2008, the pandemic. And I have to tell you that our income right now is at the level of 9/11. It’s bad.”

For the first time in nearly a decade, more Americans prefer Democrats to Republicans on handling the economy, according to a new Reuters Poll.

For example, Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed in 2025, extended major tax cuts while cutting funding for Medicaid that many working-class Americans rely on.

Currently, his administration also owns stock in 30 companies across industries like semiconductors, minerals, and quantum computing.

That’s how Dr. Kimothi Cain, a child psychiatrist at the University of New Mexico, described it under oath: “They sleep in the hallways with no privacy until a psychiatric bed can open so we can keep these children safe.”

On Aug. 6, Judge Bryan Biedscheid ruled that Meta helped cause that crisis. His order requires the company to pay $567 million into an abatement fund, on top of the $375 million a jury awarded New Mexico in March, bringing the state’s total to $942 million — the first judgment of its kind against Meta to come out of a full trial. Meta’s latest earnings show the company earns that much profit in roughly five days.

How the $942 million breaks down

A jury that heard evidence from Feb. 2 through March 24 found Meta committed 75,000 violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. At the maximum $5,000 per violation, that came to $375 million. Biedscheid then held a bench trial in May, ruled that Instagram and Facebook amount to a public nuisance under state law and ordered the $567 million fund. Of that, $420 million goes to mental health treatment for kids in the state.

Much of the evidence came from Meta’s own files. According to the court’s findings, a 2019 internal test found that “26% of the people we recommend to Groomers were Teens.” In a 2020 internal chat, an employee wrote that the People You May Know feature “was responsible for 80% of violating adult/minor connections.”

Arturo Bejar, who ran Meta’s Protect and Care engineering team for six years, told the jury: “the product is very good at connecting people with interests, and if your interest is little girls, it will be really good at connecting you with little girls.”

Why the judgment barely dents Meta’s finances

Meta reported second-quarter earnings on July 29, eight days before the ruling. Revenue came in at $60.8 billion, and the quarter produced roughly $15.8 billion in net income — about $174 million in profit every day for 91 days. At that rate, the company covers the full New Mexico judgment in about 5.4 days. Put another way, the biggest child safety judgment Meta has ever faced at trial costs it less than 6% of one quarter’s profit.

Meta had already set money aside for outcomes like this. The company booked $2.4 billion in legal charges in the quarter, more than twice the New Mexico total, and told investors that several more youth-related trials scheduled this year could bring material losses. Also, the market read Thursday’s ruling accordingly, as Meta shares slipped less than half a percent in after-hours trading.

Biedscheid acknowledged the limits of what one state court could do to a company this size. He cut the state’s proposed 15-year abatement plan to five years and reduced the total because, in the court’s assessment, other platforms including Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube also contributed to the same harms.

What the order changes for teen accounts in New Mexico

If your teenager is on Instagram in New Mexico, the order changes a few concrete things.

Their account stays private by default, and switching that off now requires a parent’s consent. Meta can’t recommend their account to any adult they don’t know, and unconnected adults can’t message them at all. Adults caught in child sexual exploitation face what the order calls a “1-strike policy”: every account disabled and new ones blocked. And minors are barred from “romantic or sexualized interactions” with Meta’s AI chatbots.

Biedscheid stopped short of touching the features his own findings link to compulsive use. He left infinite scroll, autoplay and the recommendation algorithm in place, writing that rules for a whole industry have to come from lawmakers or regulators rather than a case against one company.

Meta isn’t accepting any of it yet. “We disagree with the ruling and will appeal,” the company said Thursday, adding that it works hard to keep people safe and remains confident in its record of protecting teens online. The five-year compliance clock pauses while an appeal is pending, as long as Meta posts a bond. So while kids in Albuquerque wait for hallway beds to open up, the company earning $174 million a day has every incentive to take the long way through the courts.

Meta had not responded to Moneywise’s request for comment (beyond its public statement) by the time of publication. The New Mexico Department of Justice could not be reached for comment beyond Attorney General Torrez’s public statement; in it, he called the ruling “a victory for every parent who has worried about what social media is doing to their child and every child who deserves to grow up safer online.”

Those detractors have a new arrow in their quill now, as the airline plans to start charging passengers who use the overhead bin to stow carry-on luggage, starting in February 2027.

For now, storing things under the seat in front of you will remain complimentary.

“From next year, all bookings will include one underseat bag such as a backpack, handbag or laptop bag,” the carrier wrote. “Customers who need more carry-on baggage can pre-purchase Priority Carry-on, which includes a second, larger bag for the overhead locker and the opportunity to be among the first to board.”

The reason for the change

Jetstar says the decision to charge for overhead bin storage came following feedback from passengers and crew who cited having their bags weighed at the gate and looking for a place to put them made their flights more stressful.

“We know that weighing carry-on bags at the gate can be frustrating for our customers and for our crew,” said CEO Stephanie Tully in a statement. “To make packing easier we’ve decided to remove the 7kg weight limit, so from February, the main thing customers will need to think about is the size of their carry-on. By giving customers an underseat bag with the option to add Priority Carry-on, we can make better use of overhead locker space, streamline boarding and help more flights depart on time.”

Not alone

While Jetstar’s new policy will only impact flyers in the Australia region, several U.S. carriers have a similar fee. Frontier Airlines charges for the use of overhead bins, as does Allegiant Air, which ranges from $10 to $75 per bag). And passengers who fly Basic Economy on United Airlines are only permitted to bring one personal item on board. Carry-on bags must be checked for a fee, which ranges from $50 to $75, depending on where you check it.

Airlines make a significant amount of money by charging for checked luggage. Last year, the industry saw overall revenues of more than $7.4 billion in the U.S. just from bag fees, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Over the past five years, the number has increased by 162%.

The carrier has begun selling its fall and winter pass, which gives holders unlimited free flights (well, almost free… you’ll still have to pay taxes and fees — and, technically, you’ll book the ticket at a price of $0.01). For a limited time, the pass is on sale for $199.

“The GoWild Fall & Winter Pass makes it possible to experience fall foliage in New England, hit the slopes in the Rocky Mountains and escape to the beaches of Puerto Rico — and that’s just the beginning of the limitless adventures available to our pass holders,” said Bobby Schroeter, chief commercial officer of Frontier Airlines, in a statement.

What you can and can’t do

The pass covers flights between Aug. 4 and Feb. 28, and it’s only available for a limited time. There are, of course, some limitations.

For instance, it does come with blackout dates. You won’t be able to use it any time between Dec. 19 and Dec. 31. The day before Thanksgiving is out, too, as is New Year’s Day. (Gotta travel in those periods? You can get a seat by paying a Peak Day Charge, which ranges from $79 to $159 each way.)

Once you buy the pass, though, you can begin using it immediately. The key thing to know is that passholders can only reserve their flight one day prior to departure for domestic flights and 10 days prior to departure on international flights (including Mexico and Central America). This is a pass that’s best suited for people who embrace spontaneity.

Limited availability

These “MoviePass of the sky” passes are being sold on a first come-first served basis, and Frontier hasn’t said how many it plans to offer.

It’s also worth noting that these passes automatically renew at the end of their term unless you cancel before midnight on the final day. Typically, those renewal rates are significantly higher than the discounted rates, and those are non-refundable, the carrier says. The renewal price for the 2026-2027 GoWild! Annual Pass, for instance, is $699.

Frontier is based in Denver, Colorado, and uses Denver International Airport as its primary hub. It serves 120 destinations at present. The carrier recently raised its third-quarter earnings forecast above analyst expectations, citing recent fare increases (of more than 50%) and broader U.S. capacity reductions.

Shares of the airline are up close to 60% year to date.

When the Dallas Morning News recently asked Cuban whether he would buy into the Cowboys — currently the most valuable team in the NFL — Cuban said “I’m sure our Harbinger fund would be open to it.” Current team owner Jerry Jones, who has been historically disinterested in selling off part of his team, seems open to the idea as well.

“If you’re me, you would be open to that because of the man,” Jones said to the Dallas Morning News. “I have all the respect in the world for him and I know what he did for the Mavericks.”

This potential deal is only possible because of a recent NFL rule change that now allows private equity firms to invest in NFL teams. Here’s what to know about the current state of this nascent deal and the rule change that could allow it to happen.

Far from a done deal

As of now, neither Cuban nor Jones have made any firm plans to go through with the sale. And Stephen Jones, Jerry’s son and Dallas Cowboy’s co-owner, says the company wouldn’t easily agree to a minority sale to someone else.

Stephen also said the Cowboys would be “very particular in who we would bring in as a partner” in an interview with 105.3 The Fan.

“It’s not something we would ever totally rule out, but I wouldn’t say anything’s on the front burner either,” he said.

Jerry Jones bought the Dallas Cowboys for around $150 million in 1989. Today, the team is worth $13 billion, according to Forbes. And while people are certainly interested in buying, Jones has been historically uninterested in selling.

“The Cowboys are just not for sale,” said Jones in a 2018 interview with Bloomberg. “They’re a long-term asset and my immediate family — which has been a part of making them what they are today — they’ll own the Cowboys long after I’m gone.”

His interest in potentially selling a minority stake to Cuban, however, marks a notable change in his approach.

“He’s in additional to financial boatstreams of your team, you want to associate with the highest quality of [a person] who loves the game and then also, at the same time, wants to do something about it,” Jones told the Dallas Morning News. “Mark leads the way in that.”

How an NFL rule change made a deal possible

This potential deal wouldn’t be permitted without a recent NFL rule change that allows some private equity firms to buy up to a 10% stake in NFL teams — a ruling that the Jones family supported.

“I think it’s a great tool,” Stephen said on 105.3 The Fan. “I think it makes the league stronger, personally.”

Other major sports leagues have already allowed private equity to invest in their teams. The NBA, MLB, NHL and MLS all put their private equity ownership caps at 30%, which is significantly more than the NFL’s 10%.

While private equity deals can provide cash to professional sports teams, it can also create concerns that those teams will be treated as investments first and sports franchises last. Those concerns recently took center stage when a FIFA proposal that would have allowed private equity firms to purchase a 20% stake in the World Cup was called off.

“The World Cup cannot be treated as an investment product,” said UFEA, the governing organization for European football, in a statement rejecting the proposal. “No part of it should ever be surrendered to private investors. The World Cup is not for sale.”

The NFL’s rule update is still limited in scope — it only allows a few predetermined private equity firms to invest in teams, and Cuban’s Harbinger fund is not currently on the list. He’d need to get permission from the NFL to carry out the deal.

The Dallas Cowboys and Mark Cuban did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Jassy used part of that call to walk analysts through why the spending works, and he did it by splitting the investment in two: there are the data centers, and there are the servers and networking equipment inside them. He said the two run on different capital cycles. The buildings carry “30 plus year useful lives.” Across that stretch, Amazon should get “at least five to six generations of server economics,” each one cheaper than the last because the building is already paid for.

Then he put a number on the servers, saying they “currently have a useful life of at least five to six years.” He added that Amazon Web Services (AWS) has a track record of “finding ways to extend the useful life of this equipment.”

Amazon cut its server life estimate to 5 years in January 2025

After finishing a useful life study in the fourth quarter of 2024, Amazon cut a subset of its servers and networking equipment from six years to five, effective January 2025. At the same time it decided to retire certain servers and networking equipment early. The company gave the SEC one reason: “an increased pace of technology development, particularly in the area of artificial intelligence and machine learning.”

Those decisions carried a price. Roughly $700 million off 2025 operating income from the useful life change, about $920 million in accelerated depreciation and related charges for the early retirements and another $600 million of that expected to land during 2025.

Depreciation is the mechanism underneath all of this — the way a company spreads equipment cost across the years it expects to use it. Stretch the assumption and current profits look better. Shorten it and the bill comes sooner.

Amazon has done both, repeatedly. Servers went from three years to four in 2020, four to five in 2022, and five to six in January 2024, before the 2025 reversal.

