How Big Banks, Ranchers and Unions Found a Common Foe in Biden Regulators
A huge lobbying effort aims to kill an arcane regulation called Basel Endgame III This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] When a member of Congress loses re-election and is trying to figure out what turned voters away, their position on an arcane bank regulation doesn’t usually come up. But a deep-pocketed lobbying effort is working overtime to make a handful of powerful lawmakers fear such a scenario could be their future. Stranger still, the campaign may be working, as an unlikely and uneasy coalition is coming together on the Hill to shut down an effort to require big banks hold more cash to ensure the country avoids another Too Big to Fail moment. It’s a battle that’s pitting liberal stalwarts like Sen. Elizabeth Warren against Wall Street-minded Democrats, rural state lawmakers, civil rights leaders, and consumer groups. And it’s why NFL fans in a few targeted markets saw TV ads talking about something known among financial insiders as Basel III Endgame. “Families, seniors, farmers, and small businesses are already struggling to make ends meet,” says one such ad. “Washington needs to scrap Basel III Endgame and start over.” The core of this expensive and esoteric dogfight comes down to this: should some banks have to keep more cash reserves to ward off insolvency? After three banks failed last year, interest in making sure the surviving institutions could weather unexpected challenges rose, leading to a revisiting of a framework published back in 2010 in response to the 2008 financial crisis. (It’s worth noting that the Basel III Endgame would not have saved any of these institutions but still serves as a good bump up in the headline hierarchy.) The ideas have been around since Congress passed the Dodd-Frank financial reforms of 2010, but the implementation of them were slow-walked at first then delayed because of the Covid-19 pandemic. As expected, banks are almost universally opposed to the tighter controls. But the weariness extends beyond Wall Street. Of the 356 substantive comment letters sent to regulators, 347 of them were negative. And, of those naysayers, almost 9-in-10 came from voices outside of the banking sector, according to an analysis from a law firm keeping close tabs on the proposal. A lot of the opposition—and the bulk of the public messaging powering it through a campaign-styled effort—notes that increased cash reserves means less money available for loans to small businesses and homebuyers. Essentially, keeping cash parked in bank vaults means it’s going to be tougher and more expensive to buy a new tractor for the farm or send investment into green-energy projects. That dynamic has made internal politics tricky for Democrats, and the banking industry has been hardly circumspect about playing off these tensions heading into an election year when five Democratic seats on the Senate Banking Committee—including the chair—are in cycle. On the other side, with a paltry nine letters, is the argument that reducing risk would lead to more lending because there would be fewer threats to institutions. But it’s worth noting that among those signing onto that pitch is Sen. Sherrod Brown, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee. Rep. Maxine Waters, a California Democrat and the former chair of the Financial Services Committee, also has backed the requirements, arguing that opposition to them only stands to enrich bank execs. And it’s not even all banks. The rule would apply to financial institutions with more than $100 billion in collective assets, and smaller ones that specialize in trading assets. Community banks would be exempt, and the rule wouldn’t kick in until July 2028—the last year of the next presidential term. But that position isn’t exactly a popular one, at least in the record so far. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell—an Obama, Trump, and Biden appointee—has testified to Congress that he has seen the arguments that tilt overwhelmingly against the current proposals and is open to changing them to build a better coalition. That sentiment has met welcome audiences along Wall Street, K Street, and Main Street alike. For its part, Treasury has remained intentionally on the sidelines of the debate. Secretary Janet Yellen—herself a former Federal Reserve chair—has refused to take a position in public. But among Democrats, the pressure campaign is clearly trending in a single direction thanks to a seven-figure political blitz from the nation’s largest banks, including ads that aired during NFL games and the State of the Union speech coverage. The ads are meant to build pressure, not just on Brown and his particularly tricky re-election in Ohio this year, but also on Banking panel members from farm states like Sens. Jon Tester of Montana, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Jackie Rosen of Nevada. At the same time, Banking panel member Bob Menendez, who is simultaneously under indictment and seeking another term, is seen as a reliable ally of Wall Street while his colleague on the committee, Warren of Massachusetts, could not be further from that ideological space. What comes to the fore in this debate is a rare schism among Democrats about what the party stands for. While most Democrats have rallied on commonalities like stronger worker protections and reproductive rights, this banking proposal is less clear cut. While hating on the greedy banks and bashing capitalism plays well with the animated and very-online progressive movement, the fact remains that so much of what powers the broader economy is reliant on that system that prizes easy and reliable access to capital. Take, for instance, the unlikely opponents who sent letters to the feds about their concerns—much of which was coached and coordinated behind the scenes. Black-owned business groups have joined the discussion, arguing that an increase in capital-holding needs will hurt communities of color starting or expanding their efforts. “The Black community has faced disproportionate challenges when seeking access to capital and resources, making it even more critical to take their unique circumstances into account when making policy decisions that affect their operations,” the head of the Grand Rapids, Mich., Area Black Businesses group wrote. In Virginia, Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney, a Democrat seen as a rising star in the party and a candidate for Governor next year, wrote in opposition with similar worries, especially if the nation were to face another pandemic that requires quick and broad access to loans. Elsewhere, the Columbus/Central Ohio Building and Construction Trades Council and its 18,000 unionized tradesmen are opposing the move because it could force infrastructure projects to scale back if the cost of borrowing cash rises. Similarly, the American Clean Power Association—made up of some of the biggest names in emerging tech and legacy energy suppliers alike—warned that the new requirements could cut investments by as much as 90% from some pockets of the market. The American Council on Renewable Energy also cited the reduced appeal of such investments with a potential cost of $20 billion in planned renewable tax-equity investments this year alone. And powerful agribusiness coalition that includes the cattlemen, pork farmers, grain producers, and dairy professionals all signed on against the effort: “We are very concerned that any contraction in the availability of clearing services will have a disproportionate impact on agricultural end-users that are far outside the major financial centers, especially smaller entities such as grain elevators and family farms. We urge you to modify the proposals so that they do not disincentivize banks from providing this important service to their customers.” The naysayers also includes the massive public-employee pension systems of California, Wisconsin, and Ohio. If all of the opposition were coming from the biggest banks, or even the banks plus major financial players like insurer Nationwide, the National Association of Realtors, and Hilton Hotels, Democrats might have had an easier time pushing past it; the underlying coalition of disparate groups, however, makes this a bit trickier, especially in an election year. Which is precisely the point. The proposed changes may be grounded in solid preventative policies, but the coalition afoot is going to be tough for regulators—especially those nominated by Democrats—to ignore. (They are, of course, officially immune to pressure, even from the Senators who confirmed them or the White House that nominated them, but political neophytes don’t regularly survive a grilling from Banking panel pros when billions are at stake for their biggest campaign donors. Their bosses are even more politically savvy.) Democrats studying their electoral maps this year, from state legislatures to President Joe Biden’s re-election, are not eager to see unions, retirees, Black entrepreneurs, farmers, the Green New Deal types, and Wall Street all lined up against one of the most under-appreciated changes under consideration right now. Leaders of the Democratic coalition have looked at the polls and knows they’re in trouble—and so do the powerful lobbying voices looking to derail anything that could ding their bosses’ bottom line. Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter......»»
