• A new study suggests universal pre-K programs could increase parents' earnings.
• Researchers found that those who enrolled their kids in free pre-K made about 21% more
• Universal pre-K programs have also been shown to help kids' long-term futures.

Universal pre-K has long been thought to boost children's lives and futures, but a new study suggests parents could also reap the benefits of free and early education for their kids.

Economists found that parents who had the opportunity to enroll their children in a universal pre-K program in Connecticut saw increased earnings by about 21% while their kids were in the program, as well as persistent gains for up to six years after.

The study, published in the National Bureau of Economic Research this month, looked at a New Haven pre-K program that provides six and a half hours of free schooling each day to three and four-year-olds, as well as wraparound childcare before and after school.

Parents who were lucky enough to win the school lottery saw several positive economic benefits, according to researchers. In addition to increased wages over time, those whose kids enrolled in the program also got an average of 12 more working hours each week, the study found.

"Parents whose kids have access to reliable, high-quality child care in the pre-K period are more likely to work during that period, and they work more hours," wrote economist Emily Oster in her ParentData newsletter. "This extra work allows them to get on a steeper career path."

The authors of the study similarly chalk it up to career continuity.

"This means that even though everyone eventually ends up working the same number of hours, the group that was able to invest in their career early have higher wages and therefore more income," Oster added.

Historically, parents haven't been required to send their kids to school until Kindergarten in most states. But in recent years, a growing number of municipalities have begun offering schooling for children as young as 3.

Supporters of universal pre-K say the concept gives kids an equal starting position heading into school and opens them up to educational opportunities at a younger age. Opponents, however, point to the high costs associated with providing free childcare.

Several studies in recent years have recorded some of the benefits for kids, including 2021 research that found children who attended universal pre-K are more likely to graduate high school and attend college. The study also pointed to positive behavioral impacts for those students.

The positives go beyond academics, too. A 2017 study found that universal pre-K helps more kids access healthcare, such as earlier detection and treatment for conditions like asthma and hearing and vision problems.

Affordable childcare and universal pre-K could also flush billions of dollars back into the US economy, a 2022 study from left-leaning think tank The Century Foundation found.

President Joe Biden included universal pre-K in the Build Back Better Act, which failed to garner Congressional support back in 2021. The legislation would have allowed three million more parents to either enter the labor force or increase their working hours, the Century Foundation report found.

The new study out of New Haven notably did not find any evidence that universal pre-K programs improve students' future test scores — a finding in line with prior research that suggests the biggest benefits are more long-term, Oster noted in her newsletter.

"In the end: from an economic standpoint, the biggest value to universal pre-K may be that it helps parents return to the labor force and make a better life for their families in the short and long run," Oster wrote. "And of course, that's also good for kids."

• Alrena Dale, 61, got $155,000 in student loans discharged through bankruptcy.
• Biden's new bankruptcy guidance, aimed at easing the process for borrowers, made that possible.
• Some attorneys told BI that the new guidance is a big help, but more outreach would be helpful.

Alrena Dale, 61, had her six-figure student-loan balance wiped out after decades of payments. She's one of hundreds of borrowers who have received relief after new changes to the bankruptcy process.

Though Dale filed over five years ago, President Joe Biden's new bankruptcy guidance, which streamlined the information she needed to provide in order to qualify for relief, was a turning point in her case.

In August 2023, Dale was finally relieved of her $155,000 balance, according to documents reviewed by Business Insider.

"There were no words. I was excited. I cried," Dale, who'd attended an online business bachelor's and master's program but struggled to find employment in her field, told BI. She worked multiple minimum-wage jobs at a time to afford her student-loan payments alongside her monthly expenses. "I really honestly didn't believe it until I got my discharge papers."

The reason it was so difficult for Dale and many other student-loan borrowers to seek relief in bankruptcy court before 2022 is that borrowers had to prove an "undue hardship" standard, in which they had to show that they cannot maintain a minimal standard of living, that their circumstances aren't likely to improve, and that they have made a good-faith effort to repay their debt.

That standard was an extremely high bar for borrowers to meet. The Biden administration's guidance changed that by establishing clearer guidelines for borrowers to meet undue hardship, and it allowed borrowers to complete a self-attestation form, allowing the bankruptcy process to move quicker and avoid investigations into their backgrounds.

Some bankruptcy attorneys told BI that the new guidance has made student-loan bankruptcy much more achievable for borrowers, with some having seen quick success after decades of stagnancy. Still, they said many lawyers are reluctant to lean into the new process, and more outreach and education on navigating bankruptcy for student loans would help.

Dale said the overwhelming emotion she now feels is relief.

"Knowing that I don't have to go out and work a second job just to pay it back because they've removed it for me, I really can't thank them enough," Dale said. "I have no words because I'm just happy and grateful and thankful."

'It's given us so much hope'

Bob and Tammy Branson, a bankruptcy attorney and senior paralegal, respectively, successfully represented Dale in her bankruptcy proceedings.

Tammy said that over the past 25 years, it was nearly impossible to discharge their clients' student loans in bankruptcy — but after the new guidance, she said their law firm has successfully discharged over $1 million in student loans.

"Now we're actually getting people not just to the point of treading water, but we're getting them out of the water," Bob said.

Dustin Baker, a bankruptcy attorney in Iowa, has seen similar success with the new guidance. Baker told BI that before November 2022, he advised his clients that considering a student-loan discharge wasn't worth their effort because it was so difficult to achieve, and he didn't want to take his clients' money for litigation he wasn't confident would be successful.

But once the guidance was announced, Baker said he's eliminated student debt for about a dozen of his clients, with a few more in the pipeline. He said his "biggest excitement" with the new process is the self-attestation form, which directly tells borrowers the questions they need to answer to get approved for a discharge, making communication between the borrower and the government easier.

The Justice Department released new data in July on how the process was going since the new guidance was announced. It showed that 588 new cases were filed from October 2023 to March 2024 — a 34% increase from the prior 6-month period. New data BI obtained from Sen. Elizabeth Warren in October showed that nearly 900 borrowers sought out the process in fiscal year 2024, and 85% of borrowers who filed using the new guidance received a full or partial discharge.

Baker said his experience incorporating the new guidance into his work was "very easy," and he added that members of the Justice Department gave attorneys in his area training sessions. However, Tammy and Bob said more education and outreach would be helpful because some lawyers are unsure if the new process is worth it.

Still, it's clear the guidance works, and Tammy said she hopes that continues.

"It's given us so much hope," she said.

'I would've had to work another job'

The new bankruptcy process for student-loan borrowers still isn't perfect. Igor Roitburg, a former attorney and senior managing director at Stretto — a bankruptcy services and technology firm — told BI that the timeline for borrowers to receive a bankruptcy decision can still widely vary and that uncertainty is a roadblock for some borrowers and attorneys to participate.

"For them to invest time and effort into a new process that they're uncertain about if they don't see results for months and months and months, makes it hard for them to commit to the process and offer it as a global service to all their clients," Roitburg said.

Dale said she saw no other option but to file for bankruptcy, regardless of whether it would be successful. Once the new guidance was released, the self-attestation form allowed Dale to prove that her financial circumstances were unlikely to improve, qualifying her for relief.

She now works at a call center and said she can't afford to retire yet. If she had the opportunity to do things differently, she might have considered going to a trade school to avoid the student-debt burden.

"I'm just making the best of what I have to work with right now," she said, adding that if she didn't see success through bankruptcy, "I would've had to work another job just to pay the student loans."

Have you successfully discharged your student loans in bankruptcy? Are you struggling with the process? Share your story with this reporter at [email protected].

• Amazon drivers can earn up to an extra $25,000 for the holidays if you thank them for a delivery.
• The company has brought back its "Thank my driver" feature after first launching it in 2022.
• Amazon covered a limited amount of $5 thank-yous at no cost to customers.

Amazon brought back its promotion that'll allow you to thank your delivery driver this holiday season.

If you're pleased with your ride, you can participate by typing "Thank my Driver" into the search bar of your Amazon app or asking Alexa to "thank my driver." You'll have to thank them within 14 days of your last delivery.

It's already got a lot of traction in 2024.

The "Thank My Driver" promotion began on December 4 this year, and Amazon tipped drivers $5 for the first 2 million thank-yous from US customers.

Amazon hit the 2-million limit within six days. However, there are still ways to help your delivery person earn extra cash.

Similar to 2023, the company is offering "additional awards" for drivers who receive praise for their deliveries, according to a press release from Amazon.

Here's what Amazon is offering: "$100 each for the 1,000 most-thanked drivers each day through the rest of December; $10,000 for the seven top-thanked drivers each week until the end of December."

Meanwhile, the seven most-thanked Amazon drivers from December 4 to December 31 will receive $25,000 plus an extra $25,000 to be donated to the charity of their choice.

"Treat your customers like family, and they will do the same to you," driver Andrew Shearouse, one of the 2023 recipients of the $25,000 tip, said.

Only US-based drivers are eligible, and they must be an Amazon Flex partner, drive for a delivery service partner, or be a hub delivery associate. A delivery driver can only be thanked once per delivery. Amazon package deliveries from the Post Office and companies like UPS aren't eligible for the extra rewards.

Those looking for other ways to thank their delivery people can check TikTok, where creators are posting about the care packages they leave on their doorstep — especially during the busy holiday delivery season.

During the holiday season, Amazon drivers' shifts can be as long as 10 hours — and a serious workout. There are some Amazon drivers who earn $18 an hour compared to full-time UPS drivers who earn an average total compensation package of $145,000 per year, according to UPS.

In September, Amazon announced that it will spend $2.1 billion to give its delivery drivers a pay raise. Although the exact rate depends on location, the boost may bump drivers' pay to a national average of $22 an hour.

• Five people who earn more than $100,000 annually shared how they're spending their money.
• They're trying to balance spending on big purchases with saving for future goals.
• Some have spent money on a new car or travel, while others have invested in a home or startup.

For some, earning a six-figure income can facilitate a big splurge. For others, it's an opportunity to establish additional income streams or financial security.