Trainium 2 chips are only about 20 months old

Internal planning documents from Amazon’s Indiana campus, reported August 6th by Business Insider, describe a server cycle already turning over. Amazon is stitching separate buildings there into a single machine it calls an “AGI SuperCluster” internally. Buildings folded in become “annexes” sharing core networking equipment with a neighbor instead of running their own. Some facilities on the campus, which the documents don’t identify as the annexes, are planning to put Trainium 3 servers in place of Trainium 2 systems.

Trainium 2 reached general availability in December 2024. The oldest units anywhere are about 20 months old.

Run that against Jassy’s own math and the gap opens up. If a break-even takes just under three years, and the free cash flow arrives in the two to three years after that, the economics need something close to the full five or six years of service. Hardware pulled at 20 months hasn’t reached break-even, let alone paid its way.

How Amazon answers the depreciation question

Hardware leaving a building is not the same as hardware being retired. A Trainium 2 redeployed to inference work elsewhere in Amazon keeps depreciating on schedule with nothing written off, and most of the Trainium 2 capacity Anthropic uses already runs inference, Semafor reported. Business Insider’s reporting also says the new work leaves Project Rainier’s servers alone, and no date is attached to the Indiana swap. A spokesperson told Business Insider the company is “always designing, upgrading, and improving our data center infrastructure.”

Where to check the server estimate in Amazon’s next annual report

Amazon’s cash flow statement shows it has spent $66.1 billion more on property and equipment over the 12 months ending June 30 than a year earlier — money it attributes to AI. Free cash flow across that stretch was an outflow of $7.6 billion. Depreciation and amortization ran $75.2 billion against $58.6 billion, though that line covers content costs and lease assets alongside equipment.

Anyone holding an S&P 500 fund owns a piece of this.

Amazon has commented on the Indiana redesign but has not said whether five years still reflects how long it expects to run Trainium 2 there. When the next annual report lands, the capex number will lead the coverage.

The one that answers the question sits in the property and equipment footnote, on the line giving the estimated useful life of servers and networking equipment. Jassy says AWS keeps finding ways to make that number longer, but the filings show it going the other way.

Amazon did not respond by publication time to our request for comment.

For those in the so-called “sandwich generation” — Gen Xers who are still caring for their kids, as well as for their aging parents — the strain of a dual-caregiver role can be overwhelming.

If all that pressure weren’t enough, there is yet another factor that can complicate this already challenging role: What if you don’t have a good relationship with the parent you’re expected to provide care for?

One TikToker is speaking out on the “impossible position” that some Gen Xers are finding themselves in.

“Present but absent”

“Let’s talk about the impossible position that so many Gen X daughters are in right now,” TikToker Leelo Ryan says in a video that has more than 300,000 views.

Ryan, a 59-year-old mom, says in the video that she grew up with a “present but absent mom,” who didn’t do things like read to her or play with her, and who “could not be bothered” to provide basic emotional care.

She says that, now, many Gen Xers are “now expected to care for these aging parents who never provided the same emotional care to us.”

“What if we cared for them the way that they cared for us? What would that look like?”

Ryan gives examples of this, such as telling a parent who says they are lonely to “go outside and come back when the streetlights come on,” or if they needed help navigating new technology, telling them to “just read the instructions on the box.”

“Or maybe they’re crying, and you say ‘Shh, I’m reading my romance novel,’” she muses.

Of course, Ryan is not being serious, but trying to make a point: “If we did that, people would call us heartless, and yet somehow when we were children it was considered normal. That is the point I’m trying to make — not revenge, but the double standard.”

“The level of patience that they now need from us is the level of patience that they never had for us. We’re expected to become the emotionally available adults now that they never became for us,” Ryan added.

Caregiving for a person who has hurt you

Roberta Satow, author of Doing the Right Thing: Taking Care of Your Elderly Parents Even if They Didn’t Take Care of You, told AARP that caregiving for anyone, whether you have a good relationship or not, can bring up mixed feelings.

“Doing the right thing doesn’t mean you have to love it or be happy to do it,” Satow told AARP.

If you’re in a caregiving role for someone who hurt you, it makes sense that old wounds could be opened, or that an old dynamic will rear its ugly head. If you’re able to identify certain triggers that always send you down an emotional rabbit hole, you can learn how to avoid those scenarios while also giving yourself grace for the times that you aren’t able to stay grounded.

Carol Bradley Bursack, author of Minding Our Elders: Caregivers Share Their Personal Stories, told AARP that you may find it helpful to learn skills that can help you emotionally detach from some situations. Bursack says that while this might seem like giving in, it’s actually just saving yourself, since arguing with an irrational person won’t get you anywhere.

“If you don’t try to correct them and try to change their behavior, they have nowhere to go with their anger,” Bursack told AARP.

Protecting yourself from emotional damage

Although you may feel that it is either emotionally or financially impossible for you to care for an aging parent, you may not have a choice about it. Most states have some form of filial responsibility laws, meaning that adult children have a legal and financial obligation to care for their parents or pay for their care.

A 2026 report from the AARP Public Policy Institute found that the economic value of family caregiving in the U.S. exceeded $1 trillion in 2024.

This “invisible workforce” includes 59 million Americans, and the care they provide family members is “equivalent to the amount of work done by 23.8 million full-time workers,” the report says.

And that care comes at a cost: A 2025 joint report from AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving found that 47% of family caregivers “experienced at least one negative financial impact as a result of caregiving.” Some impacts include stopping or depleting savings, going into debt, or not paying bills.

And those with household incomes of less than $50,000 “are more often hit by these negative financial impacts,” including not being able to afford basic expenses. The report also found that Black and Latino caregivers “more often experience most of these impacts compared with the total population of family caregivers.”

If you are caregiving for a parent whom you don’t have a good relationship with, try to build skills that can help you distance yourself from their hurtful behavior, past or present. Building up your own emotional support system, with friends and trusted loved ones, can also ensure that you have people you can lean on when the stress of caregiving is overwhelming.

During a campaign rally in Las Vegas on Wednesday, Trump talked up the U.S. relationship with Venezuela, now under interim leader Delcy Rodriguez, who was installed soon after Maduro’s removal in early January. The Trump administration has dictated many of the Venezuelan government’s political and financial decisions ever since, including control of its oil sales and the revenue generated.

“We’re taking a lot of oil from Venezuela and we’re getting along great with them,” he said. “Billions and billions of barrels of oil is coming out of Venezuela, one of the most fertile places for oil in the world.”

He continued: “As you know, it was a 48-minute war, it lasted 48 minutes. And we paid for the war with what we’ve taken out many, many, many times…That’s the old -fashioned way. To the victor belong the spoils, right?”

The $13 billion question

The comments offer a glimpse into a piece of Trump’s worldview where might makes right. Critics deride it as outdated imperialism.

“The people of Venezuela have suffered decades of tyranny and now a devastating earthquake, yet Trump brags about stealing their money,” said Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia, in an X post.

The Pentagon hasn’t publicly laid out the cost of the U.S. attack that deposed Maduro. The Costs of War Project at Brown University estimated that combined military operations in Venezuela and the Caribbean — including U.S. airstrikes on alleged drug traffickers — have cost at least $4.7 billion from August 2025 through March 2026.

The Financial Times recently reported that the U.S. had collected $13 billion in Venezuelan oil revenue since January. The newspaper cited data on Venezuelan crude oil shipments from Kpler, a shipping platform, as well as price estimates for heavy crude.

There’s been scarce public accounting for the oil cash so far. The Venezuelan government under Rodriguez set up a website to detail its “sovereign transparency” with only one entry listed: a $300 million oil sale on March 13.

The Venezuelan oil industry has been in a state of disrepair for nearly a decade due to crippling U.S sanctions and economic mismanagement. Daily oil production in Venezuela ticked up to 1.1 million barrels per day in the second quarter of the year, according to a July report from the bloc of oil-producing countries OPEC. Last year, daily production hovered around 900,000 barrels per day.

Mounting scrutiny

Congressional lawmakers are stepping up their scrutiny of the current financial arrangement between Venezuela and the U.S., particularly in the wake of twin earthquakes in the country that killed more than 6,000 people in late June.

Democrats are taking the lead in pushing for more information on how the money is being managed and spent, as well as ensuring anti-corruption measures are in place.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said the Trump administration was operating with “an unacceptable lack of transparency” around its control of Venezuelan oil sales.

“The President’s statements, along with the lack of evidence of material benefit to the Venezuelan people facing 5,000 deaths and almost $20 billion in costs from catastrophic earthquakes, further our concerns about how Trump Administration officials have used these funds,” Garcia wrote in letters sent to the State, Energy and Treasury departments on Tuesday.

Michael Kozak, a State Department official overseeing U.S. diplomacy in the Western Hemisphere, said Venezuelan oil revenue is deposited into a joint account managed by the Treasury and State Departments.

“The money remains Venezuelan money,” he said at a July 14 Senate hearing. “It’s money they get from oil, they put it into that account and in order to spend it… they have to get our permission.”

Throughout his 19 seasons in the league, the man known as “The Big Aristotle” won four NBA championships, three finals MVPs and one regular season MVP. He also received 15 NBA All-Star selections while playing with six different teams: the Orlando Magic, Los Angeles Lakers, Miami Heat, Phoenix Suns, Cleveland Cavaliers and Boston Celtics.

O’Neal has a wealth of knowledge that he could share with his son, Shareef, who was once an aspiring NBA player. On a recent episode of Power Moves with Shaquille O’Neal, a Netflix show that documents his effort to ”revive Reebok’s legacy and find a rising star to rep the brand,” O’Neal shared a poignant message about his pursuit of success and how striving for greatness had cost him dearly.

“You gotta understand that in that [NBA] life, you know you have to give everything up?” O’Neal told Shareef. “If you want to be great, my man, you gotta sacrifice everything. I’ve lost a family trying to be great.”

‘I messed it up’

On top of all the awards and accolades, O’Neal earned more than $286 million during his NBA career, and he says he gave up a lot just to be able to earn that kind of cash.

In 2002, O’Neal married Shaunie Nelson, and the two had four children together: sons Shareef and Shaqir, as well as daughters Me’arah and Amirah. O’Neal also raised Shaunie’s son from a previous relationship, Myles, as his stepson, and he shares a daughter, Taahirah, with his former girlfriend, Arnetta Yardbourgh.

However, O’Neal and Nelson separated in 2009 and finalized their divorce two years later in 2011. When the two got married, O’Neal was at the peak of his career and had just won three straight NBA Championships with the Lakers.

“I was lost,” O’Neal once shared with the New York Post. “76,000-square-foot house by yourself, lost. No kids, go to the gym, nobody playing in the gym. We go to their room, nobody’s there. You start to feel it.”

“I had two perfect women and I messed it up,” he added.

Following the divorce, O’Neal told rapper T.I. on the latter’s expediTIously podcast that his children didn’t speak with him for a long time, though things seem to be better now that O’Neal is retired.

“In all of that, I’m just happy and blessed that they’ve forgiven me. Because me and my babies didn’t talk for a while,” said O’Neal, according to Complex. “I understood that, but now we’re starting to get closer. I’m teaching my boys to be better than me.”

How Shareef’s NBA dreams were dashed

Shareef played high school basketball at the Crossroads School in Santa Monica, California, where he graduated as a four-star college recruit in 2018. He later decided to join the NCAA and play for the UCLA Bruins, who were excited about his addition to the team.

“Shareef has made great strides throughout his high school career,” former head coach Steve Alford told CBS Sports. “He’s an outstanding addition to our incoming class and brings a terrific combination of size, skill and athleticism.”

However, tragedy struck Shareef just before his freshman season, when he was diagnosed with a heart condition that required open-heart surgery. He made a full recovery and was able to continue his college basketball career with hopes of playing in the NBA.

Following his lone season at LSU, Shareef entered the 2022 NBA Draft, though his father didn’t exactly approve of this decision.

“We [Shareef and O’Neal] kind of bump heads about this process,” Shareef told ESPN. “He wanted me to stay in school.”

After going unselected in the NBA Draft, Shareef found himself playing with the G League Ignite of the NBA G League in 2022-23, the minor league of the NBA. Following a knee injury in 2024 that required surgery, Shareef decided to put an end to his pursuit of NBA stardom.