How Much Should You Tip? Five People Share Their Habits
Five people share their tipping habits over the course of one week If you feel like you’re being asked to tip more often than ever, you’re not alone. A November report by the Pew Research Center found that 72% of Americans say that tipping is expected in more places today than it was five years ago. From self-service kiosks to fast casual restaurants to grab-and-go cafes, options to tip are everywhere. To better understand tipping culture, TIME asked five people to track their spending over the course of a week, and share what they tipped on and why. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Read More: Why We’re Spending So Much Money Gig workers and waitstaff often rely on tips to make a living. But Americans increasingly feel that tipping culture has gone too far. Another survey by consumer financial services company Bankrate found that around two in three U.S. adults have a negative view about tipping, and that 41% of U.S. adults think businesses should just pay their employees better, so that they don’t have to rely so heavily on tips. Tipping is thought to have its roots in ancient Rome, but in its modern form it’s believed to have originated in Tudor England. In the 19th century, when wealthy Americans returned from travels in Europe, they began tipping out of a desire to appear aristocratic. At first, the practice was strongly opposed by most diners, who argued that it was contrary to the American ideal of a society without stratification by social class. But tipping stuck, in part because business owners stood to benefit, as the practice shifts some of the burden of paying servers onto customers. Read More: ‘It’s the Legacy of Slavery’: Here’s the Troubling History Behind Tipping Practices in the U.S. From tipping on crushed ice to dinner at Chipotle, five consumers explore their relationship with tipping, and explain their tipping choices. Here’s what they said. (The following responses have been condensed and edited for clarity. The individuals featured asked to remain anonymous to protect their professional interests.) 26-year-old congressional staffer who makes $70,000 living in Washington, D.C. 60-year-old CEO of a consumer insights firm who makes over $300,000 living in Oviedo, Florida 30-year-old policy advisor who makes $120,000 living in Cambridge, Massachusetts 60-year-old consultant who makes $60,000 living in The Woodlands, Texas 27-year-old advocacy professional who makes $110,000 living in East Lansing, Michigan 26-year-old congressional staffer who makes $70,000 living in Washington, D.C. I try to tip fairly and well. I always tip reasonably at restaurants where I’ve received table service, and often when buying things at a counter—in part because the iPads present tipping options and it feels rude to click “no tip.” I never, ever carry cash, so I typically won’t tip at a hotel or after experiencing other interpersonal kinds of service (I recently went on a boat tour and they had a tip jar at the end). I feel bad about this, but not bad enough to start carrying cash. Also, as a teenager I was an ice cream scooper in a touristy destination and most of my income was through tips, so I will always tip high school kids doing the hard manual labor of being covered in dairy product. Day 1: I went to coffee near the office with a coworker to complain about work. I got a chai latte and a feta and mushroom pastry, which cost $10.22. I paid with Apple Pay. The payment tablet prompted me to add a tip—$1 was the lowest option. I went out to dinner with two coworkers to continue complaining about work. I paid the check—$138.60—with a credit card, and they Venmoed me their share. The tip was calculated for me on the receipt. I paid 20%, which was $23.10 and the middle of the three options offered (the others were 18% and 22%). Day 2: I took an Uber that cost $42.39. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4. I don’t intuitively think to tip Uber and Lyft drivers. I lived in San Francisco during the height of Uber’s VC funding, where traveling anywhere in the city was really cheap and tipping was not part of the app. I usually will tip drivers eventually, since I know that’s how they make much of their income, but I typically will do a few dollars, rather than the pre-suggested 20%, particularly on expensive rides. I ordered sushi takeout that cost $15.24. I paid with a credit card and tipped 20%, which was $2.79. We ordered takeout and paid at the counter. The receipt had boxes on it: 15%, 18%, and 20%. I checked 20% and told my friend about how I’m working on this tipping diary. She said “I would never tip for takeout, they didn’t serve us.” Day 3: For lunch, I had surprisingly good airport food from a counter serve place, which cost $16.02. I paid with Apple Pay and tipped $1.92, which was the lowest option of the pre-set amounts. I do think cashiers deserve to be tipped, and, again, it’s hard to click the “no tip” button. I took an Uber from the airport to my friend’s house, which cost $38.59. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4. Do people tip on Ubers? Am I being cheap here? Day 4: I got two coffees that cost $8.85 in total. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1.59, which was 18%. This was a coffee shop at a convenience store, but I practiced coffee shop etiquette and tipped. Lunch cost $16.81. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $3.03, which was 18% and the middle option on the tablet. Then, I got shaved ice that cost $9.11. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1, which was the cheapest of the pre-selected options. Later, I got cookies and pie that cost $14.41. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $2.16, which was 15%. In retrospect, I feel a little silly tipping for this—we grabbed a piece of pie out of a fridge and a package of cookies off a shelf and brought them to the counter to pay. Day 5: I bought coffees—they cost $12.42. I paid with my phone and tipped $1.86 (15%—the middle option). Later on, I got post-drinks pizza that cost $7.33. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1.32 (18%). This was actually the worst pizza I’ve ever had in my life. Day 6: I got udon soup for dinner that cost $22.05. I ordered online and there was not an option to tip on this transaction! Later, I bought shaved ice for $7.55. I paid with Apple Pay and tipped $1.36, which was 18%. This wasn’t actually very good shaved ice. Day 7: I got sushi takeout for dinner that cost $15.56. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $3.11, which was 20%. This was a counter-service situation, but I could see the workers behind the counter making the rolls themselves to order! I took a Lyft to the airport that cost $32.82. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4.92. This Lyft driver was particularly friendly and delightful, so I tipped more than I typically would. I got airport mac and cheese that cost $13.72. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $2.06, which was the lowest option of the pre-set amounts. After my flight, I took another Lyft that cost $10.99. I paid with a credit card saved to the app but I didn’t mean to not tip! I must have clicked out of the app without doing so. I don’t see a way to retroactively add a tip. Total in tips at the end of the week: $59.22 60-year-old CEO of a consumer insights firm who makes over $300,000 living in Oviedo, Florida I generally tip for service when the staff has done some “work,” like at a sit down restaurant or at a hairdresser where a personal service was provided. I’ll generally tip 15%-25% depending on the quality of the overall experience as well as the personal attention provided by the staff. Recognizing that servers in restaurants rely on their tips to make up for a below-market wage, I’ll tend to go on the higher side provided they show interest in earning it, with the minimum being 15%.I don’t like to tip in situations where there isn’t an extra element of service, like at a fast food place or, my pet peeve, at my dermatologist! I’ve noticed more institutions asking for a “tip” to be added to the bill with options starting at 18%. I don’t believe I should be tipping someone that is paid to do the job they are doing and the job is “put that pastry into a box and give it to the customer.” Also, I’m never quite sure who that tip goes to, so that is another reason for me not to tip. My general view is pay your staff a fair wage and then charge me accordingly. Don’t ask me to subsidize their wages or, worse, add to your bottom line by shaming me into a tip. Day 1: I got dinner at a local taco joint. It cost $43.23. I paid with a card and tipped $6.77 to take it up to $50. I generally tip 15% and round things off—it’s easier for me when reviewing charges on the back end. Day 2: N/A Day 3: I got carry-out baked goods from a local bakery. I paid cash for the goods ($11.60) then put $2 in the tip jar. They did a great job explaining how the two items compared and packed them in a box really well. They were very pleasant and polite. I generally would just have tipped $1. Day 4: I bought carry-out Indian food for $78.43, which I paid with a card. I don’t feel like carry-out in a dine-in restaurant warrants a tip. There is no element of service that I experience. I’ll occasionally tip 10% if the option is there on the screen to tap, but these guys gave 25%, 22%, and 18% along with “other.” The ridiculousness of thinking I’ll give a tip when their staff has to do zero work and making that above the norm annoyed me. Day 5: N/A Day 6: N/A Day 7: N/A Total in tips at the end of the week: $8.77 30-year-old policy advisor who makes $120,000 living in Cambridge, Massachusetts I’ll always tip in situations in which it’s clear it’s expected of me. I’ll also tip if I pay after receiving a service, and I thought it was good. I’m more likely to tip if I like the employee(s) I’m dealing with or like and/or frequent the establishment. Day 1: I went to Chipotle for a chicken burrito bowl with a fountain soda, which cost $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. I go here for lunch at least once a week. The staff were friendly today. They did give me a scoop of mild salsa when I asked only for the spicy, but I wasn’t going to tip anyway. I just don’t get the sense that I’m expected to at fast casual places like that. Day 2: I went back to the same Chipotle as before and got another chicken burrito bowl with a fountain soda for $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 3: I went back to the same Chipotle again and got a steak burrito bowl with a fountain soda for $18.03. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 4: I got coffee and a breakfast sandwich from my locally owned coffee shop for $9.76. The employees know me by name there so I paid with a card and tipped $1.95. I love this coffee shop—I go there regularly, and I feel it’s expected to tip at coffee shops. For lunch, I went back to the same Chipotle and got another chicken burrito bowl for $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. I took an Uber that cost $17.58. My driver was prompt and polite so I paid with a card, gave five stars, and tipped $1.76 which was 10%. I had dinner at a restaurant before going to see a play that cost $70.80. I paid with a card and tipped $14, which was 20%. I always tip 20% for meals with servers unless the service is especially bad. After the play I had drinks at a bar that cost $38.70. I paid with a card and tipped $7, which was 20%. I always tip 20% for drinks. I took another Uber home that cost $16.59. My driver was prompt and didn’t, like, say anything rude during the ride so I gave him five stars and a 10% tip ($1.66). Day 5: I got a black coffee from the local coffee shop I love for $3.80. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip this time. I wasn’t really thinking about it in the moment, but I think it was because I just got a black coffee and there’s not much that goes into preparing that. For breakfast, I went to a fast casual place I had never tried before and got another coffee and a breakfast sandwich for $9.85. I paid with a card and tipped $1.97, which was 15%. After that, I stopped on a long bike ride and got a salad for $14.99 from a locally owned place. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip. I like to tip at locally owned places, but I saw that the salads were pre-made when I was checking out, which I didn’t like. Honestly, it was also probably because I knew I’d never go back there. I went back to the same Chipotle for lunch, and got a steak burrito bowl for $18.03. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 6: I went back to my regular local coffee shop and got coffee and a breakfast sandwich for $14.03. I paid with a card and tipped $1.83 which was 15% as usual. Later, I got drinks at Topgolf (the indoor driving range) that cost $28.09. The service was fine, so I tipped 20% ($4.70) as per usual. Day 7: I got a turkey sandwich, water and chips for lunch at a ski lodge cafeteria for $15.41. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip since there was no service and the food wasn’t made to order. Later, I had dinner which included a sandwich and two beers and cost $33.81. Since there was table service, I paid with a card and tipped $5.60, which was 20%. Total in tips at the end of the week: $40.47 60-year-old consultant who makes $60,000 living in The Woodlands, Texas At places where I stand in a line to order—fast casual places—I tip 10%-15%. I tip 20% if I am getting good table service. I don’t tip for take out. Day 1: I went to Nando’s in Houston. I paid $23.98 with my card, and tipped $3.89. It was a quick lunch and there was no table service. Day 2: I had a casual dinner with friends at Palette Indian Kitchen. It cost $67.12 and I tipped $13.42—the table service was good. Day 3: I got a quick lunch back at the Kitchen. I paid $16.24 on card and tipped $2.44—no table service. Day 4: I went for dinner at Oporto, a local restaurant. I paid $390.50 on my card and tipped $78.10—it was my treat. We were a party of eight so the tip was automatic. I did not mind paying the 20% since the service was good. Day 5: N/A Day 6: N/A Day 7: N/A Total in tips at the end of the week: $97.85 27-year-old advocacy professional who makes $110,000 living in East Lansing, Michigan People deserve to be paid for their work. I used to tip 20% on basically everything, back when you would only be asked to tip in a small number of places. I still tip 20% for any sit down meal service, bartender, rideshare, and delivery, but now I don’t tip for takeout, or checking out at coffee shops unless there’s like a specific reason to. I also believe that the wage should be on the establishment, not the customers, and I would much rather pay a bit extra for the base price, and know that every staffer is paid a consistent or fair rate, than having tipping allowing businesses to skirt paying their people. I know this is different for servers specifically, who make more on average, but tipping has extended far beyond servers at this point. Day 1: I got dinner from Chipotle, which cost $9. The woman working was nice, and the guy in front of me was rude to her, so I paid with a card and left a $2 tip. She was also generous with portions, which deserves a tip at Chipotle. I also picked up takeout sushi for my wife for $26. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip—I just don’t see a reason to tip on takeout. Day 2: I went to a local taco restaurant for lunch and paid $18.99. Since it was a sit-down restaurant, I paid with a card and tipped $5.01, which was close to 20%. I added an extra cent because whole numbers make my brain feel good. I picked up Pad Thai takeout for my wife. It cost $10.50, I paid with a card and did not leave a tip since it was takeout. I went to CVS and bought masks for a man outside the store for $15.89. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. There was a donation screen, but since I was quite literally buying something for a random man on the street, I felt like I didn’t need to add a donation on top of that. Day 3: I bought movie tickets, popcorn, and a drink for $39.96. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip when prompted. I don’t feel I need to tip in situations like cafeteria-style or movie theaters. After the movie, I went to a bar and had drinks that cost $12.44. Since there was a bartender, I paid with a card and tipped $3, which was around 20%. Sometimes I tip based on how many drinks I’ve ordered rather than a flat percentage. I’ll do a dollar a drink or something, but this time I just tipped doing quick math, which was around 20%. Day 4: I went for lunch at a Chipotle-style restaurant called Los Amigos Taqueria and got food that cost $12.57. The person working was nice so when the tablet prompted tip amounts of $1, $1.50 and $2, I went in the middle. I went out to dinner, which cost $68.90. Since it was full service, I paid with a card and calculated 20% on my phone which came out to $13.79. I think I literally did the calculations on my phone for this. I don’t have a strong reason for why I did this, but just did. Day 5: I got food from a cafeteria that cost $21.60. When I was asked to tip at checkout, I paid with a card but I did not leave a tip. I was actually a little taken back. I went to a cafeteria where I had to pick out my own food and was asked for a tip at checkout. It’s like if I were to go grocery shopping and then was asked for a tip from the cashier. Later, I went to a restaurant with 15 people and put it all on my card—it cost $664.20. The others Venmoed me later. The tablet prompted 18%, 20% and 25% so I hit 20% which was $132.84. Day 6: I went to breakfast at a cafe in Portland on the drive back to Brighton from a ski trip in Maine, and had food that cost $21.19. Since it was a sit-down cafe with a server, I paid with a card and tipped $5 which was close to 20%. I had to leave quickly so I tipped fast. Day 7: I bought a takeout salad that cost $16.48. Since it was takeout, I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Later, I went to a cafe in Brighton, where I was staying with a friend, and had food that cost $23.75. Since it was a sit-down with a server, I paid with a card and tipped $6.50 which was around 20% calculated quickly. Total in tips at the end of the week: $169.64.....»»
Crafts Retailer Joann Files for Bankruptcy
The pandemic was a brief bright spot for the company Fabric and crafts retailer Joann Inc. filed for bankruptcy, unable to sustain its debt load after a sales boom during pandemic lockdowns faded. The Hudson, Ohio-based chain will be delisted after the bankruptcy proceedings and be privately owned by “certain of its lenders and industry parties,” according to a company statement released as it filed a Chapter 11 petition in Delaware early Monday. The filing listed liabilities of $1 billion to $10 billion. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Joann’s lenders struck a restructuring deal to provide about $132 million in new financing that would help the company reduce debt by about $505 million, the firm said. The parties in the deal also agreed to a six-month extension of certain loans and credit facilities. The company’s shares dropped to an all-time low of about 18 cents on Monday. They shot as high as 42 cents during pre-market trading before retreating. Like many of its retail peers, Joann had been contending with changing consumer shopping habits and years of declining revenues. The pandemic was a brief bright spot for the company, as cooped-up consumers boosted spending on at-home activities like crafting. In an environment of relatively high interest rates and inflation, consumer discretionary companies have borne the brunt of the changing trend. They led all sectors in US corporate bankruptcy filings last year, which reached the highest since 2010, according to S&P Global. In Joann’s “pre-packaged” bankruptcy court filing — in which restructuring terms are largely settled with creditors — the company also listed assets worth $500 million to $1 billion. Craft yarn provider Spinrite Corp. was listed as its largest unsecured creditor. The company aims to complete the restructuring as early as next month. Joann stores — which total about 850 nationwide — and JOANN.com will continue to operate normally, according to the statement. “Customers, vendors, landlords, and other trade creditors will not see any disruption in services,” it said. “This agreement is a significant step forward in addressing Joann’s capital structure needs,” Scott Sekella, chief financial officer and co-lead of the interim office of the CEO, said in the statement. The retail chain cut its debt load in an out-of-court deal in 2020, but later struggled to contend with supply chain problems and inflation that led consumers to cut back on discretionary activities. Much of its debt load is also in floating rates, leaving the company saddled with higher interest costs in recent years. The case is JOANN Inc., 24-10418, US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware......»»