Abid Salahi earns about $140,000 a year from his software engineering job. The 26-year-old, based in Vancouver, said his biggest purchase over the past year was a new car that cost roughly $37,000. Additionally, Salahi said he upgraded his home workspace.

Despite his earnings, one thing has been out of his reach: owning a home. The houses in his area that check his boxes cost more than $500,000. To afford a down payment, Salahi said he's saving and being more judicious about how much he spends dining out and at the grocery store.

Reaching a six-figure salary can be a challenge for some employees. The average annual salary for US-based full-time workers was about $82,000 as of November, the latest data available, per a New York Fed survey. Some workers who earn more than six figures have used the opportunity to set themselves up for potential future success.

Business Insider asked five people who've made more than $100,000 annually what they've spent their money on in recent years. BI has verified their six-figure earnings.

Balancing spending now and saving for the future

Earning a six-figure income has also created new opportunities for John, who's on track to earn roughly $250,000 this year by balancing a full-time and part-time remote IT role.

The millennial, who's based in California, said one of his biggest expenses over the past year was his sister's medical bills, which were about $30,000, he said.

When he spends money on himself, he focuses on fun and health. He hired a personal trainer, who charges about $130 weekly for a one-hour session. Last year, he spent about $9,000 on a three-week honeymoon in Asia.

While he's trying to take advantage of his money in the present, John said he's also prioritized saving for the future.

"I follow a concept of 'pay yourself first' — where I put money into retirement and savings first, and then the rest is disposable," said John. His identity is known to BI, but he asked to use a pseudonym due to fears of professional repercussions.

Looking forward, John said he's saving money for the children he hopes to have one day, a bigger car, and a home.

Corritta Lewis is also balancing spending now while saving for the future. Last year, Lewis earned roughly $280,000 from her consulting job and a travel blog she runs as a side hustle. The 35-year-old, who's based in Orlando, said she and her wife spend most of their disposable income on travel.

"We've been digital nomads for four years, so most of our money was used to travel the world and have amazing experiences," she said.

Despite her travel expenses, Lewis said she doesn't live a luxurious lifestyle and is focused on long-term saving. She aims to work part-time hours by her 40th birthday.

"Right now, we are prioritizing savings and investments," she said.

Investing in themselves and real estate

Margaret Pattillo took home around $128,000 last year from her digital marketing and PR business. The 27-year-old, who's based in Florida, said she's on track to earn more than $160,000 this year.

Pattillo used her earnings to buy a home earlier this year and has plans to buy a second home as an investment property. She tries to use her money to create additional income streams that will set her up for future financial success.

"I don't place much value in material items and I'm lucky that I get to travel for work frequently," she said. "I'd say my biggest goal is to build up as many cash-flowing assets as I can in the next 10 years."

Christopher Stroup has put his earnings toward a different type of investment: a new business.

Stroup earned roughly $130,000 last year working as a financial advisor. The 33-year-old, who's based in California, said his income has helped him improve his relationships with friends and family by giving him the budget to go out to eat and on trips. He said his goal is to travel to Europe at least once a year.

Over the past year, Stroup said the biggest thing he's spent his money on is the financial planning business he launched in September. He said his startup costs have included marketing expenses and hiring a team. However, he hopes the investment in his business will put him in an even better financial position.

"If it works out well, achieving my financial goals on my desired timeline has a much higher probability of happening," he said, adding that two of his main goals are owning a home and starting a family.

Are you making over $100,000 a year? Are you willing to share your story and the impact this income has had on your life? If so, contact this reporter at [email protected].

When Mike Kelly set up his first few Airbnbs in Fort Wayne, Indiana, in 2023, he figured it would be a successful move. It was meant to be an investment project for him and his daughter to work on together. But as more people moved away from bustling and expensive urban centers and landed in the Midwest, their hopes were quickly shattered.

The Fort Wayne housing market boomed. High demand for homes, coupled with the city's low housing stock, has kept costs relatively high — a Redfin analysis of housing data found home prices were up 9.2% in October compared with last year. The hot housing market has translated into higher property taxes, which is throwing off the short-term-rental business model. "The houses we purchased to turn into Airbnbs have been assessed so much higher than what we put into them that we almost can't afford to keep them," Kelly said. "The return on equity wouldn't be as high."

Owners of short-term rentals across the country have faced a similar reality, sharing stories of declining revenues over the past few years as the market was flooded with new rentals. AirDNA, an analytics firm that tracks the short-term-rental market, found that revenue per rental decreased by nearly 2% in 2022 and by more than 8% in 2023 due to an overabundance of units available for rent. AirDNA forecast that revenues would move back into the green in 2024 as the market corrected. But as short-term-rental owners felt signs of an "Airbnbust," some realized they needed to pivot.

On one end of the market, however, it's a different picture. While overall demand for short-term rentals rose just 1.8% in 2023, according to AirDNA's data, demand for stays priced at $1,000 or more increased by nearly 8%. For stays over $1,500, demand jumped 12.5%. In fact, demand for rentals costing over $1,000 a night has increased by 73% since 2019. While cheaper rentals are slowing down, luxury, niche, and themed stays are filling their place. Wealthy vacationers are increasingly going after luxe properties such as a secluded Malibu beach mansion or a modern cabin beset by pristine woods — like something off Cabin Porn. Meanwhile, Airbnb alternatives are jumping into the market to cater to the growing demand. A lust for luxury is propelling the short-term-rental market to new heights.

Over the past few years, more travelers have pushed back against the Airbnb model, complaining of outrageous cleaning fees, extensive cleanup requirements, and outright scams. As a result, some travelers have opted to stay in good old-fashioned hotels thanks to their consistent service.

These complaints, however, tend to focus on rentals on the low end of the market — the $200-a-night stay you might book to visit a family member or get out of town for a weekend. The luxury end of the rental market fills a different role. These spots boast plenty of hotellike amenities — such as contactless check-in, high-speed internet, bathroom toiletries, and coffee makers. Because of the high price point, luxury rentals also tend to standardize their cleaning services. Unlike a hotel room, though, a house or apartment comes with a lot more room to host guests, plus amenities such as a kitchen or private pool. When split between multiple guests for a night or weekend, some of the eye-popping price tags end up being surprisingly affordable.

Among high-income travelers, who made up an increasingly large share of vacationers this year, hotels are on the way out. Deloitte's 2024 summer-travel report found a 17-point drop in people who earn over $200,000 opting to stay at full-service hotels compared with the summer before. While middle-income travelers moved toward budget accommodations like bed and breakfasts and RV rentals, high earners shifted toward private-home rentals.

One brand capitalizing on the growing demand is Wander. Launched in 2022, Wander owns all of its 200 properties, each beautifully designed with stunning landscaping. Its founder and CEO, John Andrew Entwistle, had the idea of making a vacation rental feel like a luxury hospitality brand after a disastrous ordeal renting a cabin in Colorado. "The whole experience felt broken, the type of thing all of us has had at a vacation rental one time or another: The place didn't look like the photos. The beds were uncomfortable. The list goes on and on," he said.

He wanted a rental home with heart and soul, where the building was designed around the landscape and high-speed internet flowed across the house. Wander rentals are often in remote spots to give guests a sense of privacy and quiet. The cleaning service is standardized so guests don't have to worry about cleaning up after themselves, and customers can check in on their own through their smartphones. Every unit, which costs an average of $900 a night, also features sleek workstations for digital nomads.

Other travel brands have found similar success in the luxury market. There's Mint House, a cross between a hotel and short-term rental that has 12 properties across 10 major US cities. Visitor experiences are personalized — for instance, guests can request that the refrigerator be stocked with their favorite groceries before they arrive — and there's 24/7 customer care. The apartments, which can be studios or have multiple bedrooms, are priced similarly to hotels and feature bespoke furniture and decor, along with all the necessities of modern accommodations. To explain the brand's success, Christian Lee, the CEO of Mint House, pointed to the company's ability to provide consistent experiences. "Unlike other short-term listings that lack security and guest care and often require a guest to perform chores at checkout, all of our properties are professionally managed to ensure the utmost safety, security, and cleanliness," he said.

The luxuriousness only goes up from there. Rental Escapes, a full-service luxury-villa-rental company founded in 2012, offers over 5,000 villas in more than 70 destinations worldwide. They start at $500 a night — though most go for tens of thousands. Amase Stays, a collection of $10 million rental estates founded this year, creates bespoke experiences for its top-of-the-line properties, with dedicated concierges who can arrange everything from private chefs and spa services to customized excursions.

Chris Lema, a business coach and product strategist, is a Wander superfan. "These are places that are architecturally beautiful, and the land that they sit on feels like a national park," he said. He likes that the company provides attainable luxury — he's stayed in 13 different Wander locations and hopes to "collect them all," he said. He has even started planning trips around Wander rentals.

"I thought this is where Airbnb was going to go with its business model," he said. "If you go to Airbnb's website now, they have these different categories like 'amazing views' or 'lakefront.' But none of these rentals push forward on the issue of experience. There's the Luxe category — but it's not the same thing."

In Airbnb's Luxe category, homes might cost anywhere between $200 and hundreds of thousands of dollars a night. When the category launched in 2019, an Airbnb press release said the homes would have to pass a slate of design and experience criteria, including higher standards for cleanliness and amenities like towels and toiletries. Unlike at other Airbnb properties, a company representative has to walk through Luxe properties to verify them. Despite that, Lema hasn't been impressed.

"They seem to rank Luxe based on the niceness of the residence," Lema said, "but that isn't really the point of what that kind of experience should be."

An Airbnb spokesperson said, "We're proud to be the only travel platform that offers stays for nearly any desired travel experience." They added: "We're also proud of the growth of our Luxe category supply and look forward to expanding the offering."

So far, Wander's model is working out. It launched with only three locations, and two years later, it has 200 houses and an average occupancy rate of 80%, Entwistle said. By the beginning of 2025, Entwistle hopes to launch locations in Mexico and Canada.