“I always told myself, if I have to get another surgery after my heart surgery, I’d be done,” said Shareef, according to Basketball Network. “I had to get a double knee surgery. So I stopped.”

“So now I just play for fun,” he said.

With his NBA goal set aside, Shareef is now an executive contributor and creative strategist at Reebok Basketball, working with his dad, who serves as the brand’s president.

A surprising number of Gen Zers — those born between 1997 and 2012 — have also become caregivers out of necessity. And, as housing and healthcare costs soar, it’s falling on teenagers and young adults to help support aging family members.

Isabella Myricle Robinson has more pressures than the average teen — not just handing in her homework on time. After her mother’s breast cancer had spread to her brain, Isabella became her mother’s primary caregiver at the age of 14, skipping school. “I know my grades suffered. But my mom needed me,” she told The New York Times Magazine.

Instead of going to her majorette rehearsals and games — which she eventually had to quit — she was tending to her mother’s wounds, helping her bathe, changing bandages, sorting pills and accompanying her to medical appointments.

She’s far from alone. More Gen Zers are finding themselves in the position of caring for their parents or older relatives, putting their own future at risk.

The state of caregiving

About 63 million Americans provide ongoing care for an adult or a child with a complex medical condition, according to the Caregiving in the U.S. 2025 report from AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving.

These caregivers are providing complex medical care and nursing tasks (such as injections and wound care) with virtually no training. For the most part, it’s unpaid work — and it takes a toll on their own health and wellbeing. Nearly one in four caregivers say they provide 40+ hours of care per week.

On average, caregivers for adults are 50.6 years old. But overall, 18% of those caregivers are between the ages of 18 to 34, bridging Gen Z and millennial generations.

It’s not surprising, then, that 90% of family caregivers show symptoms of burnout, which 20% describe as severe, according to a nationwide study by LogicMark, a provider of personal safety and connected care technology.

And Gen Z is feeling the impact more than any other generation, with nearly two-thirds (62%) saying their caregiving duties cut into job performance (versus 44% of millennials and 45% of Gen X). And half (50%) of Gen Z respondents in the survey say their caregiving duties have damaged their personal relationships, which also outpaces older generations.

While most people think caregiving is something you have to worry about in middle age, the data says something different.

“Gen Z adults are quietly carrying one of the heaviest loads, and doing it without paid leave, any financial cushion or the support systems older generations had time to build,” said Chia-Lin Simmons, CEO of LogicMark, in a release. “This is a generational emergency hiding in plain sight.”

This is happening at a time when they’re either a student or starting out in their career, taking a toll on their career prospects and financial stability. With nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts, they also face less access to home-based supports (while making it more difficult to maintain their own Medicaid coverage).

That means financial issues could extend beyond their caregiving years, impacting their own future.

Planning for the costs of caregiving

Almost three out of four (72%) of Gen Zers plan to care for their aging parents — such as serving as a caregiver or having their parents move in with them as they age — according to a Caring.com survey.

But the data showed something else, too: Most don’t understand how much senior care actually costs. Annual costs range from $50,000 to $70,000 — which only 16% of Gen Z respondents answered correctly. For example, costs for home health care services average around $5,148 per month.

And, with rising healthcare and housing costs — along with Medicaid cuts — caregiving will keep getting more expensive. And this can feel overwhelming for students and young adults who are just starting out in life.

Many adults and their children “are not on the same page” when it comes to caregiving needs. Caring.com found that fewer than 40% of Gen X and baby boomers have discussed future care needs with their children and only 10.5% have a plan in place for caregiving and/or financial support.

Considering that 70% of Americans aged 65+ will require long-term services or support during their lifetime, this is an important conversation to have.

After talking to your family members, Caring.com recommends assessing your finances to see how aggressively you might need to save. Also look into federal, state and local resources that might be able to help.

Keep in mind that Medicare (for those 65+) doesn’t cover long-term care, while benefits for short-term care are limited. And, with cuts to Medicaid, it may be harder to qualify (eligibility varies from state to state).

For those who are eligible, long-term care insurance is another option that could make senior care more affordable down the road.

Options include traditional long-term care insurance (which helps cover costs related to activities of daily living such as bathing, dressing and eating), as well as hybrid life insurance with long-term care (offering a death benefit if you pass away before needing long-term care).

Whatever the case, having a plan for caregiving and long-term care can help to take the financial burden off of loved ones — especially teens and young adults who may struggle with the responsibility.

One cop in Dunellen, New Jersey, however, might take the crown for the most innovative undercover method.

An officer disguised as a shrubbery along a heavily trafficked, pedestrian-heavy area in the city’s downtown district issued a whopping 74 violations for distracted driving in just six hours, catching drivers checking their phone as they were behind the wheel.

The sting took place on July 29 and the department touted its effectiveness that afternoon on Facebook.

“Did you spot our ‘shrub’ today? If you had your head buried in your phone, probably not!” the department wrote. “Today, the Dunellen Police Department conducted a Distracted Driving Enforcement Detail on the 100 block of North Washington Ave. We specifically chose this highly-trafficked, pedestrian-heavy downtown area to enforce New Jersey’s Handheld Cell Phone Law and protect our community.”

Dunellen is one of 126 cities in New Jersey to receive a grant from the state’s Office of the Attorney General for the “Put the Phone Away or Pay” campaign earlier this year. The Dunellen chief of police, however, said the shrub disguise was not funded by that grant.

‘Not a cop’

In addition to Officer Shrub, the Facebook post also included another picture of another policeman standing on a bench beside the road, walkie-talkie in hand, wearing a shirt with the words “Not a Cop” spread across his chest in all capital letters.

There’s no word on how many of the texting drivers he caught, nor whether his total was included in the 74 citations.

There’s also no indication if this was a one-time operation or if Dunellen will continue to send officers out wearing ghillie suits to catch drivers on their phones, though given the success rate, it’s hard to imagine they won’t.

Don’t text and drive

New Jersey, like many other states, has made it illegal to hold a cellphone while operating a vehicle. (The practice is only still fully allowed in Montana.) Some 42% of all crashes in New Jersey in 2024 involved a distracted driver, which is often (but not always) tied to cell phone usage.

Drivers who violate this directive face fines that range anywhere from $200 to $400 for the first offense, $400 to $600 for their second and as much as $800 for subsequent offenses, as well as three points on your license. All violations require the person receiving the citation to go to court.

While it’s unlikely the officer who spotted the people caught in this sting will show up for court wearing the shrub outfit, we can always hope that happens.

He told investors on Aug. 4 that SpaceX would end this year above 2 gigawatts of computing capacity and finish 2027 “closer to 10 gigawatts” than five. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas asked whether he had the permits, chips and turbines to pull that off.

Musk went bigger, saying the tentative target is 20 gigawatts of power and cooling by the end of next year. Then he undercut himself in the same answer: “I don’t think we’re going to achieve 20 gigawatts.” The realistic number, he said, is closer to 15.

New York City needs more than 10,000 megawatts at peak in an extreme heat wave, according to a July report from Comptroller Mark Levine, so even Musk’s low figure is a city’s worth of power.

SpaceX spent about $18.4 billion in three months, roughly $15.8 billion of it on AI compute infrastructure. That is double the previous quarter, with the same pace planned for at least two more. Investors balked and the stock fell about 8% on Aug. 5.

What 15 gigawatts looks like on the ground

Mississippi regulators approved a permit in March for 41 gas turbines in Southaven, just over the state line from SpaceX’s Memphis data centers, which puts them under Mississippi’s oversight rather than Tennessee’s. The company says the plant will produce 1.2 gigawatts and let it retire the 69 temporary turbines it has been running.

The agreed order with the state blames supply chain problems for delays on the permanent turbines, so that one project is already behind schedule. Musk needs about a dozen more like it in under 18 months.

In response to Moneywise’s request for comment about the delays, the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) said only that “the agreed order speaks for itself.”

SpaceX did not respond to Moneywise’s request for comment in time for publication.

How data centers push up power bills, even far away

Utilities don’t buy your power the month you use it. They buy it years ahead at auction, based on how much demand they expect. When data centers pile into those forecasts, prices go up and the cost lands on customers. SpaceX builds its own generation, so its plants never clear one of those auctions. But it bids for the same turbines and transformers your utility needs and the shortage that delayed Southaven is the shortage utilities are buying into.

PJM Interconnection runs the grid for 67 million people across 13 states and Washington, D.C., and its capacity price for 2026/2027 came in at $329.17 per megawatt-day, up from $269.92 the year before.

Joseph Bowring, who monitors that market independently, says data centers account for $29.4 billion of $63.6 billion in capacity charges over the last four auctions. Households in those states pay a share of that.

In a statement to Moneywise, Jeffrey Shields, the senior manager at PJM for external communications, described “unprecedented growth in electricity demand, driven largely by data centers and other large loads,” pointing to an all-time peak demand record this summer as evidence.

Prices climb, Shields said, when demand outruns the new generation.

However, a May study from Energy + Environmental Economics, paid for by the Data Center Coalition, found no historical evidence that data centers push costs onto households, though one author, Kush Patel, added that the past guarantees nothing and the risk ahead is real.

The Data Center Coalition did not respond to Moneywise’s request for comment iin time for publication.

If you’re in New York you’re seeing it already. Con Edison told customers a typical household using 350 kilowatt hours a month would pay about 5.7% more this summer than last, citing higher regional demand and tighter supply.

The same pattern shows up in Tennessee Valley Authority territory, where SpaceX’s Colossus data centers sit. Power use by data centers in the valley grew sevenfold between 2020 and 2025, according to research group ThinkTennessee. In Tennessee areas with data centers, home electric bills rose 3.2% between 2023 and 2024. Commercial bills fell.

Nationwide, homes are paying an average 18.3 cents per kilowatt-hour this year, up 5.7%, with another increase forecast for 2027.

What you can do about it

If you’re facing higher prices, the first step is looking at your own bill. Find the supply or capacity charge and compare it to the same month two years ago. If it jumped, demand growth on your regional grid is probably part of why.

Then look at what your state is doing. Virginia created a separate rate class for customers drawing 25 megawatts or more, starting Jan. 1, 2027. Pennsylvania issued a model tariff in May for large customers at 50 megawatts and up. Both came out of proceedings that took public comment.

Musk’s long-term answer is to move the whole problem off the planet and he told investors SpaceX starts launching orbital data centers next year. Until then, the turbines go up in Southaven.

In its Q2 2026 earnings call, UFC’s parent company TKO Group Holdings reported operating the special UFC Freedom 250 event on President Trump’s birthday at a $30-million loss.

TKO Group’s CFO Andrew Schleimer admitted the sports entertainment company “incurred significantly higher than normal costs” with UFC Freedom 250, but that these were partially offset in other ways.

Besides the massive cost for UFC Freedom 250 — which the Associated Press estimated at $60 million — TKO Group lost so much because it didn’t collect money from foregone ticket sales. As The Hill reported, only about 4,000 VIPs were invited for free to watch this showdown on the South Lawn.

Schleimer explained that such a massive outflow of capital “meaningfully impacted” TKO Group’s margins. He went on to say, “UFC’s adjusted EBITDA margin was 52%, down from 59% in the prior year period. Removing the impact of UFC Freedom 250, UFC margins would have increased meaningfully year-over-year.”​

Although this may all sound like bad news, TKO executives have no regrets about hosting their White House brawl. CEO Ari Emanuel touted the UFC Freedom 250, claiming it “was a roaring success for our company, the UFC brand, and the sport of mixed martial arts.” Some of the benefits Emanuel noted from this event included “Exposure, earned media, audience expansion, and a weekend-long fan experience.”

Schleimer added that the partnerships they got from hosting UFC Freedom 250 will more than make up for the cost. As he reassured investors, “This wasn’t just, ‘Buy UFC Freedom 250 and get the spectacle.’ We did use this to leverage this event and its value to sign up partners that impact 2026, 2027, and in some cases 2028 and beyond.”

Moneywise reached out to TKO Group for further comment, but did not hear back by the time of publication.​

The logic behind TKO’s ‘loss leader’

​While the $30-million loss looks bad on paper, more sports companies like TKO Group don’t necessarily expect marquee events to make money — at least not directly. TKO Group alluded to using UFC Freedom 250 as a kind of loss leader to beef up its brand image and attract sponsors and media rights negotiations.