What to Do If You’ve Been Scammed
If you are scammed out of money, it's important to act quickly and inform the relevant authorities. When Ian Mitchell, a fraud specialist with 25 years’ experience, wanted to buy a car, he found himself browsing a familiar-looking auto website. But when he asked a seller if he could view one of the cars in person, “they came up with every excuse in the world [about] why I couldn’t see the vehicle,” Mitchell says. Mitchell realized that he was on a fake website, and he reported it to the company whose name was being misused as well as to local law enforcement. “I did my best to try to prevent them from abusing someone else,” he says. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Mitchell, who is co-founder of fraud services company Mission Omega and founder of crime prevention network The Knoble, did not part with any money. But many aren’t so lucky: consumers in the U.S. lost $10 billion to scams in 2023, according to the Federal Trade Commission. That’s a $1 billion increase on the year prior. Imposter scams—in which someone pretends to be a friend or relative who needs money, claims to be from your bank’s fraud department or says they are a technical support operative needing access to your computer—are the most common, according to the FTC. Read More: Why Gen Z Is Surprisingly Susceptible to Financial Scams Perpetrators focus on people’s vulnerabilities, Mitchell says. “Whether it’s a desire for love, or greed, or need, they prey on that.” Scams have also become more sophisticated, he adds. “You might get an email or a text that really looks legitimate, and it looks like it’s catered to you—because it is.” Been scammed? Here’s what to do Act immediately if you suspect you have sent money to a scammer, says Kimberly Palmer, a personal finance expert at financial resources site NerdWallet. “If you have shared any of your passwords, or information about your bank, change your passwords,” she says. “Contact your bank and tell them what happened because they’ll immediately put a hold on your account.” Next, report the scam to the FTC, Palmer says. You can do this via ReportFraud.ftc.gov. You should also report what happened to local law enforcement agencies and your state attorney general if you’ve sent money within the U.S. If you paid someone overseas, report the incident to the FBI, she advises. Read More: Why Crypto Scams Are Driving an Online Crime Boom — And How to Outsmart Them Palmer also recommends changing your bank account numbers, which your financial institution can help with. “It does take some effort on your part of course, because it means you have to update so much in your financial life, but it’s worth protecting your money.” Unfortunately, if you realize you’ve sent money directly from your bank account to a scammer, it can be very hard to recover the funds, according to Eva Velasquez, president and CEO of the Identity Theft Resource Center (ITRC), a non-profit that supports those who have been victim to scams. “If I wire money, that cash is gone. If I send this as a direct payment, a Zelle payment, a Venmo payment, that cash is gone,” Velasquez says. The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau’s Regulation E safeguards people from unauthorized electronic funds transfers from their bank accounts, but you won’t be covered if you’ve authorized a payment yourself. “There’s a lot of factors that go into the success of getting the money back and it’s not unheard of,” Velasquez says. “[But] the need for investigating where’s that money gone, far, far outweighs the resources that we have.” How to protect yourself from scams If someone contacts you claiming to be from an organization and asks for personal information or money, or sends an email or text asking you to click a link, check that they are who they claim to be, says Velasquez. Scammers can spoof email addresses and phone numbers to make it appear like they are legitimate. “Go to the source. If it’s your bank, hang up [and] call the number on the back of your card. If you have an online account, log in online and see if there’s any messages for you.” Scammers might already have personal information like your name and address, which they use to make you think they are genuine. “Don’t let that fool you,” Velasquez says. “Unfortunately, most of that information that they’re using is easily purchased on the dark web.” Read More: The Enduring Nightmare of Trafficked Scammers There are basic steps you can take to protect yourself, Palmer says. “You want to have really complex passwords on your accounts. And then you want to add two-step authentication to your financial accounts and even your social media accounts,” she says. She also warns against accessing online accounts while connected to public Wi-Fi because of the risk of having information stolen. When doing business with a company that’s new to you, such as a home builder or used car dealer, check whether it is accredited by the Better Business Bureau, Palmer says. The organization also has a Scam Tracker. It’s also good to talk about scams to friends and family, and not feel embarrassed if you’ve been taken in by one, says Mitchell. “We need to have these conversations so that the scammers don’t start from a little problem ballooning into [a situation] where they’re taking life savings.”.....»»
Banks Aren’t Doing Enough to Protect Customers From Scams
Financial scams have gotten more common and complex. Experts say it's time for banks to take more responsibility for preventing them. Venessa Dikousman thought she’d adequately checked to make sure the man calling her cell phone in November 2023 wasn’t a scammer. The man said he was a Wells Fargo representative, knew her name, and was calling from a number her phone identified as belonging to the company. Her sister even dialed the number while she was on the phone, to confirm it was Wells Fargo’s customer service line. The man on the phone was calling, he said, because Dikousman’s account had been compromised, and she needed to send $3,500 through the payment app Zelle to remedy the breach. She sent the man $1,000 before she realized she was being scammed. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] “Just imagine what they’re getting from even more vulnerable people,” says Dikousman, 33, a registered nurse who lives in Ceres, Calif. Dikousman immediately called Wells Fargo to file a report. But the bank initially refused to refund the $1,000 taken out of her account. Under federal regulations, financial institutions only have to compensate customers for “unauthorized” transactions, meaning money transfers that the consumers did not personally approve. If customers approve the transfer, banks do not have to reimburse them, even if the customer was tricked into making it. It wasn’t until TIME contacted Wells Fargo, four months after the scam occurred, that the bank refunded Dikousman the $1,000. But as scams get more sophisticated, it might be time to change the status quo. The line between authorized and unauthorized transactions is getting blurrier, and many experts and elected officials say it’s time for banks to take more responsibility to prevent scams. “I absolutely think the responsibility should be with the banks,” says Steve Weisman, who teaches white-collar crime at Bentley University and runs the website Scamicide.com. “There are plenty of red flags for false transactions, but banks say, ‘It’s not my problem.’” Read More: Why We’re Spending So Much Money Wells Fargo said in a statement to TIME that it has “taken significant action to combat scammers,” including education efforts and enhancing safeguards to protect customers. Zelle, which is run by Early Warning Services, a financial technology company owned by seven banks, including Wells Fargo, said in a statement that it has driven down fraud and scam rates through its prevention and mitigation efforts. Less than one tenth of one percent of transactions are reported as fraud or scams, Early Warning Services says. As of June 30, 2023, bank and credit card participants are required to reimburse consumers for certain imposter scams, the company said. Financial scams have proliferated since the beginning of the pandemic, when people were forced online and became more comfortable sending money digitally through banking services like Venmo and Zelle. Scammers followed them there, using advanced technology, including artificial intelligence, to reach as many people as possible. Customers lost nearly $8.8 billion to scams in 2022, according to the Federal Trade Commission, a 30% increase from the previous year. “Scams have always been around, but we’ve seen a monumental increase,” says Ian Mitchell, founder of The Knoble, an alliance of bankers, law enforcement officials, and regulators trying to fight crime. “It’s not the same as even four years ago.” Back then, it might have been relatively easy to spot a scam. You’d receive an email or text message telling you to send money to a strange email address or phone number. Often the instructions would be misspelled or have grammatical errors. Now, with the help of AI, scammers are getting much better at writing convincing messages. Read More: How to Reset Your Spending Mindset Among the most common types of scam is the one Dikousman fell victim to—the imposter scam, in which the culprit pretends to be someone they’re not in order to extract money from victims. These scammers can “spoof” phone numbers, as the perpetrator did in Dikousman’s case, and make it seem like they’re calling from your bank or are someone you know. (Dikousman never found out who had scammed her, or where her money went.) The sheer audacity of some scammers is astounding. In one case, a victim found a potential apartment to rent on apartments.com, toured an actual apartment, signed what he thought was an actual lease, and sent $2,000 through Zelle to the “landlord,” only to find out the whole thing was a scam, according to a lawsuit filed against his bank, Capital One. Some scammers have access to reams of targets’ personal information because of the frequency of data breaches in recent years. There were 3,205 publicly reported data breaches impacting around 353 million people in 2023, according to the Identity Theft Resource Center. That’s a 72% increase over the past high, in 2021. Armed with information like your address, where you were born, or even the last four digits of your Social Security number, scammers are fooling even the savviest targets. “It’s a myth to think you are somehow the only person who knows your Social Security number,” says Eva Velasquez, president and CEO of the Identity Theft Resource Center, which is calling on more businesses to change authentication processes so that stolen personal information is less valuable. Ryan Feldman says that a scammer’s knowledge of his personal information was what made him a victim. A man purporting to be from Wells Fargo called Feldman in December 2023 and claimed that someone had used his credit card to make a purchase at a store in Florida. It sounded plausible to Feldman, who had just returned from a trip to the state. The caller was able to recite Feldman’s address and the last four digits of his Wells Fargo card number, which convinced Feldman the man was an employee of the bank. The caller was asking for Feldman to share a pin number that had been sent to his phone—probably, Feldman thinks now, for the purpose of logging into Feldman’s Wells Fargo account. Feldman shared that pin, and then another, and then panicked when he couldn’t log onto his account while he was waiting on the phone. The scammers charged $25 to his account before Feldman was able to get through to the real Wells Fargo, which froze his accounts. “It just feels like everyone is susceptible to this type of thing,” says Feldman, 38, the owner of Hustler Casino Live, a livestream poker show. Read More: Why Gen Z Is Surprisingly Susceptible to Financial Scams Some scammers are even getting adept at using people’s voices, ripped from their social media accounts or voicemail boxes, to make loved ones think they’re in trouble. Gary Schildhorn, a Philadelphia attorney, says he received a call in February 2020 that appeared to be from his son Brett. His son was