President Donald Trump's speech to a joint session of Congress was the longest presidential address in recent history. However, a starkly divided Congress cut short Trump's remarks at times, with Republicans applauding the president and Democrats holding up signs in protest.
JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images
On Wednesday, Elon Musk said that both the Post Office and Amtrak should be privatized, calling the state of passenger rail in the US "embarrassing."
Speaking virtually at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media, and Telecom Conference, Musk said the government "should try to privatize everything we possibly can," according to audio reviewed by Business Insider.
"I think we should privatize the Post Office and Amtrak, for example," he said.
He praised China's trains, saying other countries' passenger rail systems are "way better" than America's.
"If you're coming from another country, please don't use our national rail," he said. "It's going to leave you with a very bad impression of America."
While Musk did not elaborate on why the USPS should be privatized, President Donald Trump has previously floated privatizing the organization, saying in late February that commerce secretary Howard Lutnick "will be looking" at the organization.
Musk acknowledged during his remarks that privatizing either Amtrak or the USPS would likely require congressional approval, and didn't expand on any steps to move forward with his vision.
Though Musk is not officially in charge of the White House DOGE office β that title goes to little-known data whiz Amy Gleason β he is seen as its de facto leader. Trump has repeatedly said Musk is in charge of the group, including during his joint address to Congress Tuesday night.
"I have created the brand-new Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE, perhaps you've heard of it, which is headed by Elon Musk, who is in the gallery tonight," Trump said Tuesday. His remarks immediately were flagged as part of an on-going lawsuit involving DOGE.
Musk didn't claim a leadership position at DOGE when speaking at the Morgan Stanley conference. He referred to himself as "tech support, believe it or not."
Representatives for DOGE and the White House did not immediately respond to BI's request for comment.
Eric Charbonneau/Archewell Foundation via Getty Images
Meghan Markle is back in her TV star era.
Her much-anticipated lifestyle series "With Love, Meghan" dropped on Netflix on Tuesday. In the show's eight episodes, the Duchess of Sussex shares entertaining tips and recipes with her famous friends, and she works on her craft with cooking experts like Roy Choi.
However, one person is conspicuously absent from most of the series: Meghan's husband, Prince Harry.
The Duke of Sussex only appears briefly in the show's final episode, a change for the couple who have been attached at the hip, particularly in their work, for nearly a decade.
Although it's a shift for the duke and duchess, the professional separation makes perfect sense for Meghan as she returns to her lifestyle roots.
Harry and Meghan began working together when they announced their engagement in 2017, which is standard for senior royals. They continued to brand themselves as a package deal in their early post-royal projects, like their first Netflix show, "Harry & Meghan."
"I think they were very smart in the early days of trying to give the public what they wanted," Kristen Meinzer, a royal commentator, told Business Insider. "The public wanted to know the story of what happened behind the castle doors."
In recent months, that strategy has shifted. Harry has focused on philanthropic endeavors, attending events without his wife, while Meghan prioritizes her series and forthcoming lifestyle brand, As Ever.
Stacy Jones, the founder and CEO of Hollywood Branded, told BI that Meghan's decision to make "With Love, Meghan" largely Harry-less was savvy, even if his royal lineage is part of why people are tuning into the show.
Yaroslav Sabitov/PA Images via Getty Images
Jones compared "With Love, Meghan" to other reality series that star women married to famous men, like "The Osbournes" or some of the "Real Housewives" franchises. "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" also relied heavily on Robert Kardashian's memories in its early seasons.
Jones said that the successful man functions as a "prop" while his wife is the star beloved by audiences, and he typically only makes brief on-screen appearances β just as Harry does on "With Love, Meghan."
Sure, having your literal prince of a husband make one long-awaited guest appearance on the series probably helps keep viewers tuned in, but keeping Harry off-screen until that moment allows Meghan to sell herself as an individual rather than just one half of the Sussex team.
"It's important to have that prop because that's the unique definer," Jones said about Harry's royal status. "Meghan with Harry is special, but Meghan does not have to be with Harry at her side all the time."
Although he isn't on screen much, traces of Harry are all over the show, as Meghan discusses her family's favorite foods or their routine with their children and dogs.
She also told People that she and Harry are in "a honeymoon period again" because of her work on the show, adding that he and her children frequently visited her on set.