This strategy is all part of the shifting economics of pro sports. S&P Global recently reported that global spending on sports media rights is on pace to hit $67.3 billion in 2026, up about 9.6% from a year earlier. That goes to show just how much broadcasters and streaming platforms are willing to fork over for high-profile events.

The sports marketing agency Two Circles also showed that the price for intellectual property (IP) in sports — such as media licensing, video games, and royalties from apparel and toys — is skyrocketing. According to Two Circles’ findings, 2025 was a record year for aggregate sports IP revenue at $174 billion. At its current growth rate, Two Circles forecasts the IP market will reach $260 billion by 2033.

So, even though UFC Freedom 250 was a huge one-time loss, management isn’t looking at that one number. When viewed as an investment in negotiating power and brand awareness, it makes a lot more business sense.

Just how much money does TKO make?

​There’s no question TKO Group took a hit with their $30-million splurge, but they’re still the strongest contender in MMA.

According to their Q2 2026 earnings, TKO Group brought in $1.55 billion in quarterly revenue, which was up 18% from a year earlier. They also posted net income of $303 million, an improvement from $273.1 million last year.

Even though TKO Group lost millions on UFC Freedom 250, they attracted a lot of eyeballs. According to their official press release, 34 million people tuned in to watch these fights around the world.

Interestingly, TKO Group also said AI could make them even stronger in the future — but not for the reasons most other companies argue. For TKO Group, the very artificiality of AI makes their sweaty spectacles even more valuable. As Emanuel explained it, “Premium live content and experiences are heating up in an increasingly AI-driven world, and our businesses are well positioned to fully capitalize on societal secular tailwinds.”

Recent price action in the stock market certainly suggests more investors believe in TKO Group’s prospects. Although TKO’s stock price is currently down about 9.5% year-to-date, it has been on a multi-year uptrend, climbing about 274% in the past five years.

The report, released by advocacy group America’s Voice, argues the President’s mass deportations have caused the price of groceries, homes and healthcare to rise. It’s also caused local economies to contract.

The group is calling the added costs the “ICE Tax,” in reference to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and says the loss of immigrant workers is impacting the economy.

“Forcibly deporting hundreds of thousands of essential workers means extra dollars at the grocery checkout, the home that costs six figures more to build, the corner store that goes quiet after a raid, the job that disappears when a coworker never comes back to work,” Vanessa Cardenas, executive director of America’s Voice, said in a statement, according to CNBC.

The ‘ICE Tax’

America’s Voice analyzed 12 months of federal price data ending in June and found that costs are rising more quickly for foods whose production relies on immigrant labor. For example, lettuce was up 31 %, fresh citrus rose by 6% and apples by 7%.

Other industries outside of agriculture are also being impacted.

In the Northeastern U.S., new permits for single-family homes fell 23.5% from March 2025 to June 2026. The construction workforce in that region is composed of 23% immigrant laborers. New home prices in the same region rose 15.4% between the first quarter of 2025 and the first quarter of 2026.

Home healthcare, where 40% of workers are immigrants, has seen a 10.7% increase over the past year.

America’s Voice notes that other factors outside of Trump’s immigration policy are further exacerbating the crisis, such as weather and higher fuel costs.

“No single figure proves the case on its own. But category after category, the products and services that rely most on immigrant labor are the ones pulling away from the rest of the economy. That’s a cost with a cause, not a coincidence,” the report says.

The Trump administration responds

The president has set an aggressive goal of deporting a million people annually. In July alone, ICE took more than 46,000 individuals into custody for alleged immigration violations — the highest of any month, according to CBS News. The agency is reportedly facing pressure from the White House to record 2,000 arrests each day.

Trump’s immigration policy has faced widespread criticism for its aggressive tactics, and critics have raised concerns about human rights violations. Additionally, ICE has come under fire for a series of high-profile killings.

But the latest report from America’s Voice is making an economic argument for policy changes.

In a statement to CNBC, White House spokesperson Lauren Bis called the report’s findings into question, blaming former President Joe Biden instead.

“Thanks to the Biden administration releasing millions of illegals into our country, rent increased, car insurance premiums skyrocketed, the quality of our health care and education declined and wages dropped for American workers,” Bis wrote in an email to CNBC. “President Trump is ending the affordability crisis caused in part by the Biden administration’s open border policies by putting American citizens first.”

Lisa from Fort Collins told co-hosts Dave Ramsey and Jade Warshaw that while she and her husband would know what to do if the money was for them, they weren’t certain what to do with a windfall allocated to their children.

Lisa said that the “crazy blessing” came about because her sons, ages 10, 7 and 4, had been named beneficiaries on the life insurance of the woman from whom they rented their first house when they were married.

“We just became friends,” Lisa said.

Dave Ramsey’s advice for Lisa started simple enough, but then became a major warning about the impacts this money could have.

Managing money for your kids

First thing, make an appointment with a financial advisor, Ramsey told Lisa.

“I would just open some mutual funds in their name,” he said. “That’s simple.”

Lisa followed up with a question about Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (UTMA) accounts, and Ramsey clarified that that’s what she would be opening.

“These are minor accounts and you’re the custodian, meaning you’re in charge of the money until they turn 18,” he said, adding that there are further complications with this windfall. “The problem that this sets up is that this is their money at 18 years old. And so if they’re doing drugs, they’re going to be well-financed drug users.”

Warshaw questioned whether the money could be transferred to a trust, but Ramsey said no, because the money is “not yours.”

Ramsey said the parents didn’t have a choice, adding that if they did something like put it in a trust, “you could get sued if you do by the kid later.”

“Because your job is to manage it for them as their parent. And if you use it personally, or you somehow trap the money ... that could really come back on you. I wouldn’t do that.”

Teaching financial skills becomes even more important

What a parent, who wants to ensure their children are responsible with money, should do in this situation is acknowledge that they have no control over how their child spends it.

Ramsey pointed to the windfall as an opportunity to home in on what kind of parenting Lisa and her husband ascribe to — and what kind of kids they want to raise.

He used his own personal history to illustrate, explaining that his kids were still young when he and his wife, Sharon, started gaining wealth.

While at first the Ramseys may have thought their newfound wealth was “going to screw up” their children’s lives, he said they realized, “No, it’s not ...”

“It’s going to reveal that we were horrible parents — or it’s going to reveal that we did a good job parenting. One of the two. And so we started raising our children not to be good children, but to be good adults.”

Ramsey’s recommendations on what money lessons Lisa should teach her kids?

“I’m going to teach them how to save. I’m going to teach them how to spend. I’m going to teach them how to live on less than they make,” he said.

He also advised that Lisa not wait until her sons turn 18 to tell them about the money, but instead slowly reveal it to them over time, for example, start to teach them about investing, then mention that there is money invested for them for their future.

And, Ramsey said that kids should still have to work. “Do not allow them to be entitled brats that don’t work.”

The road to 18

Lisa asked if there were any circumstances under which she should use the money for expenses for the kids before they turn 18. Ramsey said that if she wanted to buy them something like a car with the money, she should require that the kids match whatever contribution comes from their inheritance money with their own money they have earned.

He said they could also use the money for college, “But the sticky thing is, it’s technically their money at 18. And so, they could choose not to spend it on college.”

“They can choose to do something stupid like going to student loan debt and keep the money in the account because some bonehead financial advisor told them to do that, or something like that, right?” Ramsey said.

A major windfall is exciting and life-changing, but it also comes with its own set of challenges. If a child receives an inheritance that could be too big for them to manage responsibly when they come of age, the pressure to teach them about being smart with money is on.

The main takeaway from Ramsey’s advice to Lisa was, “If you can make it through to where these become good adults that know how to work, save, spend wisely, be generous, that are grown up, become good young adults, then this money’s going to be a massive blessing.”

“If you don’t, then it’s going to reveal whatever shortfall is in their young character.”

These are the kind of charitable gifts that get the IRS’s attention, tax lawyer Colleen Spain warns. She works at the Farrell Fritz law firm in Long Island, New York — home to Montauk Harbor, Sag Harbor, Fire Island, and a lot of nice boats.

Spain told Moneywise that in recent months, she’s seen the IRS cracking down on people who donate boats in particular. She has heard about it from clients selected for audits. The federal agency may dispute the stated value of the boats and the tax write-off the donor is claiming.

Such gifts present a hassle for charities too, requiring extra paperwork to satisfy the IRS.

“It’s a lot more burdensome than a simple cash donation,” Spain told Moneywise.

A charity recently approached her for advice on a boat donation, with the donor placing a restriction on how the organization could use the boat.

“We talked through the reporting requirements and what to do with that potential donation,” she said. “They decided it was a bit more trouble than it was worth.”

This is true of many non-cash donations. Here’s a look at the rules around non-cash donations and how to weigh whether it’s worth it.

Staying on the right side of the tax man with non-cash donations

As Forbes reports, the IRS started cracking down on charitable gifts of boats, cars and planes in 2004 in response to a tax fraud known as the Blue Book Scam. Donors were giving worthless cars to charity and claiming sizable tax deductions based on their supposed “fair market value” per guides like the Kelley Blue Book.

Today, the IRS determines the value of a boat, car or other non-cash donation based on its true fair market value based on a legitimate appraisal.

“Keep in mind that the fair market value of a boat is a lot higher than a car,” Spain notes. “Some of these boats are worth millions of dollars.”

If the charity sells the gift immediately, the donor can only claim a deduction equal to the proceeds. That means if the boat’s fair market value is $30,000 and the charity sells it for $10,000, the donor can only claim a $10,000 deduction on their taxes.

If a donor knows they’re donating a vehicle (car, boat or airplane) to be sold for scrap and the charity gets less than $500 for it, the donor can claim a $500 tax deduction, but must fill out IRS Form 1098-C.

If the charity doesn’t sell the non-cash gift immediately, it must provide the donor with a written acknowledgement of its intention to do one of the following:

1. Use it for its own purposes. For example, a nonprofit scientific organization may use a donated yacht for research. This is called “significant intervening use.”

2. Give it to a needy individual at a discounted price.

3. Improve it. For example, install a new motor in a boat or a transmission in an old car and sell it.

In these scenarios, the taxpayer can claim a deduction based on the true fair market value of the gift at the time of donation, based on a reputable appraisal. The donor must include the charity’s written acknowledgment of use and fill out IRS Form 8283 when they file their taxes.

What to do before you make a non-cash donation

If you’re considering making a non-cash donation to a nonprofit, rule No. 1 is to make sure you work with a legitimate 501(c)(3) charity. Otherwise, you won’t be able to claim any tax deduction.

Make sure the nonprofit is open to accepting your gift. Don’t assume they’ll say yes. Brad Avery, Director of Marine Programs at Orange Coast College School of Sailing & Seamanship, told Yacht World that his school turns down a lot of boat donations.

“Some boats aren’t right for our fleet, others aren’t in suitable condition and sometimes expectations simply don’t align,” he said. “The donation has to benefit both the donor and the nonprofit.”

This applies to any non-cash donation. A charity may not want your artwork — or taxidermied grizzly bear.

Even if they say yes, there may be a limit to how much you can deduct on your taxes based on your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). Spain adds that you should talk to a tax professional, whether that’s an accountant or lawyer, before you proceed.

The bottom line is that making a non-cash donation to a charity may be more trouble than it’s worth, so do your research first.

The carrier has launched a promotional Companion Pass offer for members of its Rapid Rewards loyalty program. The pass can be used an unlimited number of times on qualifying flights from January 5 through March 3, 2027, with companions paying a minimal fee of $5.60 each way.

There are, however, a few hurdles you’ll have to clear in order to get the pass, and you’ll need to hurry.

First, you’ll need to register for the promotion. You’ll also need to purchase either a qualifying round trip flight or two one-way flights before the end of the day today — August 6.

It’s a narrow window, but a notable reward. Generally, companion passes are only offered to people who fly 100 qualifying one-way flights or earn 135,000 points during the calendar year.

You’ll have to wrap up that travel by Nov. 18 and then designate who your traveling companion will be. (You can’t take different people on different flights next year, so choose wisely.)