Back in Fort Wayne, Kelly ended up pivoting his Airbnb business to cater to this demand for luxury. "We focus on four-bedroom-plus homes where groups can gather for weddings or reunions," he said. Houses with pools and hot tubs are especially desirable, he's found. Kelly has also amassed a thriving collection of themed Airbnbs. He designed one house to look like the childhood home of the fictional character Fawn Liebowitz from the cult classic film "Animal House." He's working on another rental themed around Indiana University sports teams.

"At the end of the day, the 'luxury' houses are more affordable than staying in multiple hotel rooms," he said. Plus, offering something unique, like a theme, helps homes stand out from the crowd. With the new focus, Kelly's Airbnbs are rarely empty, he said.

Part of the shifting demand stems from people viewing luxury rentals as a destination unto themselves — if the place you're staying is cool enough, you don't need to get out much. Others are drawn to them as a means to get away from the hubbub. "In today's globalized world, travel destinations have become more and more homogenous and tourist-burdened," Spencer Bailey, the editor of the new book "Design: The Leading Hotels of the World," said. "People are seeking out distinctive experiences away from the crowds and searching for a certain sense of intimacy, craft, and care." It's not just about top-rate service, intricate design, or even a Michelin-starred restaurant. "It's about being in nature, engaging in local culture, and creating discrete, felt experiences that encourage quietness and slowness, not an Instagram moment," Bailey says.

A private rental is often more secluded, meaning travelers can prioritize spending more time alone with their loved ones. "Travelers are increasingly wising up to the fact that time — and where, how, and with whom you spend it — is the greatest luxury," he said. Michelle Steinhardt, the founder of the luxury travel blog The Trav Nav, wrote about her recent stay at a secluded beachfront property rental in Punta Mita, Mexico: "Even though we were only a few minutes from the local town, our party felt like everyone else was miles away."

Increasingly, getting away from home isn't enough. We also want to get away from other people. For those who can afford it — or have enough friends — luxury-travel companies are more than happy to accommodate.

Michelle Mastro covers lifestyle, travel, architecture, and culture.

• Private home insurers are dropping a growing number of customers in most states, a Senate report found.
• That leaves homeowners at risk, turning to more expensive last-resort options or going uninsured.
• While Florida has managed to reverse the trend somewhat, the risk to homeowners is set to intensify.

As Americans flock to places in the US vulnerable to natural disasters, private home insurance companies are running the other way.

The problem has left a rising number of homeowners with just one option to cover property damage: insurers of last resort.

The scale of homeowners losing their plans became clearer on Wednesday after a Senate Budget Committee investigation found that private insurers' nonrenewals spiked threefold in more than 200 counties between 2018 and 2023.

"What our new data reveal is that the failure to deal with climate change is also affecting whether families can even get homeowners insurance, which threatens their ability to get a mortgage, which spells trouble for property values in climate-exposed communities across the country," Senate Budget Chairman Sheldon Whitehouse said in releasing the report.

A recent study by Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies found that between 2018 and 2023, the number of properties enrolled in California and Florida's insurers of last resort more than doubled. A similar trend is playing out in Louisiana. While Florida has reduced participation this year, it still has the highest enrollment in the country.

The problem isn't isolated to the most predictable states. The Senate Budget Committee found that the rate of homeowners losing their private insurance also rose in Hawaii, North Carolina, and Massachusetts.

Policymakers and insurers are trying to stabilize the private market, by enacting new laws and overhauling regulations. However, with scientists predicting that climate-fueled disasters will become more frequent and severe for the foreseeable future, the risk to America's homeowners is mounting.

Growing insurance risk has some states looking for solutions

In nearly three dozen states, insurers of last resort, known as Fair Access to Insurance Requirements, or FAIR, are available to homeowners and businesses who struggle to find insurance on the private market.

The numbers are rising because private insurers are pulling back coverage and hiking premiums in areas at risk of wildfires, hurricanes, flooding, and other disasters often made worse by climate change.

While state-mandated FAIR plans are designed to be a backstop, insurance regulators and private insurance companies are alarmed by how many homeowners and businesses are enrolling, especially in California and Florida. The plans are often more expensive and provide less coverage. Plus, saddling one insurer with the riskiest policies increases the chances of one major disaster sinking the system and leaving taxpayers and insurance companies with the bill.

Florida and California are trying to reverse the trend, and Florida has seen some progress. The state's insurer of last resort, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, said on December 4 that its policy count dropped below 1 million for the first time in two years.

Mark Friedlander, a spokesperson for the Insurance Information Institute, said the drop reflects a series of changes in recent years to stabilize the state's private insurance market after more than a dozen companies left the state or stopped writing new policies.

The Florida legislature passed laws to curb rampant litigation and claim fraud that drove up legal costs for private insurers. Friedlander said insurance lawsuits in the first three quarters of 2024 are down 56%, compared with the first three quarters of 2021 — the year before the new laws were enacted. Citizens also started a "depopulation" program that shifts customers to the private market. State regulators in October said they had approved at least nine new property companies to enter the market, and premiums weren't rising nearly as much as last year.

In California, many of the deadliest and most destructive wildfires have occurred within the last five years. As a result, some private insurers are hiking premiums and limiting coverage in risky areas, pushing more homeowners to the insurer of last resort. The Harvard study found that policies in the state's FAIR plan doubled between 2018 and 2023 to more than 300,000. As of September, the California Insurance Commission said policies totaled nearly 452,000.

The commission is working to overhaul regulations to slow the trend, including requiring private insurers to sell in risky areas. In exchange, it should be easier for companies to raise premiums that factor in reinsurance costs and the risks of future disasters. That should help stabilize rates, said Michael Sollen, a spokesman for the commission.

Sollen added that in the past, private insurers could seek approval for higher premiums but weren't required to offer coverage in wildfire-prone areas.

"In a year from now, what's happening with the FAIR plan will be a key measure for us," he said. "We expect to see those numbers start to stabilize and go down."

A mounting home insurance crisis

Still, a reduction in state-backed plans isn't necessarily a sign of progress, Steve Koller, a postdoctoral fellow in climate and housing and author of the Harvard report, told Business Insider.

A growing number of homeowners in places like Florida, Louisiana, and California are purchasing private insurance from nontraditional providers barely regulated by state governments. These so-called "non-admitted" insurers don't contribute to a state fund that guarantees homeowners will have their claims paid even if the insurance provider fails, leaving their customers without access to this backup coverage.

"Someone could be moving to a private insurer from Citizens, and that insurer might have higher insolvency risk," Koller said.

He added that more homeowners are opting out of insurance altogether. The number of US homeowners going without insurance has soared from 5% in 2019 to 12% in 2022, the Insurance Information Institute reported.

Plus, Americans are increasingly moving into parts of the country most vulnerable to extreme weather. Tens of thousands more people moved into the most flood—and fire-prone areas of the US last year rather than out of them, the real estate company Redfin reported earlier this year.

As insurers of last resort try to shift more risk to the private market, home insurance premiums are expected to keep rising. That's especially true in the areas hardest hit by climate-fueled disasters.

If private insurers exit hard-hit regions en masse in the future, Koller said states might need to become the predominant insurance provider in the same way the National Flood Insurance Program took over after the private market for flood insurance collapsed in the 1960s. Most flood insurance plans are still issued by the federal government.

"My guess is states are going to work very, very hard to avoid that and ensure the existence of a robust private market, but that's a parallel that I can't personally unthink about," he said.

Have you struggled to get home insurance, moved to an insurer of last resort, or gone uninsured? Contact these reporters at [email protected] or [email protected].

• Gig work has expanded to include nurses at hospitals and medical facilities, per a new report.
• Many nurses who work this way face challenges similar to Uber drivers, the report found.
• Nursing represents a high-stakes use case of gig work apps, one of the researchers said.

Gig work has expanded to the nurses who care for patients in hospitals and care homes — and it's coming with some of the same challenges that delivery and rideshare contractors have already pointed to, according to a new report.

Apps like CareRev, Clipboard Health, and ShiftKey have taken an approach similar to the one companies like Uber and Instacart have used to build up their workforces, and applied it to nursing at hospitals, care homes, and other medical facilities.

But the report, which the Roosevelt Institute released a summary of this week, found that medical facilities often turn to gig nursing services as a way to cut expenses, especially under the tutelage of private equity firms.

Medical professionals on the apps, which the report collectively calls "Uber for Nursing," also face many of the same issues that other gig workers do, from low pay to having their accounts on the platforms deactivated with little or no explanation.

The apps make pitches that are attractive to the nurses themselves, Katie Wells, a senior Fellow at think tank Groundwork Collaborative and one of the report's authors, told Business Insider in an interview. Wells wrote the report with Funda Ustek Spilda, a senior lecturer at King's College London and a research associate at the University of Oxford's Oxford Internet Institute.

Full-time nursing jobs often involve putting in long hours as well as working night or weekend shifts. COVID's strain on hospitals and other medical facilities also pushed many nurses to quit or consider finding other work.

Like rideshare and delivery companies, the apps say that they offer nurses more choices over how and when they work. ShiftKey's website, for instance, says that its users have "the freedom to make choices best suited to their lives" including how much they earn and "their relationship with work."

For a burned-out nurse, that can be an appealing pitch, Wells said.

"There is almost no flexibility and control," Wells said. "So it is no wonder that these apps become attractive."

Wells and Spilda interviewed 29 nurses and nursing assistants for their study. The interviewees all used at least one gig work app to find nursing shifts.

Like delivery and rideshare contractors, nurses who use the apps must claim jobs through them. The nursing apps often charge a fee for access, and workers bid with their pay rates. The user who offers the lowest pay gets the shift, according to the report.

Working the shift, however, can be tricky. When they show up for a gig, the nurses often have to navigate the facility themselves — even if they have never worked there before.

"At most hospitals and medical facilities, no orientations are required for gig nurses and nursing assistants," the report reads. "Workers do not know where supply closets are located, how to access patient portals with medical histories and current medication lists, and whom to contact in the chain of command."