crying, and said he had been in a car accident and was in jail. He told his father to call a certain public defender, which Schildhorn did. The lawyer then gave Schildhorn what he said was the phone number for the local courthouse. Someone answered, confirmed to Schildhorn that his son was being held, and advised him to have the public defender post a lawyer’s bond of $9,000 with the court. Before Schildhorn sent any money, he was able to confirm that his son was safe, and that the scammers had set up a detailed plan to trick him into sending them money. It easily could have worked, he says. “There was no doubt that it was his voice on the phone—it was the exact cadence with which he speaks,” Schildhorn says. Still, until now, most banks have been able to avoid liability in part because of a 1978 law called the Electronic Funds Transfer Act. A part of that law, called Regulation E, holds that banks are not liable for transactions that were authorized by the customer. There are calls for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to clarify the scope of Regulation E. In October 2022, Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to the CFPB urging it to hold banks more accountable for fraud, even if transactions were authorized. Warren’s office completed a report on peer-to-peer platforms like Zelle, which found that banks weren’t repaying the majority of customers, even as fraudulent activity grew. “Zelle is increasingly becoming a tool of bad actors who use the platform to defraud consumers, while the big banks that own Zelle do little to stop them or provide recourse to their consumers,” the letter said. It’s not unprecedented for regulators to change what kind of protections they expect from banks. In the wake of the Great Recession, small businesses were losing money to fraudulent wire and ACH transactions because employees of those businesses were tricked into sending money to scammers, says Tracy Kitten, director of fraud and security at Javelin Strategy & Research. At first, these small businesses lost lawsuits trying to hold the banks accountable for these transactions, Kitten says. But then they tried another tactic: arguing that banks are required to have “reasonable” security measures in place to protect customers, and that the existing measures were deficient. As public opinion changed, courts eventually started to side with small businesses, forcing the banks to adopt more stringent protocols. “Until they were losing lawsuits and had to pay out, there was no reason for [the banks] to try and do anything to shore up the security gaps,” Kitten says. “And I think we see the same thing in peer-to-peer transactions.” Indeed, Zelle and banks like Wells Fargo, Citibank, and Capital One are facing a stream of lawsuits from customers who say the banks should be doing more to protect customers from fraud. At the very least, the lawsuits argue, banks should not be advertising Zelle and other peer-to-peer services as safe. On Jan. 30, New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Citibank, alleging that it has not deployed sufficient security measures to protect consumers’ financial accounts. Even if the customers lose the lawsuits, their stories could prompt more public pressure on the banks to take more action to protect customers. Of course, it’s difficult for banks to flag and stop transactions that the consumer has authorized, especially since consumers whose legitimate transactions are blocked may become frustrated enough to bank elsewhere. But the necessary technology exists, and so far, most banks aren’t deploying it, Kitten says. There are security features that can flag transactions being made at times that people don’t usually send money or unusual amounts of money being sent. There’s also technology that can detect some common behaviors of people getting scammed, like when people log into their bank accounts and call the bank’s customer service line at the same time. Some of this technology is expensive and cumbersome for banks to adopt, says Kitten. The biggest banks are often siloed into different departments, like online banking and call centers, and merging those for fraud protection would be difficult. “Until the fraud losses get high enough to justify the expense of updating the infrastructure, they’re not going to get the budget to make these adjustments,” she says. It doesn’t help that banks are financially struggling right now because of higher interest rates. But ultimately banks may need to make these upgrades to keep their customers. Venessa Dikousman has been a Wells Fargo customer since 2008, but says she is disgusted with the company, as well as with Zelle. The lesson she learned, she says, is not to trust anyone—including your bank. “I told everyone I know, ‘If you ever get a call from your bank,’” she says, “don’t take the call.” .....»»
Why Credit Card Debt Is So High Right Now
Inflation has helped drive credit card debt higher, but there are ways to start chipping away at your balance that feel manageable The American economy owes its status as the world’s largest to consumer spending. As we put a growing amount of what we buy onto credit cards, financial experts worry that the bill is about to come due, pointing to economic as well as psychological drivers behind our love for paying with plastic. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, borrowers loaded an additional $50 billion onto their credit card balances in the last three months of 2023, an increase of nearly 5% that brings the total to a record high of $1.13 trillion. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] The higher cost of everything from housing to high-tops to haircuts are a major culprit. Although inflation has moderated since it peaked in June 2022, Americans—particularly lower-income families—are relying more on credit cards to cope with the sticker shock. “They used credit card debt to supplement their incomes to maintain their purchasing power,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. A few years ago, low interest rates plus a host of pandemic-era programs—stimulus payments, enhanced food stamp benefits, pauses on student loan payments and eviction proceedings—made this new math work for families’ budgets. But those financial supports have been discontinued, and for borrowers who were barely treading water financially, these programs couldn’t have been eliminated at a worse time. To fight inflation, the Federal Reserve hiked its benchmark interest rate a total of 11 times between March 2022 and July 2023, raising it from around zero to a range of 5.25% and 5.5%. That rate influences a host of other borrowing costs, including those for credit cards, car loans and mortgages. Paying off credit card debt over time has become considerably more expensive for the roughly half of borrowers that revolve a balance from month to month, as opposed to paying off each month’s bill in full. “Families who turned to credit cards to fill in budget gaps now have higher interest payments,” Zandi says. According to Bankrate, the average interest rate on a new credit card is 20.74%, an all-time high in a data set that stretches back to 1985. “This is really a big fork in the road, just because these credit card rates are three to four times higher than what we see on most other financial products,” says Ted Rossman, credit card industry senior analyst at Bankrate. “Anyone who was already maxed with their credit card is going to see even higher debt repayment now that interest rates have gone up,” says Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, a nonprofit advocacy group. Our piling-on of credit card debt isn’t just a math problem, though. Behavioral economists and researchers who study at the crossroads of psychology and finance say there are less black-and-white factors at play, as well. Read More: How to Make a Budget in 6 Simple Steps Some suggest that the societal upheaval triggered by COVID-19 played a role in reshaping our collective impression of our finances. “The whole culture has shifted in terms of how we think about spending,” says Abigail Sussman, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, who studies psychological biases in financial decision-making. When Americans spent months—or years—not incurring the costs of commuting, vacations, dining out and other activities, those expectations gradually shifted. “People adjusted to having lower levels of expenses. People may have adjusted to having more slack in their budgets,” Sussman says. “I think it’s likely that people didn’t have to be tracking their budgets as carefully because they were not spending their budgets on so many levels.” In addition, technological advances like digital wallets and contactless payments make it easier than ever to buy on credit without even having to pull a card out of your wallet. These conveniences can obscure how much we’re spending even as our purchasing patterns have largely reverted to pre-pandemic norms, according to Sussman. “At the margin, that leads people to spend more, because it’s easy to spend without paying attention to the amount,” she says. Read More: How to Have a Low-Spend Month Looking ahead, economists and credit card industry experts predict that our national preference for plastic isn’t going to diminish anytime soon. How well American families will be able to manage this debt depends on how well the job market holds up and how long interest rates stay high, Rossman says. “This is really a big fork in the road, just because these credit card rates are three to four times higher than what we see on most other financial products.” The Consumer Federation of America’s Rust expresses concern that many families are in too deep to easily extricate themselves from their debts, pointing to higher delinquency rates as a trouble sign. “It’s a cascading scenario,” he warns. Zandi of Moody’s Analytics is cautiously optimistic. “The good news is card growth has slowed and lenders have tightened their underwriting,” he says. “There are some signs that things are starting to stabilize and level off.” How to rein it in If you’re staring down a mountain of credit card debt, there’s no shortage of advice for how to pay it off. Thanks to credit card regulatory reforms codified by the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009, card issuers are required to include in your credit card statements how long it will take—and how much you’ll pay in interest—if you make only the minimum payment each month. Paying more than the minimum each month will go a long way towards getting out from under your debt. Determine how much extra you can put towards your debt beyond those minimum payments, then figure out which method for deploying it will work best for you: Pay off the card with the highest interest rate first. Also referred to by personal finance pros as the “avalanche method,” the math behind this tactic is simple: The more you pay to service your debt, the less money you have for other needs—including paying off more debt. Put your extra cash towards the balance with the highest interest rate. After you eliminate that balance, take the money you allocated for that card’s monthly payment and put it towards the card with the next-highest interest rate. Repeat until your debt is in your rear-view mirror. Pay off the smallest debt first. Also dubbed the “snowball method” for tackling credit card debt, this strategy is a favorite of personal finance guru Dave Ramsey. After accounting for your minimum payments, put the extra cash you’ve earmarked for paying off debt towards the card with the smallest outstanding balance. When you’ve whittled that balance down to zero, take that monthly sum and put it towards your next-smallest debt, and continue doing so until your debt is paid off. Although this method isn’t as mathematically cost-effective as the “avalanche” approach above, some experts in financial psychology prefer it because eliminating debt can be a powerful motivator—which might be just what you need to stay on track and remain committed to your debt-payoff goal. “Repaying 100% of your bill is very satisfying,” Sussman says. “If you’re not able to repay your full bill, people lose motivation to pay as much as possible.”.....»»