The promotion is open to both new and existing Rapid Rewards members.

“The Companion Pass is one of the most valued benefits in travel, and this promotion makes it easier than ever for both new and existing customers to experience the value of Rapid Rewards,” said Nandika Suri, vice president of Rapid Rewards in a statement.

An evolving airline

The companion promotion comes as Southwest looks to reinvent itself. The company has done away with its long-standing policy of allowing customers to check two bags for free.

Last May, the carrier, which has been largely focused on domestic destinations since its founding, asked the Transportation Department for permission to fly to any country with which the U.S. has an Open Skies aviation agreement. That would allow Southwest to fly to countries in Europe, the UK, much of Latin America as well as parts of Asia and Africa.

And in October 2025, it announced changes to its long-standing open-seating boarding process, bringing people on board in eight separate groups to eliminate the rush of passengers trying to get on board before it’s their turn. There’s a workaround, though. Just like people who want to skip the line at theme parks, you’ll have to pay extra to skip the line at the airport.

The Priority Boarding option will let you get on the plane before even Groups 1 or 2. Prices for that last-minute option will be dynamic and vary depending on the route.

Fuel cost fears

The changes are showing results. In July, Southwest reported a better than 9% increase in second quarter profits compared to a year ago, with revenues increasing more than 16%. The forecast for the third-quarter, however, was well below what analysts expected.

That’s due in part to increasing fuel prices due to the war in Iran.

But content creator Atticus says his recent KFC order came up 15 pieces short. In a video posted to TikTok, he counted just 35 pieces in the bucket, meaning he received 30% fewer pieces than he paid for. Atticus had also ordered extra popcorn chicken on the side — a precaution he said he took because he was already suspicious the bucket might not contain the full amount.

“And that’s why I bought extra, because I don’t trust you guys. I don’t trust anybody because this is what people do: they scam. So, if you were going to KFC and you were depending on 50, don’t depend on it. Because you can’t trust them,” he said in the video. “You think it’s funny, KFC?”

Shortchanged on chicken

KFC (NYSE:YUM) acknowledged the apparent discrepancy in a comment beneath the video.

“35 is definitelyyyy not 50,” the company wrote. “Thank you for flagging this, and we sincerely apologize on our end. Could you send us a DM so we can make this up to you ASAP?”

In subsequent videos, Atticus said he went back to the restaurant but ultimately decided not to speak with employees because he worried the interaction would become humiliating or that they would treat him poorly.

KFC continued responding to his follow-up videos, but Atticus said he was dissatisfied with the company’s approach. In an Aug. 4 video, he argued that KFC should have contacted him directly rather than asking him to initiate a private conversation.

Moneywise reached out to KFC for comment but did not receive a response before publication. It is unclear whether the company and Atticus have since resolved the dispute.

Paying more and getting less

Atticus’s frustration may be about 15 missing pieces of chicken, but it comes at a time when fast food no longer feels like the inexpensive fallback it once was.

Prices for food away from home rose 3.4% in the 12 months ending in June 2026, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And a 2025 LendingTree analysis found that the average fast-food meal in a major U.S. city cost $11.56, with prices climbing even higher in cities such as San Francisco and Seattle.

When a quick meal costs well into the double digits, customers may be less willing to shrug off missing items or smaller portions. KFC is not the only restaurant chain to face accusations that customers were getting less food than expected.

Chipotle was hit with viral complaints about inconsistent portion sizes in 2024, prompting some diners to record employees preparing their meals. Then-CEO Brian Niccol later acknowledged that portion sizes were inconsistent at about one in 10 locations and said those restaurants would receive additional training.

For diners already paying more for fast food, portion size is becoming part of the value equation. Whether it’s a bucket missing 15 pieces or a burrito that looks smaller than expected, customers are increasingly paying attention to whether what lands on the table matches what was advertised — because when prices rise, even a small shortfall can feel like a much bigger bite.

Dean, who landed at Google in 1999 and was a pioneering force behind the design of the company’s search engine, Google Brain AI lab, and Gemini model, is launching the AI startup Discovery Loop alongside Ghemawat, Google Brain co-founder Quoc Le, and former Gemini technical lead Oriol Vinyals.

In a statement on Discovery Loop’s website, the company notes its intention to provide AI systems that “act as a deeply positive, empowering force for humanity” while also enabling “much more rapid advances across countless fields of science.”

“We think there is opportunity for AI to more fully automate what has traditionally been a very human-intensive experimental loop,” Dean told The New York Times. “You will get both a higher quantity and a higher quality of experiments, and that will lead to scientific breakthroughs and advances.”

In a message ahead of his final day at Google on Aug. 6, Dean reflected on his 27 years at the company and explained that, “as a kid, I dreamed of helping build software that would be used by many people, and Google now has thirteen products used by more than a billion people (amazing!). Our work has had a tremendous impact in the world.”

Google backs Jeff Dean’s next big AI bet

Dean and company’s departure comes as Google shuffles AI leadership, including naming DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis chair of the AI research lab as well as chief scientist at parent company Alphabet.

Meanwhile, Dean, who is a legend at both Google and within the wider tech world, told Wired that Alphabet attempted to convince he and his Discovery Loop co-founders to stay, but that the foursome “were working on different things” and “were all starting to see the possibility of AI being able to automate scientific and engineering loops.”

He also told the outlet that the idea for Discovery Loop only first arose “a few weeks ago.”

Discovery Loop didn’t immediately reply to Moneywise’s request for comment, while Google responded with a statement from Alphabet and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, which celebrated Dean and Ghemawat a “helping to drive some of the most significant technology transitions, from our early search infrastructure to the neural networks that helped create the modern AI era.”

Despite leaving Google, the tech giant is investing in Discovery Loop and offering the startup some of its services, including cloud infrastructure, which Pichai reiterated in a social media post on Wednesday.

The Times also noted that Discover Loop intends to “operate as a public benefit corporation,” or B-corp, with Dean telling them that, “There is a lot of good that can be done in the world if we can distribute scientific discoveries broadly. We might make decisions that are not necessarily in the company’s purist financial interests.”

Meanwhile, at Google, it’s clear that Dean and his departing colleagues will be sorely missed. On a company message board chat, one employee reportedly quipped that “Google is not losing Jeff Dean. Google is finally open-sourcing him for humanity,” Business Insider reports.

For months, residents near a stalled 22-unit condominium development have been living alongside a pack of coyotes that have taken up residence in the unfinished structure, according to the Washington Post.

Community members and the West Hollywood Planning Commission opposed the development in 2018, when it was proposed. Then, in 2021, the City of West Hollywood issued permits after a review process, and construction was stopped in 2024, the City confirmed in an email to Moneywise.

Now it sits empty — a shell more than a mile from any open wild space, wedged between apartment buildings in one of Los Angeles’s densest neighborhoods.

Neighbor Collin Newman, who has lived in the area for 10 years, captured the nightly soundtrack: “It’s kind of like a cacophony of howls,” he told the Post. “If you’ve ever seen ‘The Lion King,’ imagine a pack of hyenas in the middle of the wilderness. And there’s no escape.”

The story became a local spectacle when news outlets reported on what neighbors dubbed the “coyote condos” — drawing onlookers, reporters and even a helicopter trying to photograph the pack from above.

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s theirs. They’re the ones occupying it, living in it,” was Newman’s wry assessment of the situation.

The bigger story: Stalled housing in a city that desperately needs it

The West Hollywood “coyote condo” is an extreme example of a pervasive problem. Los Angeles is in the midst of a severe housing shortage, and construction isn’t keeping pace with demand.

According to a report by Enterprise Community Partners, nearly 40,000 affordable homes across 461 California developments have cleared key regulatory hurdles — including local approvals and partial financing — but can’t break ground without final public funding commitments. Of those, 9,533 stalled units are in Los Angeles County and Ventura County alone.

And a University of Southern California report cited by CoStar notes that Los Angeles County has completed fewer than 100,000 housing units since 2021 — nearly all at market rate — while the county is mandated to plan for about 700,000 additional units by 2029, including close to 300,000 affordable units.

That gap between supply and need can keep rents elevated, push low-income residents further from employment centers and other resources, and leave stalled sites like the West Hollywood condo as monuments to a broken development pipeline.

The costs and what’s being done

The West Hollywood site illustrates what can happen when a development stalls indefinitely. According to the Post, the building has previously sheltered unhoused individuals, and now wildlife. Neighbors have complained to the city for months with limited response.

The city of West Hollywood told the Post it follows a coexistence plan favoring nonlethal methods to manage wildlife and now requires the property owners to retain a wildlife control expert. The owners did not respond to the Post’s requests for comment.

Moneywise reached out to the city for comment and was directed to its published statement, which states:

*"*The City recognizes that residents are understandably concerned about the presence of coyotes and is actively responding to the situation … The City’s Neighborhood and Business Safety Division, which oversees animal care and control services in West Hollywood, has been in contact with the property owner's representative to seek immediate action. As with any privately owned property, the owner is responsible for maintaining the site … The City is also coordinating with the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner, which is the primary County-level department that serves to track coyote sightings." .

The financial cost to neighbors living beside a stalled site is real and documented. According to the Center for Community Progress, vacant and abandoned properties suppress surrounding property values, strain city budgets through code enforcement, nuisance abatement, fire response, policing and legal costs. They also contribute to declining quality of life. These effects can compound the longer a site sits unfinished.

Whether the city resolves the coyote situation or not, Newman more broadly observed several other vacant structures in the area. In a city where 40,000 affordable homes sit waiting for funding to break ground, that’s unlikely to change anytime soon.

Lekishaann Huggins, 45, has been charged with 39 counts of bank fraud, four counts of spending money laundering, two counts of filing a false tax return and one count of aggravated identity theft.

Huggins was in charge of the THA’s housing choice voucher program, which was designed to help low-income residents afford private housing by paying rent subsidies directly to landlords.

As WCTV reports, Huggins would allegedly replace landlords’ bank information with her own. She also allegedly used former THA tenants’ information to file false claims for housing vouchers before directing those funds to her bank accounts.

Huggins faces decades of prison time

Huggins is facing up to 30 years of prison for each of her 39 counts of bank fraud — up to 1,170 years in prison for those charges alone, although the average sentence for one offence is just 22 months.

She racked up these charges over the course of two years from 2023 to 2025. An official statement from Dr. Tamara Berry-Andrews, Executive Director, said the THA had been working with law enforcement since 2024 in an official statement.

“[The THA] has cooperated with federal authorities throughout this matter and appreciates the work of our law enforcement partners,” she said.

Leon County Commissioner David O’Keefe, who’s currently up for re-election, spoke out against Huggins’ alleged actions — and how long she was able to get away with it — in a Facebook post. Tallahassee is situated in Leon County.

“This is exactly why I became a CPA and auditor,” he wrote. “What jumps out isn’t the dollar amount — it’s that one employee allegedly could change a landlord’s payment information and approve it, with no one required to check their work. A basic two-person check could have easily prevented this.”

It’s vital for any organization to institute two-person checks on financial processes like this to protect against fraud. When dealing with already underfunded programs, these necessary double checks sometimes fall through the cracks, but those oversights can have painful consequences for the people those organizations are supporting.

THA also dealing with federal budget cuts

Unfortunately, the THA isn’t going to get more funding anytime soon. In December 2025, the organization had to delay housing choice voucher payments thanks to funding shortfalls from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In her official statement, Dr. Berry-Andrews said this shortfall was not caused by Huggins.

In 2026, the THA announced it wouldn’t be able to reissue some vouchers currently being used when families left the program due to federal budget cuts. Of the 2,700 vouchers the THA is authorized to give, it said only 1,700 are currently issued — despite demonstrated need from the community.

“They are waiting. It’s an issue, for sure, in terms of being able to adequately meet the needs of our local community, because there’s such great needs,” said Board of Commissioners Chair Christic Henry in an interview with WTXL.

The waiting list for the housing choice voucher program is currently closed. According to O’Keefe’s statement, the waitlist has been closed since December 2020 except for a one-month period in 2024.