And like Uber drivers or Instacart delivery workers, nurses who use the apps don't have a boss to contact when things go wrong. One Oregon-based nurse interviewed for the study said that she was barred from Clipboard Health's app for two weeks after she had a hernia on the job and had to leave early.

In another instance, the same nurse said that she went to work with COVID after learning that she couldn't cancel her shift without losing "attendance points" and hurting her chances of getting gigs in the future, the report reads.

"It sucks that there's nobody that you can get ahold of immediately," the nurse told Wells and Spilda.

"It's really as if AI has eaten the managers," Wells said.

The apps also advertise that nurses can make more on their platforms than at other jobs. One nurse interviewed by the researchers said she made gross pay of $23 an hour on ShiftKey. That dropped to around $13 an hour after accounting for fees that she paid to ShiftKey.

Despite the challenges, the report found that 19 of the 29 people interviewed planned to continue working for the apps, though some also said they also had jobs in other industries to make enough money to live.

The report says that gig nursing apps are often used by facilities that are trying to save money and are under pressure to produce returns for investors.

Wells told BI that bringing the gig economy to medical care creates risks not present in food delivery or rideshare.

"The stakes are higher because this has to do with patient safety, and the immediacy of health and care makes things more palpable," she told BI.

ShiftMed, which employs its nurses as W2 employees but still offers them much of the flexibility of gig work, said that it deactivates nurses' accounts for various reasons, from patient safety to legal violations.

"Nurses file an appeal by submitting a formal review through the app or support channel, after which ShiftMed conducts an internal investigation, reviews records, and determines the next steps," CEO Todd Walrath said in a statement to BI.

The company said that it also offers an orientation so that users "are fully prepared for any clinical setting by aligning health system-specific requirements, such as training or shadowing before they begin shifts," Walrath said.

CareRev, Clipboard Health, and ShiftKey did not respond to requests for comment.

Are you a nurse who works as an independent contractor with a story idea to share? Reach out to this reporter at [email protected]

• Many older Americans regret some career choices that affected retirement plans and job prospects.
• Regrets include not prioritizing education, frequent job changes, and involvement in office drama.
• This is part of an ongoing series about older Americans' regrets.

For millions of Americans, retiring at 65 is just a dream.

Since September, BI has heard from older Americans about their career regrets in two surveys it conducted.

Over 3,000 people between the ages of 48 and 96 completed a voluntary BI survey or emailed reporters about their life regrets. In a separate survey, over 300 recently laid-off Americans over 50 shared their career regrets. We followed up with 13 interviews to learn more. This is part of an ongoing series.

Some common themes people discussed included not prioritizing education, switching jobs too frequently, and struggling to navigate office politics. Many also cited age discrimination — data from AARP found that 64% of those over 50 have either seen or experienced age discrimination in the workplace. Nearly all said they were passed over for some roles in favor of younger applicants with lower pay expectations, particularly in white-collar roles where hiring has slowed.

We want to hear from you. Are you an older American with any life regrets that you would be comfortable sharing with a reporter? Please fill out this quick form.

Bureau of Labor Statistics data found that 18.9% of Americans 65 and older — about 11.4 million people — still work, many for financial or social reasons. Some returned to work after retiring, citing financial concerns.

Not prioritizing or getting the wrong kind of education

Lou Nelson, 63, was an executive assistant in the medical devices industry for 25 years but faced two layoffs since 2021. She hasn't had luck securing work since January.

For most of her career, she had few regrets about not having a bachelor's degree because she worked for top healthtech companies and said she was well respected. However, after sending out over 50 applications, she suspects not having a degree has impeded her search.

"Nobody wants to hire someone that's 63 years old, and I don't know if it's because of pay or experience," said Nelson, who lives in Texas.

A college degree is still a big boon to finding and holding a job. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' latest jobs report showed that Americans with a bachelor's degree or higher had an unemployment rate of 2.4% in November 2024, while those with only a high-school diploma had an unemployment rate nearly twice as high, at 4.6%.

Grover McBeath, 79, said not having either limited his career options. He struggled through school and dropped out in eighth grade.

He joined the Air Force and worked in electronics for most of his career, but he lacked job satisfaction. Though he traveled the world for work and his salary peaked at $38,000 a year, he said he had an "unstable, nomadic lifestyle." McBeath took Social Security at 62 and relies on the $1,108 a month he receives. He lives in affordable housing in Nevada and receives SNAP benefits to help pay for food.

"I was in a career field that I didn't have an aptitude for, and many times, I just felt so lost in what I was doing, which is why I bounced around a lot," McBeath said, adding he wished he prioritized education.

Still, many believe a college degree isn't worth the financial burden. A Pew Research Center survey of US adults conducted at the end of 2023 found that just 22% of respondents believed a four-year college degree would be worth it if they had to take out loans.

Some older Americans BI spoke with agreed that their degrees haven't helped further their careers. Lynda Namey, 54, was a healthcare business manager for two decades, making $62,000 a year at her peak. However, after a divorce that put her in debt, she said she panicked and returned to school for her master's and doctorate degrees in counseling from Liberty University. She had no strong desire to pursue the degrees but did it because she expected them to help her land higher-paying roles.

That hasn't panned out. The Alabama resident removed her doctorate from her résumé to not appear overqualified. While searching for a full-time job, she's held part-time consulting, life coaching, and independent contractor roles. She also teaches meditation.

"I'm a middle-aged woman who has to completely support myself. I pay for my own insurance, and I've got to think about my future," Namey said. "I can't afford to take a job that pays $17 or $18 an hour. But those are the only jobs I get interviewed for."

Switching jobs frequently instead of building a cohesive career

Though a few job seekers regretted not looking enough for new roles, dozens said they regretted bouncing between jobs and career paths and not being more intentional about growing their networks.

After working in various industries, Dawn Habbena, 63, fell in love with human resources. But after her company was sold, she took a job in compliance for a wealth management company, which wasn't as satisfying as HR.

When Habbena faced a layoff during the pandemic, she struggled to get back into HR. Six months later, she got an HR job for a manufacturing plant, but she took another HR role after moving to help her aging mother. She described that role as "absolutely horrible," and she's since struggled to find another position — even as a grocery checker — after sending out over 1,000 applications.

Habbena wished she'd stayed focused on HR to accrue more experience and kept building her computer skills. She lives in a one-bedroom apartment with her 86-year-old mother and drives for DoorDash to stay afloat.

"I wish I had more confidence in what I did because I was easily knocked off," said Habbena, who lives in Texas.

Many older Americans, like Chuck Smith, 60, couldn't control how long they stayed in roles because of layoffs but wished they had settled somewhere more stable. Smith, from Massachusetts, worked in tech marketing for most of his career, making as much as six figures.

Smith was laid off in June 2023 and said he's since applied to over 2,700 roles and landed about 100 interviews. Though he and his wife are financially comfortable, Smith said he's worried about how quickly he's spending down his savings without a stable income.

Though hiring has remained steady for lower-income workers, the job market for six-figure earners has slumped. New LinkedIn data found hiring has fallen 27% in IT and 23% in product management and marketing since 2018. Middle managers have also faced hiring challenges — hiring levels fell 42% between April 2022 and October 2024, data from Revelio Labs found.

To be sure, recent data reveals that switching jobs often yields financial gains. A September Vanguard report found that the median job switcher received a 10% increase in pay. Still, it also showed a 0.7 percentage-point decline in people's retirement savings rate when switching jobs because 401(k) plan benefits can vary and people often make mistakes when rolling over retirement accounts.

AARP found that older workers who voluntarily change roles or industries in their 40s and 50s tend to retire later and have better work outcomes than their peers who stay in one role.

"They have better wage growth. They've experienced a higher success rate of staying in the workplace over those who might have been forced to change jobs later in their career," said Carly Roszkowski, the vice president of financial resilience programming at AARP.

Taking a risk on a business, contract roles, or an 'office bully'

Some respondents took risks that hurt them financially.

Michael R., 70, opened toy stores in New York throughout the 2000s, thinking they would grow enough that he could retire comfortably. However, when his businesses crashed amid the 2008 recession, he lost over $650,000 and declared bankruptcy.

"If I didn't do the business, I would have bought a house," Michael said, adding that in that scenario, he could've helped his whole family by selling his mom's house and gifting his siblings the money.

However, he had to move in with his mother, and after she died, he rented a studio apartment. He said he works nearly every day of the week at his friend's toy store and earns about $8,000 a month between his paycheck and his Social Security benefits.

"I'm still struggling just to pay my rent, my groceries, and my car. We don't get a raise. We don't get a bonus," Michael said. "I'm grateful I'm employed, but I can't go out looking for another job. Nobody's going to hire somebody who's 70 years old."

Some regretted taking risks working in contract roles instead of prioritizing full-time work. Mauricia Day, 74, never finished her degree and said she's held over 40 jobs — many contracted — in radio, tailoring, and office administration, making $30,000 a year at most. After a layoff in 2020, she hasn't found secure work. She works at a nonprofit in a part-time contract role that ends in December.

Day said because she knew little about saving and investing, she lived paycheck to paycheck. She wished she'd focused on securing full-time employment in one field instead of relying on unstable income. She receives $1,136 in Social Security and $317 from her pension each month, which is slightly more than her house payment.

"I wish I had focused more on a career; it would have probably helped better with retirement and investing," Day said, adding she stayed home for nearly 18 years raising her children. "I have a lot of friends who have been retired for 10 years, 15 years. I'm unsure why I'm still looking, but I know I'm still looking."

A few wished they took fewer risks navigating workplace dynamics. Robbi Sera, 59, said she had a stable career as a biotech project manager and made good financial decisions, such as maxing out her 401(k). However, she said she took a few risks at work that backfired.

Sera said she gave constructive feedback to a "company bully," which she said contributed to her layoff in February. She wished she'd stayed quiet until she locked down a different job, as she said the hiring landscape is "dismal."

Sera, who splits her time between California and Hawaii, said even though she's financially stable, she and her husband have cut back on spending significantly, rarely eating out or traveling. She earns $20 an hour as a contracted customer service agent for the aviation industry while searching for higher-paying roles.