"My husband met me when I had The Tig, and I see this spark in his eye when he sees me doing the thing that I was doing when he first met me," she told People, speaking of the blog she ran from 2014 to 2017. "I think he loves watching as much as I love doing that creative process."
Jones said those traces of Harry in the series can remind the audience they are a unit even as they define themselves as individuals, and Meghan can do the same for Harry as he finds his post-royal identity.
Meghan's appearance at the Invictus Games in February was a step in the right direction. She seemed like Harry's supporter rather than the cohost of the games, even leaving them a few days early to return to their children.
Harry and Meghan's professional lives will likely always be intertwined in some capacity, but their newfound distance will benefit them both.
Spencer Platt / Getty Images
You know something is a hot topic of discussion when a CEO thanks a Wall Street analyst for not asking about it.
"Thank you for the question that wasn't tariff-related, Anthony," Best Buy CEO Corie Barry said during an earnings call Tuesday, during which she fielded multiple queries on the topic.
Indeed, President Donald Trump's trade war is the new elephant in the room this week as executives field questions on earnings calls, investor conferences, and media appearances.
C-suite execs at companies like Target, Chipotle, and more have shared their thoughts on how the new policies will impact their businesses, their customers, and the US economy.
While their approach and strategies vary, a common theme emerged among some of the business leaders: This is uncharted territory.
"We've not seen this level of tariff before," RBC CEO David McKay said Tuesday at a conference hosted by the bank in New York. "And it's a real departure from what's built, I think, some of the great pillars of success in this country."
Still, he added, "Even with all the tariffs, we're going to have a lot of trade."
And don't be surprised if companies hike prices β fast.
Here's what business leaders are saying.
Pat Wortwick/AP
CFO Jamere Jackson said during an earnings call Tuesday that AutoZone intends to raise prices in order to offset any tariff impacts.
"To be clear, we intend to maintain our margin profile post tariffs, and we expect the entire industry will behave in a rational way as our historical experience has shown," he said.
CEO Phil Daniele said on the call that new autos are more expensive than ever, giving US consumers less of an option about whether to repair or replace their aging vehicles.
Kena Betancur/Getty Images
Best Buy's Corie Barry told investors on an earnings call Tuesday that price increases on imported products are now "highly likely."
"Tariffs at this level will result in price increases," she said.
Barry said Best Buy directly imports about 2% to 3% of its products, primarily from China and Mexico, but its vendors will likely experience new costs and pass those along.
"We've never seen this kind of breadth of tariffs β and this, of course, impacts the whole industry, so it's not just a Best Buy question," she said.
Matt Rourke/AP
Target's Brian Cornell said in an interview with CNBC Tuesday that some grocery costs could go up as early as this week, especially in fresh categories that are typically imported from Mexico.
"Those are categories where we'll try to protect pricing, but the consumer will likely see price increases over the next couple of days," he said.
"If there's a 25% tariff, those prices will go up," he said.
DeWalt
Speaking at the Raymond James Institutional Investors Conference on Tuesday, CEO Don Allan said Stanley Black & Decker was in a "little bit of a wait and see" situation, especially regarding tariffs on Mexico.
"We do have a fairly substantial Mexican footprint, primarily for our DeWalt power tool business that serves the US market, and so we'll see how the negotiations happen between the two countries and where this lands," he said.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
CEO Scott Boatwright told NBC Sunday that Chipotle would absorb costs from tariffs unless they become a "significant headwind" for the burrito chain.
He previously said that the company had reduced its sourcing of avocados from Mexico to 50% while increasing its supply from Colombia, Peru, and the Dominican Republic.
"We don't think it's fair to the consumer to pass those costs off to the consumer, because pricing becomes permanent," he said. "And so again, back to the idea of delivering extraordinary value to the consumer. We're going to stay the course."
Maria Noyen/Insider
CEO Mick Beekhuizen said in an earnings call Wednesday that Campbell's imports two key supplies from Canada: tinplate steel for its cans and canola oil for its chips.
"On the flip side, with some of the reference to the retaliatory tariffs, those mainly relate to Canadian exports," he added. "So we are producing our soup in the United States and we're importing it into Canada, and that would obviously have an impact on that business."
Beekhuizen said the company is working with suppliers to soften the impact of new tariffs, but didn't rule out price hikes.
"Now that being said, I'm obviously going to be very focused to make sure that we provide a good value to our consumers," he said.