Floridians who need that program to secure housing are the real victims in this. They’re the ones who feel the federal budget cuts the most, in addition to the hundreds of thousands of dollars of rent they could have received if not for Huggins’ bank fraud.

“It’s going to affect a lot of parents,” says Britney Chavers, a Floridian single mother who has used the program before, in an interview with WTXL. “I’m going to have to work two jobs. That’s going to be time away from my son, my parenting. That’s going to affect him as well.”

The Tallahassee Housing Authority did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Still, experts try, drawing up “balance sheets” of sorts to distill all of humanity’s unfathomable resources and deficits into a figure can help yield some insights into how we are faring over time.

McKinsey Global Institute, the research subsidiary of the well-known consulting firm, is one of the sources that’s been monitoring these benchmarks in recent years, taking a broad look at all assets and liabilities on Earth in an attempt to “provide a lens into economic health.”

Its latest report, though, has a troubling thesis: that our international financial statement has become distinctly “out of kilter” with the economy, as less and less concrete capital — and progressively more theoretical returns — make up the quadrillions of dollars of wealth that exists.

Money on paper is outpacing investment and productive output

This wealth is, McKinsey writes, now “rooted in asset values rising faster than real economy investment and growth, creating record levels of global wealth ‘on paper,’ to a greater extent than previously.”

The primary suspects behind the trend are China and the U.S., where the surging values of certain existing commodities and businesses are key drivers of an overall jump in “wealth” despite not being true indicators of real value formation. This is also amid record debt in both countries.

As the researchers write, “When equity values rise faster than GDP, capital may disproportionately go to asset repurchases, sometimes with a lot of leverage. This may push up valuations, but leave the economy deprived of the type of investment that generates long-run growth.”

One big elephant in the room is the monumental expenditures in the realm of AI, much of which is funded by precarious circular financing and, even worse, debt, all for something that has yet to prove its worth. Some experts argued that AI did basically nothing to the economy in 2025, despite so much being poured into the sector.

But, the runaway stocks of these tech companies pushed world equities up by a staggering 20% over the course of the year, raising their values to nearly four times the US’s total GDP. Amid the flurry of the buildout, McKinsey notes that it’s “ imperative that corporate earnings deliver on high expectations” — something that still isn’t guaranteed.

This all serves as more solely “on-paper” growth, which McKinsey doesn’t deem as healthy economic progress.

Where the divergence could lead

While household wealth across all nations has been surging disproportionately to GDP for some 30 years, last year’s numbers show a particularly drastic rift, with the world’s fortune reaching the highest level ever recorded — $1.7 quadrillion in total assets and $570 trillion in household wealth — while many economies flatline.

“Productivity did not keep pace across advanced economies, nor did real wealth formation through net new investment,” the writers state, pointing to the best and most obvious possible solution: higher productivity. But other, less desirable outcomes are also possible.

“Several asset classes have grown further out of balance with the underlying economy, raising the possibility of corrections through inflation or asset valuation losses,” they state.

What’s even more startling is the fact that this divergence between household wealth and productivity may be even worse than it seems due to somewhat artificially inflated GDP numbers.

High immigration bumps headline GDP by expanding the consumer base, but the resulting figure doesn’t take into account the worsening wealth divide — under which many are not seeing their earnings and assets accelerate at the rate that GDP stats would suggest — and the severe impacts the influx has on things like home prices, which falsely contributes to higher overall wealth though nothing new has been created or invested in.

Add to that the exorbitant AI capital expenditures without corresponding tangible productivity or commercial gains, and the balance sheet could be even more off.

“We need to be clear about this: We are in a fight for humanity,” said Fain during the UAW’s constitutional convention. “Human beings have to come first in this equation, not an afterthought.”

Less than two months later, two car companies have announced plans to add AI-powered humanoid robots to their car plants.

“If you have a humanoid form, you can pretty much set it to any workplace where a human is working today because it has the same size and same capabilities,” said Michael Nikolaides, head of process management and digitalization at BMW, to BBC.

BMW is one of the companies planning to add humanoid to their plants’ production lines; Hyundai is the other. Boston Dynamics, the creator of the Atlas robots Hyundai plans to use, describes them as “the new face of industrial automation.”

Here’s why unions are upset — and what we can expect from AI automation across different sectors going forward.

BMW and Hyundai both moving towards adding humanoid robots to factories — despite protests from the latter’s unions

BMW has already added humanoid robots to one of their plants in the United States. Now it’s bringing its humanoid robot pilot program to one of its German plants.

“For the first time, the BMW Group is now bringing Physical AI to Europe,” it said in its press release on the subject.

Each of these pilot programs were small in scope; the US plant has so far tested two different humanoid robots, and the German plant will also test two robots.

Hyundai’s plans are far broader. It hopes to produce 30,000 humanoid robots annually starting in 2028, deploying those robots first in Georgia and then around the world.

Hyundai’s plant in Georgia is not currently unionized, although the USW is attempting to organize its workers. But its South Korean plants are unionized, and union leaders are reportedly not happy.

According to Reuters, Hyundai Motor’s labor union sent an internal letter warning against going ahead with humanoid robots without consulting the union first. The letter said that Hyundai was hoping to use the robots to reduce its workforce, reducing labor costs and boosting profits.

The Hyundai Motor union is currently on partial strike, though Hyundai leadership says the strike doesn’t have anything to do with the humanoid robots. The Wall Street Journal reports that Byun Jun-hwan, the union’s secretary general, says the union “[has] to prepare to ensure there are safeguards in place.”

Other sectors also face job loss due to AI and automation

The auto industry is far from the only sector facing automation concerns. For example, autonomous vehicles are starting to replace services like Uber and Lyft — leaving already-struggling gig workers out of a job.

In unionized sectors, union leaders have started to push for increased worker protections on how and when companies use AI and automation.

“There is a path where new technology makes work better and safer, with good union jobs that have fair pay and better job quality,” says the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations’ (AFL-CIO) October 2025 report on AI in the workplace. The AFL-CIO represents dozens of unions, including UAW.

“This vision for a worker-centered technological future does not reflect what we are seeing today as new AI-powered technology is being unleashed on all of us, much of it unregulated and some of it dangerous,” it continues. “Without commonsense rules and a true commitment to boosting worker voice, there is a different future where good jobs, working conditions, safety, economic security, and worker and civil rights are at risk.”

Unions are increasingly winning guardrails on AI at the negotiating table. But when almost 90% of the US workforce isn’t represented by a union, that still leaves a lot of room for AI and automation to replace workers.

UAW, BMW and Hyundai did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

He opened the account in 1999, before he was a billionaire, with less than $2,000 — the most anyone could contribute back then — and then used it to buy into the startup that became PayPal, according to IRS records obtained by ProPublica.

Congress created the Roth IRA to help regular workers save for retirement. On July 22, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore)., and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass) introduced a bill to stop accounts like Thiel’s from ever getting that big.

But one economist wants to go even further — he wants the tax break, and your retirement accounts, killed entirely.

What the Wyden-Neal bill would do

The bill itself targets a narrow group: people earning more than $400,000 a year ($450,000 for couples) who hold more than $10 million across their IRAs, Roth accounts and 401(k)s. They wouldn’t be able to add another dollar to their account. Each year they’d withdraw half of everything above $10 million and pay income tax on it. Any amount above $20 million would have to be fully withdrawn.

New Joint Committee on Taxation data released with the bill shows more than 32,000 individuals each held over $10 million in tax-sheltered retirement accounts at the end of 2024, averaging $17 million. At the very top, 208 people held $85.1 billion between them — $409 million each.

How does anyone get $10 million into an account like that? Contributions can’t do it — the annual IRA limit was $2,000 when Thiel opened his, and it’s $7,500 for 2026 ($8,600 for those 50 and over). The move is to put in something worth almost nothing, then wait for it to climb.

That depends on a low valuation, which is exactly where the IRS runs into trouble. A 2014 Government Accountability Office report found the agency already going after undervalued assets inside IRAs, through audits that drag and are hard to win in court, because nobody can price a private company with certainty.

“Individuals worth hundreds of millions or billions of dollars do not need any taxpayer subsidy to save,” said Wyden, ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, in a media release.

This idea keeps coming back. Obama proposed a cap in 2013, a version died with the Build Back Better Act in 2021 and Biden revived it in his fiscal 2024 budget. None of it became law. This version likely won’t either, not with Republicans holding both chambers. But if Democrats flip the House or Senate in November, Neal, House Ways and Means Committee ranking member, and Wyden would chair the two committees that write tax law.

Why one economist wants the tax break gone for everyone

Andrew Biggs once rose to principal deputy commissioner at the Social Security Administration — the agency’s No. 2 job. He’s now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. In 2024, he and Boston College economist Alicia Munnell published a brief arguing the government should stop subsidizing retirement accounts and send the money to Social Security. The Treasury put the cost of the break at about $185 billion in 2020 alone.

“If I were in charge, I wouldn’t have the tax preference at all,” Biggs told USA TODAY.

But not everyone buys it. Economists at Biggs’ own institute have argued that workers who build private savings should lean less on government programs later in life.

Unfortunately, the retirement account tax break does little to raise how much the average person saves. High earners just move money they were already setting aside into accounts where it grows untaxed. What works is signing people up by default. Britain started doing that in 2012, and by 2024 nine in 10 eligible workers were paying into a workplace pension, according to the Department for Work and Pensions.

Biggs has also been a proponent of automatic enrollment in workplace retirement plans, noting in a National Association of Plan Advisors report, “If a big concern people have is that not enough Americans either offer a retirement plan or participate, something like the U.K. structure is how you do it.”

Who the current tax break actually helps

Around half of American households — 54.3% — had any retirement account at all in 2022, according to a Congressional Research Service analysis of Federal Reserve data. Among those nearing retirement with a 401(k), median combined 401(k) and IRA balances reached $204,000, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. Those gains went mostly to higher earners.

If you’re one of the roughly half of households with no retirement account at all, this tax break has never touched you. And if you do have one, the deduction on your contributions is the same one Biggs wants to end — by his math, it was never doing much for you anyway.

A law professor who has spent years arguing these accounts should be capped put it bluntly. Norman Stein, professor emeritus at Drexel University’s Thomas R. Kline School of Law, told USA TODAY the system is “just backward.”

Still, some of this is shifting anyway. A 2022 law now requires most new 401(k) plans to enroll workers automatically, a rule that kicked in last year. And on April 30, President Donald Trump signed an executive order launching TrumpIRA.gov, where workers without a workplace plan can open an IRA and collect a federal match worth up to $1,000. It’s designed to go into effect in 2027.

For now the tax break stands, Thiel’s account keeps compounding and the 32,000 people this bill targets can keep saving.

A spokesperson for Thiel had not responded to a request for comment by the time of publication.

The move offers fresh insight into where the high-profile investor sees the strongest long-term growth opportunities.

Wood’s investments

ARK purchased 37,916 TSMC shares worth about $14.2 million and 128,932 SpaceX shares valued at roughly $14.5 million. The SpaceX shares were bought after the stock’s post-IPO decline.

The purchase was funded in part by the selling of roughly $1.1 million each of Amazon and Alphabet and about $5 million of Shopify. The selling of Amazon came just hours before it released its July 30 second-quarter earnings report, as investors eyed the company’s AI spending and cash flow. Amazon beat Wall Street’s expectations, pushing shares to an all-time high on Monday.

TSMC is the world’s largest contract chip maker and manufactures chips for AI giants like Nvidia. The Taiwanese company recently reported second-quarter revenue of $40.2 billion, marking a 34% increase year over year. However, the stock has shed roughly 7% of its value over a month. Still, the company’s growth and its central role in the AI boom make a case for Wood’s investment.

On the other hand, SpaceX is a more volatile test for ARK. The Elon Musk-led space technology company has been rocky since its IPO debut on June 12. It reported a loss of more than $500 million in its first earnings report, and its stock is down by about half from its all-time high.

Should investors follow Wood’s moves?

This latest round of investments offers clues as to where Wood sees the strongest long-term growth opportunities, signalling a deeper commitment to semiconductor manufacturing and space technology.