"You just keep swimming and hope that something gets better," Sera said.

Are you an older American with any life regrets that you would be comfortable sharing with a reporter? Please fill out this quick form or email [email protected].

• Three baby boomer homeowners told BI they want to downsize but can't find suitable options.
• Rising home prices have led to a big increase in their home equity over the years.
• But those rising prices also make it harder to find affordable homes for retirement.

As many baby boomer homeowners look to cash in on their home equity and downsize, some are grappling with a shortage of suitable homes.

Older homeowners are increasingly staying put, as mortgage rates and housing costs remain stubbornly elevated and inventory— particularly of affordable and accessible homes — is scarce. Some simply can't find a suitable home that would leave them with enough cash to retire on, while others simply don't feel downsizing is a savvy financial move with housing and borrowing costs so high.

Kim Cayes is one of those boomers who feel stuck. The 67-year-old always banked on selling her four-bedroom house in Parsippany, New Jersey, to help support herself in retirement.

"My plan had kind of been: save everything I can, and then when I retire, move someplace cheap and use the equity in my house to buy a house in cash to reduce my costs," she told Business Insider.

Cayes bought her home for $245,000 in 2000 after her divorce. She added a major addition and has since benefited from New Jersey's soaring home prices — the house was recently appraised at nearly $700,000, according to documents reviewed by Business Insider.

But Cayes, now semi-retired from corporate communications, is no longer interested in leaving northern Jersey for a cheaper part of the country. Two of her three adult children live with her, and she doesn't want to leave her community.

"I would hate to move somewhere and leave one of my kids behind because, not being married, my kids are all I've got," she said. "Especially as you get older, you need a network of people."

Cayes is looking for a single-story home in the $400,000 to $450,000 range. But she hasn't had any luck finding something suitable. She says the homes she's looked at would need a lot of work and aren't in familiar neighborhoods.

"Thinking I'm going to spend the final years of my life in a worse situation than I've ever been in — that's just so depressing," Cayes said. "Especially when my friends are all traveling around the world with their spouses and constantly posting on Facebook which countries they're in."

'A lateral financial move'

Some boomers who can afford to stay in their homes don't want to endure the costs and possible stress associated with downsizing. Even those who are still paying off their homes often have much lower mortgage interest rates than what they could get on the market today, hovering around 6.5%. And leaving a familiar home and neighborhood can be emotionally taxing.

Dorothy Lipovenko, 71, and her husband love the single-family home in a well-connected neighborhood of Montreal where they've lived for nearly 25 years. But the options to downsize in their area seem limited to pricey new condos and old homes that need major repairs. Lipovenko doesn't want to live in a modern condo without green space, but she also doesn't want to take on a home renovation project.

"It becomes a lateral financial move, and that is what has us saying 'no,'" she said. "Downsizing is a huge undertaking, physically and emotionally, and a one-for-one trade makes no sense."

Ideally, Lipovenko and her husband would move to a smaller, single-floor house — she dreams of a Levittown-style suburban starter home, she said.

"It's not just giving up possessions and going into a smaller space; it's shrinking a lot of things to fit a new mindset," she said. "I just can't see my husband and I spending the last decades of our life in a little apartment."

'I'm lucky I have this house'

Andrea S., 60, already lives in a single-story starter home in Sherman Oaks, California, that's well-suited for a retiree. But Andrea, who requested partial anonymity to protect her privacy, isn't sure she can afford to stay in it.

The former agent and producer bought her two-bedroom bungalow with her ex-partner in 1994 for $245,000. She's lived in the home ever since, hasn't made any major improvements, and has a housemate to split the bills with. The Zillow estimate, reviewed by Business Insider, found the house is now worth about $1.3 million.

"I'm lucky I have this house," she told Business Insider. "I just hate the fact that the house is pretty much my pension fund."

Andrea's income is lower than she expected it to be at this point in her life — she's struggled to work since suffering from a head injury in a car crash in 2021. Meanwhile, the pandemic and Hollywood writers' strike killed off some of her projects, she said. At the same time, maintenance and repair costs for her nearly 75-year-old house are daunting: the HVAC system needs to be replaced, and the pool and large yard are expensive and energy-intensive to maintain.

"If I can't get a job that covers me enough to cover my bills, then I have to think about do I sell the house," she said.

But she's concerned that she won't be able to find an affordable home in a neighborhood as pleasant and walkable as hers, especially on a budget that makes sense. After her crash, she gave up driving and wants to keep living in a place with bus access and grocery stores within walking distance. Plus, she's concerned about the capital gains tax she'll need to pay if she sells the home.

"I'm realizing now, at age 60, all the things that you become very vulnerable to, especially when you're a woman and you don't have a life partner," she said.

Andrea and her friends joke about their dream of retiring together in the British seaside town of Port Isaac — the idyllic setting for the early-2000s TV show "Doc Martin."

"You get some nice little cottage in town. They don't have big yards. And you walk out your door, and you see the lovely English coastline," she said. "That sounds good to me."

Are you struggling to downsize or find a suitable home to retire in? Are you otherwise affected by the cost of retirement housing? Reach out to this reporter at [email protected].

• President-elect Donald Trump has called on Congress to raise or eliminate the debt ceiling.
• He said doing so before his term would put the onus on Joe Biden and let him avoid an early fight.
• Going over the debt ceiling could lead to a default and a deep recession.

The debt ceiling is the unexpected debate in Washington this week after President-elect Donald Trump threw the annual holiday-season government-funding talks into disarray.

Trump said he wanted to raise or eliminate the limit on how much the federal government can borrow. Doing so now would mean the much-debated move would happen on President Joe Biden's watch and be resolved before Trump takes office, when he'll want to implement his agenda without a fight over borrowing limits.

"Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling," Trump wrote Friday in a Truth Social post. "Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President.'"

This all comes amid a chaotic scramble to reach a funding deal for the US government and avoid a shutdown when Friday ends. The debt ceiling was one of the sticking points Trump used to scrap a bipartisan deal to keep the government funded through March. Now he's revisiting a much-used political tool.

"Trump is right to identify that he doesn't want his fingerprints on increasing the debt ceiling, and he doesn't want to have to deal with it in six months while he's trying to pass what he considers a must-pass tax-extension bill," Elizabeth Pancotti, the director of special initiatives at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute think tank, told Business Insider.

A debt-ceiling breach has become a political tool — one that Trump is trying to wield for the last time

The debt ceiling limits the amount of money the federal government is allowed to borrow to pay for its programs and operations. If it's not regularly raised or suspended, the US government risks defaulting on its debt and failing to pay its bills.

This could compromise everyday Americans' access to crucial government programs such as Social Security, Medicaid, and housing vouchers. Len Burman, a fellow at the think tank Urban Institute, told BI that a default could also cause interest rates to rise drastically if investors no longer viewed the US government as a creditworthy borrower. That would mean Americans may face higher rates on mortgages and credit cards, which could lead to a broader financial crisis and deep recession.

Because of these widespread consequences, the debt ceiling has evolved into a political bargaining chip, and the US has repeatedly come close to breaching it over partisan disagreements, most recently in 2023. That's why some Democrats have long advocated abolishing the ceiling, arguing that Republicans weaponize it to push spending cuts. Sen. Elizabeth Warren capitalized on Trump's recent comments, writing Thursday morning on X that she agreed with him on terminating the debt limit.

During recent debt-ceiling standoffs, various plans to sidestep the limit were floated. Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin told BI that the president could invoke a clause in the 14th Amendment that would declare a default and the debt ceiling that caused that default unconstitutional.

Other ideas to eliminate the debt ceiling have included minting a $1 trillion platinum coin, which some economists have said would allow the Treasury secretary to deposit the coin to pay off debts.

In an interview with Fox News Digital on Thursday, Trump said that Republicans who didn't support repealing the debt limit could face primary challenges; many Republicans have historically opposed getting rid of it, arguing that it's a check on borrowing. Trump told NBC News that Democrats had signaled they wanted to get rid of the debt limit and that he would "lead the charge" to do so.

The country will technically hit the debt ceiling at the start of next year, but the Treasury Department can hold off default and keep paying the bills through various accounting tricks, likely until late spring or early summer.

• Biden's administration posted notices to withdraw its broader student-loan-forgiveness plans.
• Amid lawsuits, the Education Department wrote that it stands by the legality of its debt-relief plans.
• The plans aimed to cancel some student debt for over 38 million borrowers.

President Joe Biden's administration has officially scrapped its unfinished rules for broad student-loan forgiveness.

The Education Department posted notices to withdraw its plans to cancel student debt for over 38 million borrowers. The withdrawal notices were for two of the department's unfinished debt-relief rules. The first rule was Biden's Plan B for broader debt relief after the Supreme Court struck his first plan down in summer 2023. The second rule was a proposal to provide relief to borrowers facing financial hardship.

In the notices to withdraw the unfinished rules, the Education Department said it is focused on helping student-loan borrowers manage the remaining elements of the return to repayment that began last year following the pandemic pause.

The department said that withdrawing these regulations will give future stakeholders the flexibility to craft new forms of relief, especially with the uncertainty the incoming administration brings. Trump has previously criticized broad relief and is unlikely to continue Biden's efforts.

The department also said that the withdrawal of these rules is not a result of the questions surrounding their legality, saying that it believes the relief "is authorized by the Secretary's longstanding and existing authority" under the Higher Education Act.

Biden's Plan B for student-loan forgiveness would have benefited over 30 million borrowers. It proposed full or partial relief for categories including borrowers with unpaid interest and those who have made at least 20 years of payments. While the rule was never finalized, a group of GOP-led states filed a lawsuit in September to block its implementation.

Meanwhile, the Education Department proposed a separate rule in October to provide relief to 8 million borrowers facing financial hardship. Those categories would have included borrowers facing challenges with childcare or medical expenses.

The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider on the withdrawal of the plans.