An Expert on Trust Says We’re Thinking About It All Wrong
Botsman says we’re asking many of the wrong questions about trust and so we’re missing some of the solutions. It’s always tempting for journalists to search for threads that connect disparate news stories, and easy to overstate their significance. But it’s remarkable how much one such thread—declining trust in the institutions that once dominated public life—ties together so many of today’s major headlines, from our deeply polarized politics to the proliferation of crazy conspiracy theories. This decline, sometimes called a “crisis of trust” or a “trust deficit,” has of course become an increasingly common topic in newsrooms and think tanks and global conferences that conjure a world without trust and search for solutions. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] But Rachel Botsman, an author, teacher and Substacker who is considered one of the leading experts on the topic, argues we’re thinking about trust wrong. I met Botsman earlier this year at the World Economic Forum at Davos (theme: “Rebuilding Trust”). Because we’re asking many of the wrong questions about trust at places like Davos and elsewhere, she says, we’re missing some of the solutions. Below, condensed and edited for clarity, is our conversation about why that is, and how to fix it. We hear a lot that trust is in decline. But that’s not really your view, is it? It’s more that it’s in a state of redirection or fragmentation? Trust is like energy—it doesn’t get destroyed; it changes form. It’s not a question of whether you trust; it’s where you place your trust. In society today, trust is shifting from institutional trust to “distributed trust.” Trust used to flow upwards to leaders and experts, to referees and regulators. Networks, platforms and marketplaces change that flow sideways to peers, strangers and crowds, creating a dispersion of authority and fracturing of trust. A lack of acceptance that the trust dynamics have changed, I think, is a systemic problem. We’re trying to solve trust issues in the distributed world through an institutional mindset. And if I’m a leader of an institution or a company, then I can learn from that. Yes. It’s like, “Oh, my trust went over there. That’s where it’s gone.” That’s how they’re being influenced. “That’s where I’ve got to be.” You’ve said that crucial context is missing from a lot of conversations about trust. Talking in general terms about trust is not helpful because trust is a belief, and like all beliefs, it is highly subjective and contextual. Whenever we ask the question, “Do you trust fill in the blank?” we should follow with “to do what?” If you think about trust in AI in education versus trust in AI in healthcare, these are very different applications with different trust needs. Trusting these systems to do what? Talking about trust is problematic unless you get to the context. So how do you define trust? The way I define trust is “a confident relationship with the unknown.” The greater the unknown, the more uncertainty, the more trust that you need. This perspective runs counter to many social scientists who claim trust is knowing another person will do what is expected or knowing how things will turn out. But this has always struck me as odd: If you know the outcome or how things will end, why do you need trust? If you take AI, think of all the complexities and unknowns; you need a lot of trust. When most leaders talk about trust in new technologies, they are often talking about mitigating risk. They are focused on governance and controls, and guardrails and mitigating the unknown. And then of course there is the belief that you can increase trust through transparency. This is a big misconception. You can reduce the need for trust through transparency and through these risk controls. Or you can increase people’s confidence in the unknown. So if we want to increase trust in society, we have to do more than mitigate risks. Yes. I find it quite unsettling that when pressed for solutions, the default is often transparency. Let’s make the media transparent. Let’s make the algorithms more transparent. Let’s make the inner workings of government more transparent. But if that’s the way we head, we’ve kind of given up on trust. You’re actually lowering the need for trust. You’re saying, “This is how this thing works. You can be certain about the processes. Therefore, you don’t really need as much trust.” So what does your research say about the right way to build trust, in our institutions and in each other? Deep trust forms based on how people behave. Above all, I think, it comes from integrity. How do you realign the public’s belief and confidence that whatever this institution is is serving their best interests? It’s around changing our behavior rather than guardrails? You need both, don’t get me wrong. But if we’re talking about restoring trust, regulatory guardrails don’t always restore people’s confidence. People’s confidence comes more from a belief that you know what you’re doing–capability, and I know why you are doing it—–character. Put simply, it comes from not just doing things but doing the right things. So we need to have more discussion of solutions as a way of building confidence in the notion that we can get from here to there? There is a crisis of confidence in our society that the people in charge actually know how to get out of this mess and chaos. I often hear, “Oh, we need to lower expectations of what we think we’re going to get from political leaders.” I find it incredibly disconcerting that we’ve come to accept things unimaginable even five years ago regarding the erosion of trust. We’ve entered an age of information and content where it’s no longer “trust, but verify” but “verify, then trust.” You recently wrote that, “Owning our uncertainty makes us kinder, more creative, and more alive.” It seems to me we are seeing some of this in a positive way around AI, at least as compared to social media, do you agree? An acknowledgement that there’s plenty we don’t know. What I’m struck by is what I would describe as a push-pull between fear of joining in and fear of missing out. Business leaders need to innovate with AI because they’re scared of being left behind. At the same time, there is extreme caution not to move too fast because they understand the unintended consequences if they get it wrong. The fear, the hesitation, is good for trust. It creates a trust pause, where people slow down and think, “How do I trust these systems?” For example, I trust it for input and information, but I don’t trust it yet to make decisions about my health or money. I was impressed, I have to say, by the humility of Sam Altman when he said, the sign above his desk says “no one knows what happens next.” The next generation of AI leaders may have the humility to admit they don’t know. They may program that into the technology so that it says, “I don’t know the factual answer to that. Ask a human being or find another source.” Is there an example in your research or work of an institution or a field that has turned it around, that has rebuilt trust? It always comes down to an individual. It’s often a very low-tech intervention. Take schools. Sometimes, kids have a very low propensity to trust others. They’ve never experienced being trusted, so they don’t know or find it incredibly difficult to trust others. And then you have these remarkable teachers who slowly earn their trust over time. One of the things that always strikes me is that the teachers never go into these situations with the assumption that the children will give their trust back. They assume these kids will not trust them. Earning trust is through small gestures over time. It’s how you treat people day in, day out. It’s how you make them feel, especially on tough days. Can you scale that type of human trust through technology? Do we want to? We’ll see. Does that make you a pessimist? Or a realist. Or a humanist! I’m hopeful in many ways because AI will make us think more carefully about human connection and why humanness will become a differentiator......»»
How to Realistically Save for Retirement
Saving for retirement may seem daunting, but understanding the options and setting up automatic transfers can make the process easier. Saving for retirement can be tricky, but using tools to make automatic and regular transfers can make the process easier. Transfering a set amount of money once or twice a month from your checking account into a 401(k) plan or Individual Retirement Account (IRA) simplifies the task and will result in more disciplined saving habits. “Automate the savings through payroll deduction into your workplace plan and automatic draft from your bank account into an IRA,” says Greg McBride, chief financial analyst of Bankrate, a New York-based financial data company. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] How much money you need to retire Figuring out how much money you will need in the future when you’re just starting out in your career can be challenging since you don’t know what kind of lifestyle you want, such as whether you want to own a home or where you will end up living. “If you’re in your 20s, 30s, or 40s, don’t waste your time trying to figure out how much you need to save for retirement, he says. “You’re not going to successfully pin down the expenses, lifestyle, and cost-of-living you’ll have 30, 40, or 50 years from now and the rate of inflation between now and then.” Instead of determining the total amount, focus on saving a good chunk of your salary and aim for saving 10% to 15% of your income for retirement “by investing for the long haul in a well-diversified, equity-heavy portfolio and minimizing investment costs,” McBride advises. Other experts such as Henry Yoshida, CEO of Rocket Dollar, an Austin, Texas-based self-directed individual retirement account provider, recommend saving up to 20% of your earnings. “It’s more important that individuals understand the need to save a portion of their earnings in tax efficient retirement accounts to accumulate a nest egg,” he said. “If you haven’t started doing this yet, just start with any percentage you can, even 1% and gradually increase this over time to the target 10% to 20%.” What a 401(k) does for retirement One way to ramp up your retirement savings is to contribute to a workplace retirement savings plan like a 401(k). This enables you to save on a tax-advantaged basis via a payroll deduction with your employer kicking in some money too, McBride says. “You essentially have both your employer and the government helping you save for retirement and it happens before you roll out of bed on payday morning.” Some employers will match what you sock away in a 401(k) plan up to a certain percentage—such as 3%.. A rule of thumb to follow is to save up to the maximum employer match, then contribute to the upper limit for a Roth IRA, Yoshida says. The contributions you make to a 401(k) plan are beneficial because they allow you to invest pre-tax dollars, which reduces your current income tax bill and allows you to save more money, says Robert Johnson, a professor at Heider College of Business, Creighton University. Another advantage is that the money saved in a 401(k) plan grows tax free. “You benefit from compounding within the plan and pay no taxes on the increase in value while the funds are in the plan,” he says. When to withdraw from your 401(k) Taking withdrawals from a 401(k) plan should be delayed until you reach retirement age—the IRS deems that to be 59.5 years or older. Otherwise, Uncle Sam penalizes you for using the money too early, since it was set up for you to use once you retire. “Resist the urge to use your retirement savings as a piggy bank for unplanned expenses or in the event of a job loss—the taxes and penalties mean you may only get 55 to 80 cents in hand for every dollar withdrawn,” McBride says. “Even in situations where you’re permitted to make withdrawals without penalty, such as taking money from your IRA for the downpayment on your first home, doesn’t mean you should. Early withdrawals are a permanent setback to your retirement planning by robbing yourself of valuable compounding.” The money socked away in a 401(k) plan or IRA is a nest egg for your retirement and is not a rainy day fund, Johnson adds. Dipping into it too early could leave you at risk when you really need it. “Too often people view their 401(k) or IRA as a fund that can be accessed prior to retirement for emergencies,” he says. “They rationalize that it is ‘my money’ and either make an early withdrawal from the account or borrow against the balance. When it comes time to retire and you haven’t amassed enough money in your retirement accounts you are effectively out of options other than working longer or lowering your lifestyle.” Why you should have an IRA As job hopping becomes more commonplace, Millennials and Gen Zers should roll over their 401(k) plans into an IRA to consolidate and lower the expenses they pay for their retirement plans, since each plan charges a fee. At least 22% of workers told Pew Research in 2022 that they are likely to start looking for a different job during the next six months. An IRA also allows you to save more money for the future, especially if you already max out your 401(k) contribution of $23,000 in 2024. The contribution limit in 2024 for an IRA is $7,000 for people who are 50 and younger. “An IRA is a great way to supplement your workplace retirement savings with money you completely control,” says McBride. “When leaving an employer, it is often a good idea to roll your previous employer’s 401(k) into another tax-advantaged retirement plan like an IRA, especially if your new employer’s plan isn’t an option.” Younger workers should only contribute up to the match limit from an employer in a 401(k) plan, Yoshida says. That’s because some of these 401(k) plans have high fees for maintaining the account and the expense ratios for mutual funds are also costly. “After this you should invest in low cost, broad market index funds in a Roth IRA,” he says. “Doing both of these will get the majority of Americans to the critical 10% to 20% savings number.” IRAs provide additional tax advantages, either tax-deferred growth for traditional IRAs or tax-free withdrawals for Roth IRAs, says Daren Blonski, co-founder and managing principal of Sonoma Wealth Advisors in California. “This tax flexibility can be advantageous in retirement planning, particularly if you anticipate changes in your tax bracket over time,” he says. “Additionally, IRAs offer a broader range of investment options compared to many employer-sponsored 401(k) plans, empowering you to customize your investment strategy to align with your specific financial goals and risk tolerance.”.....»»