It remains unclear what prompted ARK to trim its holdings in Amazon, Alphabet and Shopify. The move could indicate Wood is moving away from some large-cap tech names in favour of companies she believes will benefit more greatly from the AI boom. It could also just be a modest trim to help fund new investments.

The strategy also balances a lower-risk investment with a higher-risk one. TSMC has proven revenue and future growth opportunities thanks to its central and vital position in the AI industry However, it is not without risk. Any slowdown in demand for AI chips could weigh on future growth. Geopolitical tensions between Taiwan and China also continue to create uncertainty for investors.

SpaceX, on the other hand, represents the higher-risk side of the investment. The dip in SpaceX’s stock could be a buying opportunity, but investors should weigh their risk tolerance as the stock is expected to remain volatile as Wall Street waits for SpaceX to prove its profitability.

Whether ARK’s latest moves prove successful will depend on how both companies execute in the months ahead. For investors, Wood’s trades serve as a reminder that investing in the future often means balancing proven industry leaders with higher-risk bets.

Those messages are now evidence in lawsuits against social media companies. In 2021, TikTok rewrote part of its recommendation system so that a person watching one troubling video would be less likely to get a run of them. A confidential internal report, described by Bloomberg Businessweek on Aug. 4, says the company then withheld that rewrite from about 10% of U.S. users on purpose. The other 90% had it by early 2022.

That left roughly 15 million people on the older system while the company measured what the safer version was costing it in terms of viewing time. Chase lived in Suffolk County, New York, and his account was one of them.

Why TikTok sped up its For You feed reset

Businessweek had gone to the company for comment on a 2023 story. That’s what the late-night chat was for. Two dozen employees were in the chat, and court documents reveal the response taking shape across several days and several nights.

A staffer on the communications team wrote that colleagues were ”developing on-the-record quotes to show empathy.” The same staffer wanted a feed-reset feature out the door faster, to “show progress ahead of the story.”

TikTok launched it for everyone on March 16, 2023. The Businessweek story ran the following month.

None of this was visible at the time. A court unsealed the exhibit earlier this year, with Chase’s name and the experiment redacted.

What the sealed report says about the teen’s account

Staff from TikTok’s safety and algorithm teams wrote the report that same March, and it follows what Chase watched right up to the end. The document carries a “privileged and confidential” marking and remains under court seal. Two weeks after the review was completed, CEO Shou Chew testified before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on March 23, 2023.

Back on Dec. 16, 2021, TikTok said publicly that it was working to “interrupt repetitive patterns” and testing ways to stop serving people run after run of similar videos on subjects such as extreme dieting or sadness — the kind of content the company itself admitted could hurt a vulnerable person who sees too much of it in a row. Most U.S. users had that system by early 2022, and Chase’s account was selected at random for the control group on Jan. 25, 2022.

Brandon Maffei, a school friend, noticed a shift around then in what Chase forwarded him. The jokes stopped and suicide content took their place, Maffei told Businessweek the following year. Chase was dead within a month. His account stayed live, and his mother, Michelle Nasca, found it a year afterward, still delivering the same material.

What TikTok says, and where the case stands

Asked about the document, TikTok sent a written statement. A spokesperson said the company is “deeply committed to the safety and well-being of users,” particularly teenagers, and pointed to what it spends on trust and safety work. “Our hearts break for any family that experienced a tragic loss,” the spokesperson said.

Not everyone inside the company knew about the test. A former trust and safety team leader, whom Bloomberg did not name, said he had no idea it was running. Experiments like this are normal at social platforms, he said — his problem was with how this one was set up. Far too many people got swept into the control group, and nobody carved out under-18 accounts or self-harm material.

Chase’s parents have been trying to get TikTok in front of a jury since March 2023. Their wrongful death suit was thrown out last year. TikTok argued it was protected by Section 230, the federal law that shields websites from being sued over what their users post. The judge agreed, and the family is appealing. In June 2026, the Arkansas attorney general’s office asked to depose Chase’s father, Dean Nasca, for its own case.

What parents can change in the app today

If your teen is on TikTok, the feature those employees pushed to launch is worth knowing about. TikTok’s own instructions run through profile, then the menu button, then settings and privacy, then content preferences, then refresh your For You feed. It clears existing recommendations and restarts the algorithm, and TikTok warns the action can’t be reversed.

That doesn’t touch the part that costs your household money. Edison Research found that 83% of weekly U.S. TikTok users aged 13 and older had taken some action after seeing an ad in the app, and that 43% had bought something. The feed built to hold a teenager’s attention is the same one selling to them.

The reset is still three menus deep, and it only works if somebody goes looking.

TikTok has not yet responded to questions from Moneywise about whether the control group included minors, or whether the refresh feature’s launch was moved up because of the pending story.

According to the investigation, for-profit trade schools have defrauded the government out of more than $300 million through the GI Bill, by charging exorbitant tuition for short-term programs.

The Post found that in 2025 alone, taxpayers spent more than $11 billion to educate 666,000 people through the GI Bill. However, a lack of government oversight has allowed some schools to take advantage of the program — and its left veterans without the skills and training they were promised.

The extent of the fraud

The investigation found one New Hampshire trade school charged $18,500 in tuition to teach veterans how to turn fake rocks into concrete. According to public records and interviews conducted by the Post, the school owner — who is a convicted tax evader — exploited veterans for free labour. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) paid the school $17.8 million over seven years before it was finally shut down.

In Texas, a high school dropout opened a “boot camp” that trained veterans to become heating and air-conditioning technicians. The program ran for just six weeks, but tuition was $20,000. In just 3 years, the school had received $72 million from the GI bill.

The owner was eventually charged — but not before using government money to buy a Lamborghini, Ferrari and Bentley. Several veterans impacted by the shady school said they were duped with fake promises of good-paying jobs.

“I feel bamboozled,” Marine veteran Ryan DiFranco testified at the trial against the owner. “It’s a nightmare that lives in the back of my mind all the time.”

DiFranco told the court that the school’s insufficient training caused him to lose three jobs. The Post also found some schools falsely claimed they had been operating for years. At some locations, administrators had criminal records that went under the radar because VA and state agencies don’t conduct background checks.

Gaps in the GI Bill benefits program

Since its creation following World War II, more than 25 million veterans have relied on the GI Bill to help pay for college, job training and other benefits. Over the past two decades, Washington has expanded the program, removing restrictions on when benefits need to be claimed and allowing credits to be transferred to veterans’ spouses or children.

However, according to the Post, loopholes in the system have allowed the program to be abused.

The Bill typically covers up to 36 months of expenses for veterans enrolled in college or vocational school. VA limits annual tuition payments to $30,908 but there are no minimum course-length requirements. Since bills are sent to VA directly, veterans often don’t realize how expensive short-term classes may be.

There are also minimal standards around the quality of schools. The Bill does not require trade schools to obtain academic accreditation. State officials are responsible for monitoring GI Bill schools, but many don’t have the resources to be effective watchdogs.

15 of the 20 major fraud investigations examined by the Post involved unaccredited trade schools.

VA Press Secretary Quinn Slaven told the Post that the $300 million lost to fraud is “less than 0.3 percent of VA’s educational budget,” and blamed state governments for enabling fraud.

“The problem is that many state-level bureaucrats have looked the other way for years as fraudsters robbed government programs blind,” Slaven said in an emailed statement. He said a White House anti-fraud task force is working to “root out the waste, abuse and criminal exploitation of government programs.”

Trump touted his backing of the bill in a social media post endorsing Republican Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas in the state’s GOP Senate primary — and presented it as a reason for Republican voters to support Marshall.

“Roger is working tirelessly to pass the Credit Card Competition Act, in order to stop the out of control Swipe Fee ripoff!” the president said in a Truth Social post on Monday.

Trump first issued an endorsement of the bill in January, as he was attempting to cobble together a domestic agenda around affordability and bringing down the cost of living. The legislation would obligate banks with at least $100 billion in assets to allow credit card fee processing on at least two networks.

“Everyone should support great Republican Senator Roger Marshall’s Credit Card Competition Act, in order to stop the out of control Swipe Fee ripoff,” Trump said at the time in a social media post.

How credit card fee payments work

Currently, the majority of credit-card issuers — namely, large US banks — link up with either the Visa or Mastercard networks. Once a consumer uses a credit card for payment, the merchant must pay the associated fees to the bank on an affiliated network.

Supporters of the legislation argue that increasing competition between payment processors beyond Visa and Mastercard could slash their fees — and translate into lower costs for consumers.

Both credit card issuing banks and payment networks have turned major profits under the current payment structure. Last year, merchants paid $198.25 billion in credit and debit swipe fees, according to the Nilson Report, a trade publication.

The credit card bill’s rocky path from here

The MPC — a trade group, representing retailers, supermarkets and online merchants — welcomed Trump’s comments, saying the legislation would help “restore affordability” in the US economy.

“This is the second time President Trump has called for credit card swipe fee reform, and his continuing commitment shows that concern over these fees has reached the highest level,” said MPC Executive Committee member Doug Kantor in a statement. “With President Trump and members of Congress from across the political spectrum seeking passage, it’s time to turn this legislation into law.”

In addition to Marshall, the legislation only has two Senate co-sponsors so far: Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Peter Welch of Vermont. Vice President JD Vance once signed onto the legislation while serving as Ohio senator, but has stayed mum on the issue since. It was first introduced in 2022.

The Credit Card Competition Act set off a fierce fight, with the retailers paying the fees on one side and the credit card networks and banks that collect on the other. Critics of the legislation argue it will weaken anti-fraud measures and erode popular credit card rewards programs.

The Electronic Payments Coalition, an industry group representing card-issuing banks and payment networks, has spent $22 million to oppose the legislation, according to lobbying filings reviewed by progressive group Demand Progress.

Republican support in Congress hasn’t materialized for the bill, so it’s unlikely to pass anytime soon. The GOP-controlled House has already adjourned for their summer recess, while the Republican-held Senate is sorting through a raft of competing legislative priorities before skipping town by the end of the week.

But then the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) unit started asking questions. Like how Marabella, a controller at a Las Vegas construction company, could amass millions of dollars. By February 2025, the dream was over.

In April of this year, Marabella and Costa, both of Henderson, Nevada, each pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of monetary transactions in criminally derived property.

In July, a District of Nevada court sentenced Marabella, 46, to five years and 10 months in prison for embezzling more than $26 million from her employer. The court also ordered her to repay all the money.

Her partner Costa, 42, a security company owner, faces up to 30 years in prison. He will be sentenced Sept. 2. As Las Vegas media outlet KLAS reports, the case is connected to Costa’s February 2025 kidnapping of Larry Gilmore, owner of Gilmore Construction LLC, where Marabella worked.

Here’s how the couple colluded to steal millions — and how the law caught up with them.

Financial controller engages in fraud, boyfriend kidnaps her boss

Marabella had access to money and financial statements in her role at Gilmore Construction. She was in charge of accounts payable and receivable as well as bank and credit card statements.

She and Costa copied bonus checks and deposited the fraudulent checks into their own bank accounts. They opened credit cards in other people’s names and racked up charges on them, repaying the charges with the embezzled cash.

According to the DOJ, the couple used the money they stole to live like millionaires in mansions, drive around in luxury cars and buy expensive merchandise, which Marabella then sold online through a consignment company, thereby laundering the money.

Marabella covered up her tracks at work by faking accounting records, bank statements and merchant invoices. The couple carried out the scheme from Jan. 1, 2018 to Feb. 28, 2025.

But by late 2024, the IRS-CI and the Henderson Police Department had uncovered the extent of the fraud, and alerted the construction company owner, Larry Gilmore, of the embezzlement.

As KLAS reports, not long after, in February 2025, Costa kidnapped Gilmore and threatened him with regards to the case. Gilmore reported the incident to the police. Costa was arrested the next day. This year, on Feb. 9, Costa pleaded guilty to one count of first-degree kidnapping and one count of extortion.

Scott Brown, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the IRS CI Phoenix Field Office, said the scale of such crime inflicts “deep and lasting harm on victims and their families.”

“The fallout reverberates throughout the entire business, impacting everyone who depends on it for their livelihood,” he said in a press release.