Biden is still pursuing other avenues for debt relief before his term is up. On Friday, his administration announced an additional $4.28 billion in debt relief for 54,900 borrowers in Public Service Loan Forgiveness — a result of ongoing improvements to the program. Despite not being able to pass broad relief, Biden, over the course of his term, has provided relief to nearly 5 million borrowers through changes to various programs.

Some Republican lawmakers lauded the withdrawal of the plans. Sen. Bill Cassidy, the top Republican on the Senate education committee, said in a Friday statement that Biden's "student loan schemes were always a lie."

Meanwhile, some advocates criticized the GOP-led challenges to Biden's relief efforts. Persis Yu, the deputy executive director of the advocacy group Student Borrower Protection Center, said in a statement that Biden's plans "would have freed millions from the crushing weight of the student debt crisis and unlocked economic mobility for millions more workers and families."

"We are deeply grateful to President Biden for the work he did to fight for the 40 million borrowers trapped in student debt," Yu said.

• Donald Trump has said the EU will face tariffs unless they make up their trade deficit with the US.
• He has told the bloc to make a "large scale purchase" of US oil and gas to balance trade relations.
• In 2022, the US purchased $131.3 billion more of goods and services from the EU than vice-versa.

US President-elect Donald Trump said he has told the European Union it must purchase a large quantity of US oil and gas, or he will impose tariffs on the trading bloc.

"I told the European Union that they must make up their tremendous deficit with the United States by the large scale purchase of our oil and gas. Otherwise, it is TARIFFS all the way!!!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform on Friday.

The EU and US have long maintained deep economic ties, but in recent years, the balance of trade has tilted in Europe's favor. In 2022, the overall US goods and services trade deficit with the EU was $131.3 billion.

While the US imports more goods in the trade partnership than the EU, the reverse is true for services.

In 2023, the US exported €396.4 billion ($411.5 billion) of services to the EU, while importing €292.4 billion ($303.5 billion) — a US surplus of €104 billion ($107 billion), according to EU figures.

"The EU and US have deeply integrated economies, with overall balanced trade and investment," Olof Gill, a European Commission spokesperson, told Business Insider.

"We are ready to discuss with President-elect Trump how we can further strengthen an already strong relationship, including by discussing our common interests in the energy sector," he added.

"The message is clear: the European Union is committed to continue working with the United States, pragmatically, to strengthen transatlantic ties," European Council President António Costa told reporters following a meeting of the European Council on Thursday.

Trump made tariffs central to his reelection campaign, suggesting a blanket 10% tariff on goods from all countries. It is still uncertain which policies he will introduce once in office.

The US is one of the EU's largest trading partners, particularly for industries like automobiles, pharmaceuticals, and luxury goods.

Individual countries like Germany, whose stuttering auto market depends heavily on imports to the US, would be particularly hard hit by renewed tariffs.

The pressure of potential tariffs comes as the eurozone struggles with sluggish economic growth and the ongoing war in Ukraine. The bloc expanded by 0.2% in the most recent quarter, compared to 0.7% growth in the US.

On Wednesday, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said Trump's proposed tariff plans pose more uncertainty to the US economy in the coming year.

"We don't know what will be tariffed, from what countries, for how long, in what size. We don't know whether there'll be retaliatory tariffs. We don't know what the transmission of any of that will be into consumer prices," Powell told reporters.

The European Commission did not reply immediately to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Biden announced $4.28 billion in student-debt cancellation for 54,900 borrowers in Public Service Loan Forgiveness.
• The relief is a result of the Education Department's ongoing fixes to PSLF.
• President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to continue Biden's student-debt relief efforts.

President Joe Biden announced more student-loan forgiveness with one month left until he leaves the White House.

On Friday, Biden and his Education Department said they have approved $4.28 billion in student debt for 54,900 borrowers in the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which forgives student debt for government and nonprofit workers after 10 years of qualifying payments.

The relief is a result of ongoing improvements to PSLF, including a waiver that expired in October 2022 that allowed payments that previously did not qualify for relief to count toward borrowers' forgiveness progress.

"Four years ago, the Biden-Harris Administration made a pledge to America's teachers, service members, nurses, first responders, and other public servants that we would fix the broken Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, and I'm proud to say that we delivered," Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

This latest relief brings the total student-loan forgiveness under Biden to about $180 billion for nearly 5 million Americans, including $78 billion for just over 1 million borrowers enrolled in PSLF.

It's unclear if the Biden administration will announce more student-debt relief before President-elect Donald Trump takes office on January 20. Still, it caps off a tumultuous past few years for student-loan borrowers hoping for broad debt relief — Biden's first student-loan forgiveness plan was struck down by the Supreme Court last summer, and his Plan B for debt relief is now in court following legal challenging from Republican-led states.

On top of that, 8 million borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan — Biden's new income-driven repayment plan intended to make monthly payments cheaper with a shorter timeline to forgiveness — are in limbo as they wait for a court to decide if the plan can move forward.

Even if Biden's plans for broader relief do survive their legal challenges, it's unlikely Trump's administration would continue those efforts. Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, previously told Business Insider that Biden "has taken a stance of, 'We want to try and forgive as much debt as possible through various different programs.'"

"And to put it mildly, we're not going to see that same attitude under the Trump administration," Cooper said.

Trump proposed eliminating PSLF during his first term, but doing so requires congressional approval. Republican control of Congress and the White House means that Trump would likely have more success achieving his goals.

"From Day One of my Administration, I promised to make sure that higher education is a ticket to the middle class, not a barrier to opportunity," Biden said in a statement. "Because of our actions, millions of people across the country now have the breathing room to start businesses, save for retirement, and pursue life plans they had to put on hold because of the burden of student loan debt."

• Roofers, construction helpers, and grounds maintenance workers have higher fatal injury rates than many other jobs.
• Last year, logging workers had the highest rate per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers at 98.9.
• The overall rate dropped from 3.7 fatal injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers in 2022 to 3.5.

Logging, transportation, and hunting work can be risky jobs in the US based on the latest fatal work injury rates released by the Labor Department.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently published data on fatal injuries at work in 2023 by industry and occupation.

Fatal injury rates at work were down overall last year. "A worker died every 99 minutes from a work-related injury in 2023 compared to 96 minutes in 2022," a news release from BLS on Thursday said.

Three civilian occupations had rates above 50 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. Logging workers had a fatal injury rate of almost 100 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers in 2023, way above the overall rate of 3.5 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers last year. That rate of 3.5 was a tick down from the rate of 3.7 in 2022.

Below are the 10 deadliest jobs in the US based on fatal work injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers.

10. Structural iron and steel workers

Fatal work injury rate: 19.8

Number of fatal work injuries: 9

9. Miscellaneous agricultural workers

Fatal work injury rate: 20.2

Number of fatal work injuries: 146

8. Grounds maintenance workers

Fatal work injury rate: 20.5

Number of fatal work injuries: 226

7. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers

Fatal work injury rate: 26.8

Number of fatal work injuries: 984

6. Helpers in construction trades

Fatal work injury rate: 27.4

Number of fatal work injuries: 16

5. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers

Fatal work injury rate: 31.3

Number of fatal work injuries: 62

4. Refuse and recyclable material collectors

Fatal work injury rate: 41.4

Number of fatal work injuries: 41

3. Roofers

Fatal work injury rate: 51.8

Number of fatal work injuries: 113

2. Fishing and hunting workers

Fatal work injury rate: 86.9

Number of fatal work injuries: 19

1. Logging workers

Fatal work injury rate: 98.9

Number of fatal work injuries: 52

• Many of the 3,300 older Americans BI heard from recently regret not preparing enough for retirement.
• Financial planners described how younger people could set themselves up now to retire comfortably.
• This is part of an ongoing series about older Americans' retirement regrets.

For many Americans, their golden years can be a time of reflection — and regret.

Since mid-September, more than 3,300 older Americans have shared their retirement regrets with Business Insider through a reader survey or direct emails to reporters. Many said they wished they'd saved more, waited longer to retire, relied less on Social Security, or been more prepared for unexpected financial setbacks, such as a layoff, a medical diagnosis, or a divorce.

"I didn't really think about retirement in concrete terms," one 65-year-old wrote in response to a survey question about how people wished they planned for retirement differently. "I always felt I had time. Now I'm older, wholly unprepared, and without savings or a 401(k)."

We want to hear from you. Are you an older American with any life regrets that you would be comfortable sharing with a reporter? Please fill out this quick form.

BI talked to financial planners, wealth managers, and a personal-finance writer about what younger generations could do to avoid similar financial mistakes. This story is part of an ongoing series.

Start saving and investing as early as possible, even with a small amount of money

The amount of money Americans need to save for retirement can vary based on lifestyle and the local cost of living. In a survey conducted by Northwestern Mutual in January, the average respondent said they thought they'd need about $1.5 million to retire comfortably. Wealth managers and financial planners encourage young people with this goal — or any others — to understand their options, start early, and take advantage of employer-match programs.

Brad Bartick, a wealth planner at Baird, said Americans should begin saving for retirement while they're in college or in their early 20s. "Sobering though it may be," Bartick said, "success may require you to work a second job" or "earn a higher level of training or education."

He suggests people create a "ruthlessly honest budget" so they can identify places to cut spending and ways to pay down high-interest debt or build up an emergency fund. If money is tight, start by putting $25 to $50 per paycheck aside for retirement.

"That may not seem like much, but it is the behavior of saving — the habit, if you will — that is most important later in life," Bartick said. "Additionally, time will reward your having started early."

Bartick suggested that people whose workplaces offer retirement plans contribute at least the maximum dollar amount their employer will match and raise their savings rate as their salary increases.

A fact sheet published by AARP in December cited an estimate based on Census, IRS, and Federal Reserve data that about 56 million Americans in 2022 lacked access to retirement-savings plans at work. The vast majority of those people earned less than $50,000, meaning they may not have much surplus cash to save for retirement.

Judith Ward, thought leadership director and a certified financial planner at T. Rowe Price, said that not every employer clearly communicates which resources it offers, so workers may have to research what's available. She suggests people aim to save 15% of their salary annually.