What We Know So Far About Meghan Markle’s New Venture, American Riviera Orchard
Meghan Markle launched a new website and Instagram account for an upcoming lifestyle company called American Riviera Orchard Meghan Markle launched a new website and Instagram account for an upcoming lifestyle company called American Riviera Orchard on Thursday. American Riviera Orchard is likely a reference to Santa Barbara, Calif., where Markle lives with her husband, Prince Harry. The city, which sits some 100 miles northwest of Los Angeles, has been called the “American Riviera” for over a century, according to Travel & Leisure. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Markle’s new company will sell tableware, cookbooks, dinnerware, jellies, jams, and more, according to the company’s trademark application. The Duchess of Sussex previously had her own lifestyle blog known as The Tig, named after Tignanello wine. The Tig shut down in 2017—three years after its launch and seven months before her engagement. American Riviera Orchard’s instagram account already has more than 80,000 followers as of Thursday afternoon, just a few hours after launching. “By Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. Established 2024,” the page’s bio reads. The account’s first Instagram story features a video of Markle cooking in a kitchen while Nancy Wilson’s “I Wish You Love” plays. The website prompts people to enter their email to join a waitlist. Markle and her husband have been quiet on social media since stepping back as working royals and have not posted on their @Sussex Royal account since March 2020. The couple share updates on their personal website, which launched in February 2024. .....»»
McDonald’s Crashed? Outages Reported at the Fast-Food Chain’s Outlets Around the World
Operations at the fast-food chain’s outlets across Asia and beyond have been affected by an IT system failure. Operations at the global fast-food chain McDonald’s have slowed Friday, as widespread IT system outages hit stores in multiple countries across the Asia-Pacific region and beyond, leaving staff unable to process electronic orders and hungry customers frustrated. McDonald’s Japan posted on X on Friday afternoon local time that they were experiencing a “system failure” and in another post said that “many stores nationwide are temporarily closed.” [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Screens of self-ordering kiosks as well as order terminals used by employees were either black or displaying “out of service” messages, according to photos taken in restaurants in Singapore and Australia, while customers have complained that they have also been unable to order on the McDonald’s app. Australian media reported that some stores have shut down entirely while others are only taking cash orders. In Singapore and Japan, McDonald’s employees have been spotted accepting cash from customers and calculating orders on paper. “We are aware of a technology outage currently impacting our restaurants nationwide and are working to resolve this issue as soon as possible,” a spokesperson for McDonald’s Australia told media outlets. “We apologize for the inconvenience and thank customers for their patience.” “The issue is now being resolved,” McDonald’s Corporation, headquartered in the U.S., said in a statement to TIME. “Notably, the issue is not related to a cybersecurity event,” it noted, as rumors have swirled on social media of the company being targeted by hackers. McDonald’s did not clarify at the time the known extent of the outage nor details of how or when it would be fully fixed. Hours after this story was published, McDonald’s publicly shared a statement that was sent to global employees, franchisees, and development licensees and attributed to Global Chief Information Officer Brian Rice, explaining that the “global technology system outage” was caused “by a third-party provider during a configuration change” and “was quickly identified and corrected.” “Many markets are back online,” the statement continued, “and the rest are in the process of coming back online. We are closely working with those markets that are still experiencing issues.” Stores in New Zealand had also been affected, with a spokesperson telling local media that they’re “experiencing an IT issue that’s impacting their ability to process orders.” McDonald’s Hong Kong posted on Facebook that mobile orders and self-ordering kiosks are not working due to “computer system failure,” urging customers to order directly with staff at the restaurant. The McDonald’s Taiwan website said that its delivery service has been suspended for “system maintenance.” The outage also apparently affected the fast-food chain’s stores in China. On Weibo, the phrase “McDonald’s crashed” is among the top trending topics, with a total of over 48 million views and counting on posts related to the issue. On social media and Downdetector, a platform where users can report and view outages in real time, people flagged similar technical problems with orders in Austria, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Since its establishment in 1940 in California, McDonald’s has grown to become one of the world’s largest fast-food chains, with around 40,000 stores globally, including more than 12,000 across Asia and more than 1,000 in Australia. “Reliability and stability of our technology are a priority, and I know how frustrating it can be when there are outages” the statement from Rice, McDonald’s chief information officer, said. “What happened today has been an exception to the norm, and we are working with absolute urgency to resolve it.”.....»»