Embezzlement is one of the most common workplace crimes

The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) reports that embezzlement and cash theft represent 90% of workplace frauds, with an average loss of more than $1.4 million. The median scheme goes undetected for a year due to poor internal controls, with employee tipoffs being one of the most common detection methods.

Marabella is not the only controller to take advantage of her boss. According to the Controllers Council, 77% of workplace frauds take place in just eight departments — with the top three being accounting, operations and sales.

The Controllers Council says if money is going missing from the company till, look out for employees:

• Living beyond their means (like Marabella), 41% of the cases
• Struggling with financial challenges, 29% of cases
• A very close relationship with a supplier or customer, 20% of cases
• Problems letting go of control or sharing duties, 15% of cases
• Dealing with family problems, 14% of cases

As the Council says, “If the books look a bit light, it’s always a good idea to look towards the people in charge of them.”

TerraCycle specializes in recycling things that other waste companies consider unprofitable — like coffee pods, cosmetics, cigarette butts and batteries. Now, as Plastic News reports, TerraCycle is offering Class B preferred shares to the public in order to raise $75 million.

This follows another offering in 2018 when the New Jersey-based company raised more than $19 million in 12 months, and another round last year when it made $5 million in under 60 days.

TerraCycle is not a startup. It may have begun that way when CEO Tom Szaky founded it 20 years ago, but today it’s a multinational company operating in more than 20 countries, with regional offices and hubs across North America, the U.K. and Australia.

Here’s a look at why TerraCycle has chosen this moment to raise $75 million, how it can legally do so as a private company, and other ways retail investors can buy into waste management.

How a private company can sell shares to the public

Normally startups and private companies like TerraCycle raise money by partnering with wealthy investors, but there’s an exception called Regulation A.

Created by the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the 1930s and expanded in 2015, Reg A allows private companies to crowdfund up to $75 million in the course of a year. It’s essentially a way to reach the public without actually going public.

In return, the SEC demands that a company taking advantage of Reg A must file its financials like a publicly traded company. However, such a company would only have to do so twice a year instead of every quarter.

As Szaky told Moneywise, this Reg A public offering achieves several things at once. Not only is it a way to test the waters for a future Initial Public Offering (IPO), revealing the public’s interest, it’s also a way to build the compliance infrastructure needed for an IPO, like disclosing its finances and other details in its offering circular.

Of course, the biggest immediate benefit is a cash infusion to expand operations.

“The reason to raise money this way is to accelerate growth,” Szaky told Moneywise.

He said the company aims to use the funds to acquire more high-quality specialty recyclers — profitable businesses that have been around at least 10 years and which specialize in things like mercury-bearing lightbulbs, batteries and electronic waste.

As Recycling Today reports, TerraCycle has bought four such companies in the past eight years: New Jersey-based Air Cycle Corp. in 2018, followed by Massachusetts-based Complete Recycling Solutions in 2023 and Northcoast Services in 2024. Its most recent acquisition was Connecticut-based NLR (Northwest Lamp Recycling).

TerraCycle’s return on investment

These acquisitions have fueled plenty of growth for TerraCycle. Between 2020 and 2025, the company’s net revenue grew nearly 93% from $24.7 million to $47.6 million. In 2025, TerraCycle made $22.1 million in gross profit.

Ramy Elsisi, the company’s CFO, reports that the 6,300 people who invested in TerraCycle’s first Reg-A offering in 2018 have received up to 24% of their investment back in the form of $4.6 million in dividends to date.

If you’re interested in investing in the growing waste management sector, there are also plenty of publicly traded companies to consider. Here are five of the biggest:

• Veiola: Headquartered in France, Veiola is the world’s largest waste management and recycling company. It is a partner and investor in TerraCycle that made more than €44 billion ($50.8 billion USD) in revenue last year.
• Waste Management: This U.S.-based multinational made over $25.2 billion in revenue last year.
• Republic Services: Based in Phoenix, Arizona, this U.S. company earned $16.59 billion in revenue in 2025.
• Waste Connections: This Toronto-based company earned revenue of $9.46 billion in 2025. It is also a partner and investor in TerraCycle.
• GFL Environmental: A Canadian company now headquartered in Miami, Florida, GFL earned $6.6 billion in revenue in 2025.

Before investing in any of these companies, it’s a good idea to talk to a financial advisor about how such investments may fit with your larger financial goals.

That’s because the bank, now Truist Bank, settled a class-action lawsuit for $240 million, over ATM and debit card overdraft fees.

The complaint, filed in 2010, alleged that SunTrust’s overdraft fees for certain transactions constituted interest, a violation of usury laws in Georgia.

According to a CNBC report, Truist “denied any wrongdoing and said it was settling to avoid the burden and expense of continued litigation.”

Read on to find out who’s eligible, and how to file a claim before the Sept. 14 deadline.

Who can make a claim?

To be eligible to make a claim as part of the class action, you must:

• Have been a citizen of Georgia continuously from July 12, 2010 through Oct. 6, 2017.
• Have had a SunTrust Bank account that was not closed before June 1, 2010.
• Incurred at least one overdraft fee of $500 or less, charged between July 12, 2006 and April 15, 2014, from an ATM or debit card transaction.
• Have paid overdraft fees as a result of the transaction(s) and didn’t get a refund.

Those who may meet these criteria have been sent postcard or email notices by the settlement administrator.

CNBC reported that “464,000 account holders were identified and sent notices.”

Payment amounts will depend on how much you paid in overdraft fees; your proportional share of the settlement funds will also depend “on the number of valid claims submitted and the total value of all claims,” the CNBC report says.

“Eligible class members may receive between $5 and $1,000, depending on the amount they paid in qualifying overdraft fees,” according to CNBC.

If you think you might be eligible to make a claim, but you did not receive an email or postcard about the class action, contact the settlement administrator. If you were contacted, you still need to submit a claim form before the deadline in order to receive payment.

Avoid overdraft

In 2025, financial institutions made about $12 billion from American consumers on overdraft and NSF fees, according to a National Consumer Law Center report.

While the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau did issue a rule in December 2024 that would’ve seen most overdraft fees reduced to $5, Congress reversed the rule in 2025, before it took effect.

Banks charge overdraft fees when there isn’t enough money in an account to cover a transaction you make. and they can often cost around $35, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

For ATM or debit transactions at merchants, you must opt in, or agree when opening an account, in order for the bank to charge you overdraft fees, which are often referred to as “overdraft protection,” the FDIC says.

Your bank may offer an option to link a savings account to your checking account, so that if you don’t have enough in your checking to cover transactions, funds can be drawn from savings, but there may be fees for this option.

If you don’t want to be charged overdraft fees, consider switching to a bank that doesn’t charge them; institutions that have done away with overdraft fees include Capital One, Citibank, American Express bank and Ally Bank, according to a New York Times report.

If you sometimes have to rely on overdraft, you can look for a bank that offers small installment loans as an alternative, or check out fintech firms that offer similar services.

One exception is if you use paper checks: “While you have a choice to opt-in or opt-out of overdraft coverage for debit card transactions, you may not have a choice when it comes to using paper checks or other ways of making payments or purchases from your account,” the FDIC says.

In fact, while other social media companies have faced — or are set to face — personal injury trials this year, TikTok has settled every such 2026 case against it so far.

That includes three settled cases this week alleging social media platforms contributed to depression, anxiety, addiction and self-harm in plaintiffs aged 15 to 18. Those lawsuits will still proceed against YouTube, Facebook and Snapchat in October.

TikTok and Snapchat also settled a social media addiction case scheduled for trial in February. In that case, Google, the parent company of YouTube, and Meta, the parent company of Facebook, paid a $6 million judgment. The fifth settlement involved a lawsuit that had been scheduled for July before the plaintiff later settled it.

California alone has about 3,300 social media injury cases on its docket, while federal courts are handling another 2,600. And settlements, as one observer put it, carry no precedent for financial payouts or admissions of wrongdoing, meaning “ the confidential cheque is the cheaper risk.”

That could prove especially true if this is, as some legal observers contend, social media’s “big tobacco” moment.

“Like tobacco companies in the ’90s, social media companies are being accused of selling products engineered to be addictive without disclosing the risks,” Lindsay Sain Jones and Tim Samples of the University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business Legal Studies wrote. “Critics argue that social media companies know their platforms are addictive and harmful to mental health, particularly for young people.”

Bellwether trials could reshape the legal battle over social media

TikTok did settle one case this year: a $27 million lawsuit brought by Kentucky’s Breathitt County school district. TikTok contributed $8 million as part of a settlement shared with Facebook, Snapchat and YouTube.

The October cases, meanwhile, are being billed as bellwether trials, which allow for plaintiffs and defendants to test their arguments before the courts and could help shape the direction of future litigation.

Neither TikTok nor Meta returned Moneywise’s request for comment about the social lawsuits.

Google spokesperson José Castañeda, however, told Moneywise in an email that the “allegations in these complaints are simply not true” and that “in collaboration with youth, mental health and parenting experts, we built services and policies to provide young people with age-appropriate experiences, and parents with robust controls.”

Snapchat responded by focusing on how its interface is interacted with by users.

“Snapchat was designed differently from traditional social media — it opens to the camera, not a feed, and has no social comparison metrics. Our goal has always been to encourage self-expression and authentic connections,” A Snap Company spokesperson wrote in an email. “We’ve built safeguards, launched safety tutorials, partnered with experts, and continue to invest in features and tools that support the safety, privacy, and well-being of all Snapchatters.”

Social media companies have also argued that they are protected by Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which provides broad, though not unlimited, legal protections for providers of “interactive computer services” over content posted by third parties.

Sain Jones and Samples, meanwhile, said recent lawsuits argue companies intentionally designed addictive features while failing to disclose known risks.

One case, spotlighted by Bloomberg, alleged a 16-year-old boy died by suicide after TikTok’s algorithm repeatedly served him videos about suicide while his account was part of an experimental control group in which safeguards were added, but not switched on in his case. A judge later dismissed the family’s wrongful death lawsuit.

TikTok told Bloomberg, “Our hearts break for any family that experiences a tragic loss,” adding that the company plans to continue investing in safeguards for its platform.”

[a]It’s technically every personal injury trial that TikTok has settled, which includes addition. But the trials also allege self-harm, anxiety, eating disorders, etc. So “personal injury” may be more accurate.

It wasn’t. Thomas has just been awarded a Guinness World Record for being the youngest professor ever, beating a record that was more than 306 years old.

Thomas is 21 today, but he was 18 years and 346 days old when he first accepted the engineering teaching position at Miami Dade College. It was a school he was familiar with.

At the age of 10, Thomas dual-enrolled at Miami Dade, later transferring to Florida International University at 14. Over the next four years, he earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in electrical engineering, chalking up honors in each degree.

And in his spare time

Thomas is teaching online these days. That’s because he’s chasing yet another degree. In 2028, he’s expected to graduate with a law degree. He plans to use that, along with his other degrees, to find work in the intellectual property law field, focusing on STEM.

“Engineering taught me how to break down complex problems in a structured way, and that’s carried over into how I approach law school now,” Thomas told Guinness World Records.

Thomas’ parents are engineers and growing up in that environment, he said, helped him learn to think in a structured manner. And his mother’s assistance cemented it.

“[My mom] had a way of making things feel simple even when they weren’t, and I think some of that stuck with me more than I realized at the time,” he said.

While he hasn’t lost the love for learning, he says there’s another sort of reward in encouraging that passion in others.

“The part about teaching that I like most is watching something click for a student,” he said. “You can kind of see it happen in real time, when a concept that felt impossible a few minutes ago suddenly makes sense.”

Not just school

There is life beyond the classroom for Thomas. He enjoys music, playing classical piano and jamming out to Drake or EDM when he’s in the mood to chill. He’s a fan of the Boston Celtics and New England Patriots and plays tennis, golf and basketball.

As for the age gap when he’s at the front of the classroom? Thomas says it’s really not as big a deal as you might expect.

“Once you’re in that setting, everyone’s there for the same reason, which is to learn,” he said. “Age doesn’t really factor into that. I just focus on trying to do my job well and helping students in whatever way I can. If someone’s willing to put in the effort, that’s really all that matters to me.”