A 72-year-old who responded to the survey implored people to "always, always, always take advantage of a 401(k) program with your employer and max it out," adding: "My mortgage was too big initially, so I didn't participate in the program for a few years. Big mistake."

Those lacking a retirement-savings plan at work can use individual retirement accounts, which most banks offer. Traditional IRAs offer tax breaks up front. Roth IRAs offer tax-free qualified withdrawals later in life. Bartick said higher earners should consider a Roth 401(k), as they're likely to be in a higher tax bracket later in life and can therefore save more money.

Bartick described investing as "the great equalizer" for young people looking to build a retirement portfolio, adding that most people can open a brokerage account and invest with few barriers. While investing can be lucrative, it involves risk and isn't a surefire way to build wealth.

Rob Williams, a managing director of financial planning at Charles Schwab, said the biggest regret he hears is that people waited too long to invest, missing out on years of compounding interest.

Retirees who didn't save or invest enough often rely on Social Security in their later years. Several older adults told BI they regretted collecting Social Security at 62 instead of 67, when their full retirement benefits would have kicked in.

A 77-year-old survey respondent who wrote that they "took Social Security too early" said they regretted cashing in on their benefit before reaching full retirement age. They added that working a lower-paying teaching job hurt their Social Security income and retirement savings later in life.

Prepare in case of a divorce or a spouse's death

Dozens of survey respondents said they regretted how they handled finances with their spouse. Some said they weren't on the same page about retirement goals, while others said the death of a partner disrupted their carefully laid plans.

Ward suggested married couples consider retirement as a household and analyze finances together, even if spouses keep their accounts separate.

"One of the biggest retirement mistakes I see is when a spouse assumes they share the same retirement vision," Ward said.

Many older adults told BI that a divorce hurt their finances. One 67-year-old survey respondent who got a divorce said they regretted "not having a 401(k) and thinking I would be OK because my husband worked hard all his life."

A study published in the Journal of Gerontology in 2022 found that from 1990 to 2010, the divorce rate for adults 65 and older nearly tripled. A BI analysis of 2023 individual-level Census Bureau data found that divorced retirees had lower average 401(k) balances, less savings, and a lower monthly retirement income than married people.

Elizabeth Ayoola, a personal-finance writer at NerdWallet, said people could protect some of their money and retirement savings with prenuptial agreements. However, prenups typically apply only to money and assets acquired before a couple ties the knot, so they provide less protection if the couple divorces later in life. She said that including major assets or money in a trust could be an effective way to secure wealth in a divorce, and she advised couples to have transparent conversations about finances at all stages of their relationship.

A spouse's death can also have detrimental financial ramifications. Older Americans told BI they struggled to get by without their spouses' paychecks or Social Security income. Others said a lack of a will threw them into a complex legal battle and probate process for their spouses' assets.

Ayoola advised couples to write a will and consider a life-insurance policy.

Build a nest egg to lessen the sting of sudden bills or loss of income

Some older Americans told BI that unexpected expenses or events, like medical diagnoses or layoffs, depleted their retirement savings.

One 78-year-old survey respondent wrote that her husband had heart problems and was recently laid off. She described wanting to reduce their housing costs but being unable to. "We are trapped in a large home living on Social Security and draining savings until it's gone," she wrote.

Dozens of older Americans said a layoff affected their retirement planning. Carly Roszkowski, a vice president of financial-resilience programming at AARP, advised older workers to continue updating their résumés and keep their skills sharp in case they're laid off.

Younger people may want to diversify their skills and prepare to pivot careers. They may also want to build an emergency fund to support themselves or loved ones if they lose their jobs.

"Build relationships with colleagues, mentors, and industry professionals. Networking can open doors to new opportunities and provide valuable support and guidance," Roszkowski said. "Reverse mentorship programs can be effective in organizations to help bridge generational gaps and build understanding and collaboration between different age groups."

Several older Americans said they stopped working or used up much of their savings because of a medical diagnosis. Healthcare researchers advise investing in routine checkups, factoring medical emergencies into nest eggs, and researching government-assistance options.

When a 69-year-old survey respondent and her husband began to struggle with health issues in their 50s and 60s, she said it took a toll on their savings: "Because of our health, I had to cash in my 401(k) for medical expenses at a very early age."

Financial planners told BI that people should analyze the value of their last-resort funding sources, like homes or life-insurance policies, so they know the total of their assets in a costly emergency. Ward said a healthy emergency fund for young people should include enough to cover three to six months' worth of expenses. As people age, they should allocate more: Retirees should have one to two years' worth of income, Ward said.

Sudden healthcare costs can drain emergency funds. Williams advised that people — whether they're young or heading into retirement — research their insurance options so they can reduce out-of-pocket costs.

Doug Ornstein, a director of wealth management at TIAA, argued that people paying high out-of-pocket healthcare costs in retirement "probably would have to live really bare-bones instead of being able to leave their kids some money or be able to do some trips and travel."

Benefits counselors can also help people determine the government aid they qualify for — the money may help them conserve savings and cover bills. The National Council on Aging estimates that up to 9 million older Americans are eligible for government assistance but not enrolled.

Ayoola said that benefits like SNAP or Medicaid could help lower-income people save money over time. "I would tell them to look around for as many government resources as possible to supplement their income," Ayoola said.

Are you an older American with any life regrets that you would be comfortable sharing with a reporter? Please fill out this quick form.

• Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy pressured Republicans to scrap their bill to keep the government funded.
• The US government is now set to shut down early Saturday morning if Congress doesn't act.
• A shutdown would furlough thousands of federal workers, impacting programs many Americans rely on.

The US is once again on the brink of a government shutdown following intense pressure from President-elect Donald Trump and his newly created DOGE commission.

It would mean federal workers are temporarily out of work, and Americans could experience slowdowns at airport security and customer-service delays for programs like Social Security. During the last government shutdown under Trump, national parks shuttered and flights were delayed or rerouted because of limited transportation staffing.

The possibility of a shutdown starting at 12:01 a.m. Saturday comes after the House of Representatives seemed poised this week to approve a continuing resolution to keep the government funded through March. However, following intense criticism on social media from Trump and the leaders of his new Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, House Republicans scrapped the bill.

They took issue with the inclusion of a range of items in the bill that they said were not relevant to government funding, including pandemic preparedness and a pay raise for lawmakers.

Ramaswamy posted on X on Wednesday morning that the bill is "full of excessive spending, special interest giveaways & pork barrel politics."

Musk also wrote on X on Wednesday that a government shutdown is "infinitely better than passing a horrible bill."

Trump and his vice president-elect, JD Vance, released a joint statement Wednesday saying the resolution would "give Congress a pay increase while many Americans are struggling this Christmas."

Now, Congress must find a new funding solution in just over 24 hours, leaving Americans on the brink of the first government shutdown since 2018. Here's what that could mean.

What happens in a government shutdown

Every federal agency is required to prepare for a government shutdown by creating contingency plans to submit to the Office of Management and Budget. Each agency outlines how it will structure its workforce in a shutdown, including how many workers it will furlough and for how long.

This means federal workers would be affected first, with many finding themselves temporarily out of work. The longer the shutdown lasts, the more severe the consequences for Americans would be, but if federal workers are furloughed, agencies will be strained to carry out their usual daily functions.

For example, the Social Security Administration's latest contingency plan said it expects to furlough 8,103 of its 59,000 employees at the start of a shutdown. This means that while Social Security payments would still continue to reach Americans, customer service would be limited for beneficiaries dealing with payment issues.

During a government shutdown, active-duty military service members would remain on duty but may go unpaid until funding is restored. The Department of Education's latest contingency plan, from 2023, said that it would have to pause most of its grantmaking activities during a shutdown, including its review of grant applications from local school districts.

The Department of Transportation's contingency plan in 2024 said that while facility service inspections and air-traffic-controller training would cease, essential services like air travel would continue. The Department of Homeland Security's most recent contingency plan said that the Transportation Security Administration would furlough over 2,000 workers, likely resulting in longer wait times for travelers at airports.

The US Postal Service, however, would not be affected by a shutdown because it's an independent agency.

Additionally, a 2023 brief from the progressive think tank Center for American Progress said that a number of federal programs "immediately cease" during federal shutdowns, including the processing of new small business loan applications, workplace safety inspections, NASA research programs, and federal loans to farmers.

The collapse of the previous deal means the clock is ticking for both parties to come to an agreement on avoiding a government shutdown before the weekend.

Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, criticized the recent government shutdown threats in a statement Wednesday.

"Triggering a damaging government shutdown would hurt families who are gathering to meet with their loved ones and endanger the basic services Americans from veterans to Social Security recipients rely on," she said. "A deal is a deal. Republicans should keep their word."

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) spending bill has just been release and it grants DJI a year's grace before it's potentially banned in the US, The Verge reported. It was expected that DJI and rival Autel could be banned by the end of 2024 because of the Countering CCP Drones Act provision. However, the bill gives DJI an extra year to prove to an "appropriate national security agency" that its products don't pose a national security risk in the US. 

Failing that, the bill authorizes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to place DJI's drones on its covered list for 2026, meaning retailers would no longer be able to import them. It also means that the products (including drones and cameras like the Osmo Pocket 3) would be prohibited from connecting to US networks, and their internal radios would no longer be authorized by the FCC. That would technically prohibit the use of DJI products already owned by consumers, though the US wouldn't likely stop consumers from doing so. 

In a reply on its Viewpoints blog, DJI said it's "good news" that the ban wasn't included in this year's budget. However, it pointed out that "drones manufactured in China are singled out for scrutiny and the legislation does not designate a specific agency to undertake the required study." The latter point could cause the company harm "simply because no agency chose to take on the work of studying our product," it wrote.

The main reason DJI is still alive is through the support of drone enthusiasts and content creators, along with law enforcement and search and rescue organizations. "In the event that a bill like this would go fully through and would potentially ban the use of Chinese drones for public safety, it'd be catastrophic for the public safety drone industry," said Law Enforcement Drone Association spokesperson Brendan Karr in a letter to Congress. 