Courtesy of Seth Jones
This is an as-told-to essay based on a conversation with Seth Jones, 36, who lives in Port Orange, Florida, about 20 minutes south of Daytona Beach. Jones started buying investment properties in 2015, then began selling them off in 2020 to put his money elsewhere. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
When I was younger, I read books like "Rich Dad, Poor Dad," and "The Millionaire Real Estate Investor." That's all I wanted to do.
When I left the military at 22, the first thing I did was get a job as a real-estate agent because I thought it would help me become an investor.
My wife and I moved to Port Orange, Florida, in 2013 to be closer to her parents. I quickly realized Florida was saturated with agents. Even back then, there were only a small number of really good mortgage brokers. So I pivoted.
It took some time because I had to develop the right credentials. I became a personal banker with a regional bank and worked there for about a year and a half. Eventually, I became the branch manager. The entire time, I was working on my licensing to become a mortgage broker.
For years, my wife and I were hyper-focused on saving money. My wife is a teacher and we lived only off her salary. All of my income went into saving to buy properties. We hardly ever ate out and never went to bars. My faith is really important to me, so I spent a lot of time around people in the church, which made it easier. A lot of the people in the church live pretty simply, so we didn't do a lot of things socially or travel-wise, either.
The goal was to get to 100 doors. That was my entire focus. I just wanted to build a real-estate business that would eventually support me and my family, and I wanted to do it as fast as possible.
I didn't purchase my first property until 2014. They were actually two, each with three bedrooms under $60,000. I was able to pay 15% down.
I'm very conservative by nature. Fundamentals have always mattered to me.
It's been frustrating to me that in the aftermath of 2008, a lot of people developed a mindset that real estate just doesn't go down in value.
I developed a rule as a mortgage broker that I often call the 1% rule. It's very simple, back-of-the-napkin math. When I look at a property, the first thing I look for is whether the monthly rent I can charge for it is greater than 1% of the home's value. So on a $100,000 property, am I able to rent it out for $1,000 per month? On a $200,000 property, am I able to rent it out for $2,000 per month?
It's not ironclad and doesn't always make or break a purchase. But I use it as a guidepost and for quick analysis of a deal.
After the first two properties, I was able to grow rather quickly. In 2018, I opened my first mortgage brokerage, which increased my income and gave us more resources to invest with. By 2019, I was able to target higher-quality properties in top school districts.
My tenth and last purchase was a property in Lexington, South Carolina that I bought for $138,000 in February 2020. By that point, I had realized I had been concentrating all my risk in Florida. I started to get worried about the impacts of a big hurricane and wanted to diversify my portfolio out of state.
Doing my research, western South Carolina seemed fairly insulated from national disasters and I found a good school district in Lexington.
I ended up with a 10-property portfolio.
In the real-estate investing world, everyone used to talk about cash flow.
Sometime around 2019, I noticed a shift in focus. I listen to a lot of financial podcasts and I heard everyone's focus change from cash flow-oriented to appreciation-oriented. That's just never how I've looked at underwriting deals.
At the beginning of COVID, I anticipated property values were going to be stressed and would potentially go down. Obviously, the opposite happened.
I watched things take off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen moving forward, but the fundamentals started to change. I used Reventure, a data aggregator for real estate, pretty extensively. It pulls in data from a lot of different sources, and I would track price-to-rent ratios for the local market.
For property values, I've used every website, but I prefer Redfin. I find it to be the most accurate, and I like the feature where you can see comparable sales.
I sold two properties in 2019, three in 2020, three in 2021, one in 2022, and one in 2023. The biggest appreciation was a home I purchased for $190,000 that I was able to sell for $500,000.
I put all our resources into liquid assetsΒ β a diversified, multi-asset ETF portfolio of fundamentally sound stocks (SCHD), gold (IAU), long-term treasuries (SCHQ), and short-term treasuries (SCHO).
I have no regrets, and I think that I'll be vindicated once we have some type of correction.
I have people who tell me I'm an idiot for selling off my properties. They think they could've made 10 times what I did in real estate.
I do think real estate is a great tool to build wealth, but it's also true that fundamentals matter. There's a significant difference in my headspace coming from not owning real estate. From a liability perspective, I have no external worries. No one's going to get hurt. I'm not dealing with late-night phone calls.
There is still stress in trading stocks and equities. You don't see a ticker on a house going up and down all the time, but life is way simpler.