However, US representatives believe they're a risk. "DJI drones pose the national security threat of TikTok, but with wings. This Chinese-controlled company cannot be allowed to continue to operate in the US," said Republican Representative Elise Stefanik. "These Chinese-manufactured drones allow for the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, to access data in a backdoor manner and ultimately surveil Americans," added Democratic Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi. 

• The Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest rate to between 4.25% and 4.5% on Wednesday.
• The central bank also projected two cuts next year instead of four, sending stocks tumbling.
• Here's how analysts, economists, and other experts reacted to the Fed decision and market reaction.

The Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest rate on Wednesday to a range of 4.25% to 4.5%, bringing its decline since mid-September to 100 basis points.

Wall Street usually celebrates rate cuts as lowering borrowing costs drives spending, investing, and hiring. Reducing rates also signals inflation is under control, and makes risk assets like stocks relatively more attractive by trimming yields on safer assets like Treasuries.

Yet stocks tanked because Fed officials projected two cuts next year, down from four previously. Fed Chair Jerome Powell also said the central bank expects to ease its monetary policy more slowly in the months ahead.

Here's a roundup of how analysts, economists, strategists, investors, and other experts reacted to the latest Fed decision in their morning research Thursday.

Matt Britzman, senior equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown

"US markets played the part of Scrooge on Wednesday, tumbling as the Federal Reserve's hawkish tone dampened holiday cheer.

Investors should see this as a healthy spot of profit-taking rather than an end to the party, after what's been a fantastic run for markets since the US election."

Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell

"Markets are normally good at reading the signs, but the sell-off on Wall Street last night would suggest investors had started on the Christmas sherry a bit early and were caught out by the Fed's announcement about where rates might go in 2025.

The 3% drop in the S&P 500 is a wake-up call that US markets are not a one-way ticket to the moon.

The fact futures prices are showing a rebound in the main US equities on Thursday would suggest we are not at the start of a full-blown market correction. Instead, it's more likely that investors are now sitting up and paying more attention to what could go wrong, rather than only focusing on the positives. That's long overdue and a healthy development."

David Rosenberg, founder and president of Rosenberg Research

"This is a Fed that really has no faith in its view at any time and is willingly reactive as opposed to proactive even though its actions affect the economy with long lags.

You would have thought that between the commentary and forecast changes that the world has changed dramatically since the jumbo rate cut just three months ago. It clearly does not take much to cause this Fed to swing its view around. I can guarantee that it will shift again."

Stephen Koopman, senior macro strategist at Rabobank

"'We had a year-end inflation forecast, and it's kind of fallen apart.'

Not exactly the confidence-inspiring line you'd expect from a Fed chair. But Jerome Powell's performance at yesterday's press conference wasn't his finest hour. In what might have been the most uncomfortable showing of his tenure, Powell ceded the stage to the hawks, visibly strained as he tried to sell a strategy he didn't fully appear to endorse.

Powell flagged inflation 'moving sideways' and 'higher uncertainty' around its trajectory. These admissions reveal a central bank increasingly unsure of its footing, with rates markets now expecting just one cut for 2025 (as we do), and with no real consensus on when that final cut would arrive."

Jamie Cox, managing partner for Harris Financial Group

"Markets have a really bad of habit of overreacting to Fed policy moves. The Fed didn't do or say anything that deviated from what the market expected — this seems more like, I'm leaving for Christmas break, so I'll sell and start up next year.

The good news is that this 10-day sell-off should lay the path for a Santa Rally leading into next week."

Chris Zaccarelli, chief investment officer for Northlight Asset Management

"Santa came early and dropped a 25-bps rate cut in the market's stocking but accompanied it with a note saying that there would be coal next year."

The market is forward-looking and ignored the good news of today's rate cut and instead focused on the paucity of rate cuts for next year."

Jochen Stanzl, chief market analyst at CMC Markets.

"What was heard last night from the Fed as an accompaniment to the interest rate cut is a showstopper for the stock market.

The Fed is sending a clear signal that it has almost completed the phase of interest rate cuts. The year 2025 will be a significant break in the Fed's rate-cutting cycle.

The Trump blessing could quickly turn into a curse. If the market expects yields to rise further, it is unlikely that the Fed will intervene against these forces. If inflation data continues to rise in January and February, then that could be it for the interest rate cuts."

Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist for LPL Financial

"While the Fed is taking all the heat for today's sell-off, a reality check from overbought conditions, deteriorating market breadth, and rising rates was arguably overdue.

Overall, today's FOMC meeting brought back some unwanted clouds of uncertainty over monetary policy next year. At a minimum, market expectations have shifted toward a shallower- and slower-than-anticipated rate-cutting cycle. Technically, the near-term risk remains to the upside for 10-year Treasury yields, creating a likely headwind for stocks."

Jean Boivin, head of the BlackRock Investment Institute

"The Fed has poured cold water on already dwindling market hopes for generous rate cuts in 2025.

Given the risk of resurging inflation from potential trade tariffs and a slowdown in immigration that has been cooling pressure in the labor market, market expectations of only two more cuts in 2025 now seem reasonable.

We expected this policy outcome, so it doesn't change our recently upgraded view on US equities. US stocks can still benefit from AI and other mega forces, from robust economic growth and from broad earnings growth — and we see them outperforming international peers in 2025."

Isaac Stell, investment manager at Wealth Club

"With an economy that's going gangbusters and an incoming president with a fiscally loose agenda, you wonder why the Fed felt it necessary to cut.

Is this to curry favor with the incoming administration or is there a bump in the road the Fed can see that the rest of us are missing."

Michael Brown, senior research strategist at Pepperstone

"The FOMC delivered about as hawkish a cut as they could muster up yesterday, and market participants were not particularly pleased about what they heard.

It was, though, a little perplexing to see such a violent market reaction to Powell's remarks, particularly considering how 'every man and his dog' had been expecting this sort of a pivot in the run up to the meeting.

It feels, though, as if markets have overreacted to Powell's message, and that we may have reached something of a hawkish extreme here

Consequently, I'd be a dip buyer of equities here, as strong earnings and economic growth should see the path of least resistance continuing to lead to the upside, offsetting the fading impact of the 'Fed Put.'"

• Companies use "stealth firing" to quietly reduce staff without public layoffs.
• It involves dismissing employees for minor offenses to avoid public backlash.
• This tactic can harm company culture, leading to low morale and potential legal issues.

Some companies are opting for a new tactic in slimming down employee numbers — "stealth firing."

Meta let go around two dozen staff in October for using their $25 meal credits to buy other items, including laundry detergent and acne pads, while EY fired many more for "cheating" and taking multiple training courses at once.

The Financial Times, which first reported the EY firings, referred to these instances of being dismissed for minor offenses as "stealth firing."

Joe Galvin, the chief research officer at the executive coaching platform Vistage, told Business Insider that this sneaky sacking is "a "covert behind-the-scenes activity" that "violates the principle of respect for the individual."

A corporation might think: "I'm trying to downsize a little bit without saying I'm downsizing a little bit," Galvin said.

"So you go through this process that does nothing but break trust."

Short-term gain for long-term problems

Stealth firing leads from an era of "quiet firing," where companies methodically made employees' roles increasingly uncomfortable and less appealing, such as implementing strict return-to-office mandates.

This trend, along with the quietly agreed-upon severance packages of "silent layoffs," is a tactic to avoid the optics of publicly cutting dozens of staff.

Cynthia Patterson, the founder of the HR consultancy firm PeopleOps.how, who has 20 years of experience in HR across tech, AI, healthcare, and retail industries, told BI that while quietly trimming headcounts in these ways may work in the short term, they can cause serious issues for a workplace.

"Any short-term outcome is offset by the negative cultural impact," Patterson said. "Employees are left second-guessing their own value and stability, creating an environment of anxiety and mistrust."

A lack of trust and stability can lead to low morale, reduced productivity, and a stressed-out workforce.

"This dynamic mirrors the patterns of toxic and/or abusive work cultures, where fear and uncertainty are used — intentionally or not — as tools for behavioral control," Patterson said.

A shift in power

People are also perceptive, and employees who see their colleagues be shown the door for minor indiscretions will only make them wary and dissatisfied.

Patterson told BI companies who push people out in arbitrary ways are mistakenly viewing avoidance as kindness.

"Employee performance management is part of running a business," she said. "And it can't be skipped because it feels uncomfortable or inconvenient to the employer."

Stealth firing, Patterson said, simply exposes a company's inability or unwillingness to have honest, necessary conversations about performance — and "signals to employees that the organization doesn't have integrity."

Galvin told BI that companies willfully harming their reputations in this way may find they are the ones suffering and bleeding talent if an era of revenge quitting hits in 2025.

"The signs are pointing up toward a really strong 2025 — our community is energized, hiring's going back up again, investments are going up, expectations for profits and revenues are up," he said. "The power shifting."

Weigh up your options

It's always a smaller world than you think when it comes to work and looking for your next job, Ciara Harrington, the chief people officer of the leadership training platform Skillsoft, told BI.

"It's in the interest of everybody to keep good relationships," she said. "I don't think anybody really wants to leave a company on bad terms."

Sometimes, companies have to let their staff go, and the best thing for everyone is to do so with respect and honesty. That way, while the news isn't what the employees hope for, they still maintain a level of respect for the company.

The alternative is that employees post on public platforms such as LinkedIn, TikTok, Reddit, and job review sites about their negative experiences, such as how they felt undervalued and lied to.

Patterson said these stories could reach future employees, customers, investors, and even employment lawyers, opening up companies to potential legal disputes.

"Strong companies know their employees are human beings and deserve to be treated as such," Patterson said.

Galvin told BI that if there are signs that your company is looking to stealth fire you, it's time to start weighing your options.

Even if your employer isn't planning on firing you, if their communication is poor, and you feel unsafe, it's best to get out anyway.

"In the absence of a story, we create one," Galvin said. "If you sense that's happening to you, you either have the direct conversation with your manager or start looking for your next job."