Why a 60/30/10 Budget Could Be the New 50/30/20
If the 50/30/20 budget plan popularized by Elizabeth Warren feels impossible, try this instead. A money-management formula introduced nearly 20 years ago by Elizabeth Warren still has relevance, financial planners say—with a few tweaks. Back in 2006, Warren—now a Democratic Senator from Massachusetts, then a Harvard Law School professor—popularized the 50/30/20 rule, detailed in the book All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan, which Warren co-wrote with her daughter, Amelia Warren Tyagi. In this model, half of your income goes towards “needs” including your rent or mortgage, utilities, car payment and so on. An additional 30% goes towards “wants”—that is, discretionary purchases like vacation flights or “upgraded” expenses, such as springing for the ad-free streaming package. The remaining 20% is for socking away in an emergency fund or retirement account, or to pay down high-interest debt such as credit card balances. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] It sounds great in theory, but in an economy where housing costs alone can easily consume half a paycheck—particularly for young adults earning entry-level income—it can feel difficult, if not flat-out impossible. Financial advisers say molding this budget advice to today’s economy means embracing a certain degree of flexibility. “It’s important to have rules of thumb and structures that can help guide us and get things organized, but there aren’t any rules that are written in stone, and that’s important to know—that it’s never a concrete situation. It’s important to be flexible,” says Kevin L. Matthews II, founder of the financial education firm BuildingBread. Read More: 8 Reasons Your Credit Card Was Declined (And What To Do About It) 60 is the new 50—especially in an expensive city “For someone making good money in a reasonable cost of living area, that rule works fine,” says Elizabeth Pennington, a senior associate at the financial planning firm Fearless Finance. “Where it breaks is for most of my clients living in high cost-of-living areas.” For this reason, Pennington says she encourages clients to embrace the idea of the 50/30/20 formula without applying it as a mandate. “A rule of thumb is meant to be an entry into the conversation and less an end-all, be-all of what we’re trying to achieve,” she says. According to Moody’s Analytics, while incomes have climbed by 77% since 1999, rents have soared by 129%. Nationwide, average rents equal 30% of median income, and young adults in particular are feeling the financial squeeze of high housing costs. Survey results published in November 2022 by mortgage agency Freddie Mac found that about a third of adults age 25 and younger say they don’t ever expect to be able to afford to own a home. Read More: Is It Finally Time to Buy a House? If you still have decades ahead of you to save for retirement, it’s OK to cut yourself some slack on the 20% part of the model. If you’re a young adult, “60/30/10 is just fine,” says Michael Finke, professor of wealth management at the American College of Financial Services. “Then you can gradually, as you reach middle age, increase that savings rate.” Take five (years) “If you’re taking someone that’s just starting or living paycheck-to-paycheck, it can be unrealistic or overly drastic, especially as they’re beginning to really get a handle on their finances,” says Brian Walsh, head of advice and planning at digital bank SoFi. “This is probably one of the biggest challenges we come across when were working with young professionals.” Rather than trying to conform to the 50/30/20 model as soon as you graduate college, give yourself a five-year window to work up to your optimal savings level, Matthews suggests. By that point in your career, you’ll likely have enough work experience to obtain a higher-paying job, either by climbing the corporate ladder at your current employer or getting a new job entirely. People who establish good money habits in their early or mid-20s have a window of opportunity each time they get a raise or take a new job with a higher salary, Walsh adds. “What people decide to do when they get a raise or they get a bonus has a much bigger effect on their overall financial well-being,” he says. If you can maintain your current budget and lifestyle, or even increase your budget by half of your new income level, you can work up to that 20% goal without feeling deprived. Don’t cut these corners If you work for an employer that offers any kind of a match for retirement account contributions, prioritize your savings to ensure that you contribute at least enough to get it. “Make sure you get every single cent of the employer match. It’s a 100% return on your investment,” Finke says. Remember, those employer contributions count towards that savings percentage, so a 50% match on your 6% contribution would bring you within striking distance of that 10% savings goal. Likewise, paying off high-interest credit card debt and building an emergency fund should go to the top of every young adult’s to-do list, Pennington says. New credit card interest rates are at a record high of 20.74%, according to Bankrate.com, which means that even a small outstanding balance can quickly become a big drag on your finances. “Usually if there’s high interest debt, that’s the place we start,” she says. “If someone has debt and they don’t have enough extra money to pay towards the minimum, don’t have an emergency fund and have no way of building one, ending up with credit card debt can be a lot more dangerous.” And while it might sound counterintuitive, Matthews advises against trying to make the 50/30/20 model work for you by slashing the 30%—the part of your budget that goes towards discretionary purchases. “I never recommend taking that to zero because it’s just human nature—it’s like a crash diet. If you deprive yourself of everything, you’re going to overspend and put yourself in a much worse position,” he says. Read More: How to Reset Your Thinking Around Spending Money, According to Experts The bottom line, financial planners say, is that budget models can be helpful starting points, but they should reflect your personal financial priorities and be revisited as your financial situation changes over the years. The 50/30/20 formula works best when you can adhere to it well enough that the money habits it helps you instill become permanent. “The most important part is dealing with the emotional side of finances and making small, short-term changes that really add up,” Walsh says......»»
How to Have a Successful Low-Spend Month
Experts and participants weigh in on how to successfully have a 'low-spend month,' a viral trend on how to budget. Living in New York City, which has the highest cost of living in the United States, has left Hannah Yoo all too aware of how easily expenses can add up. “You step outside your house and you’ve already spent $200,” she says. “It’s crazy how quickly things can get out of control.” To better track her spending, Yoo, 26, decided to try out a “low-spend month”—a budgeting trend in which participants aim to spend only on essentials, like rent or car payments, while limiting or cutting out discretionary spending entirely. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Yoo is not alone in looking for new ways to save. Videos tagged with #lowspendmonth have received over 13.5 million views on TikTok. “The cost of living has been really tough for a lot of folks,” says Catherine Arnet-Valega, a wealth consultant at Green Bee Advisory. “People are paying attention to their finances more than they used to.” A low-spend month can give you the opportunity to pay off debt, save for a bigger purchase, or gain a better understanding of your monthly spending. “Fighting overconsumption and becoming more intentional with your spending is a muscle that you have to practice,” says Yoo, who did her first low-spend month last August. “As I’ve continued to do it, I’ve seen my mindset change.” Here are some tips for how to have a successful low-spend month. Set your intentions Before starting a low-spend month, it’s important to identify why you’re doing one. The reason can vary by person—maybe you’re hoping to pay down debt or save up for a new car— but setting your intentions will help you stick to your goal even when you’re tempted to stray. “There’s going to be times when it gets tough,” says Meg, who declined to give her last name because she worries people on social media will find out where she lives. As she did her first low-spend month in January in an effort to cut down on impulse purchases, “I always went back to the why, because I knew without that I wouldn’t be motivated to continue.” Read More: Why We’re Spending So Much Money Be mindful about purchases Next, take a hard look at your monthly budget—even if the prospect seems scary. “A lot of people don’t know what their normal monthly spending is,” says Sarah Paulson, a financial planner with Valkyrie Finance. Paulson recommends that, rather than cutting out all discretionary spending, you start the challenge by cutting back on one category you overspend on—like making coffee at home rather than buying it daily, or refraining from food delivery orders.”Maybe now you think Whole Foods is necessary for groceries, but it doesn’t have to be at that level,” says Paulson. “You can be more frugal about your purchases without cutting yourself off.” For Meg, 31, a big part of the challenge was refraining from impulse buying trendy products she was seeing on social media. “I would just see something and suddenly buy it or feel pressure to buy it and then have it right away,” she says. During her low-spend month, instead of immediately adding to her shopping cart, Meg began to make a wish list of things she wanted to buy when the month was over. “A week or two later,” she says, “I’d look back and think, ‘I don’t really need this anymore.’” Read More: How to Make A Budget in 6 Simple Steps Don’t be too restrictive Sometimes cutting back too much in a low-spend month can result in overspending as soon as the challenge is over. “It’s like a rubber band snapping back,” says Paulson. “You do really well for a month, and then you go overboard.” The key, Paulson says, is to be honest with yourself about where you might be overspending, without completely depriving yourself of joy. If you look forward to your monthly facial or treat yourself with takeout on a Friday night, it’s okay to personalize the rules to reflect that. “Saying no to yourself constantly doesn’t feel good,” she says. “Spending isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s just when we let it get away from us.” Read More: What Is a Good Credit Score? Repurpose your savings To avoid overspending once the month is over, Jack Heintzelman, a financial planner at Boston Wealth, suggests putting the extra money in your budget towards your savings goal. “If you find that you can spend $100 less in a certain category, the next month, take that $100 that you were spending in that category and immediately save it somewhere,” he says. Automating the saving process, whether towards a retirement or savings fund, or to paying down debt, can help you keep your goals front of mind and prevent you from impulse spending the extra cash you learned how to save during your low-spend challenge. Read More: How to Reset Your Thinking Around Spending Money Join a community Asking your partner, family member, or friend to join you in the challenge can help you stay on track. “If you speak it out loud or surround yourselves with others that understand what you’re doing and your goals, then that helps with accountability,” says Heintzelman. For Yoo, posting about her low-spend journey on TikTok helped her rein in her shopping. “I can’t spend a crazy amount at a random sample sale because I’m going to have to share that with somebody,” she says. “It can’t be my secret.” Most importantly, be patient with yourself and understand that slip-ups don’t mean you have to give up. Yoo and Meg both say that, though they struggled with the challenge at first, pushing through encouraged them to build habits that lasted beyond the month......»»
How Much Should You Tip? 5 People Share Their Habits
Five people share their tipping habits over the course of one week If you feel like you’re being asked to tip more often than ever, you’re not alone. A November report by the Pew Research Center found that 72% of Americans say that tipping is expected in more places today than it was five years ago. From self-service kiosks to fast casual restaurants to grab-and-go cafes, options to tip are everywhere. To better understand tipping culture, TIME asked five people to track their spending over the course of a week, and share what they tipped on and why. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Gig workers and waitstaff often rely on tips to make a living. But Americans increasingly feel that tipping culture has gone too far. Another survey by consumer financial services company Bankrate found that around two in three U.S. adults have a negative view about tipping, and that 41% of U.S. adults think businesses should just pay their employees better, so that they don’t have to rely so heavily on tips. Tipping is thought to have its roots in ancient Rome, but in its modern form it’s believed to have originated in Tudor England. In the 19th century, when wealthy Americans returned from travels in Europe, they began tipping out of a desire to appear aristocratic. At first, the practice was strongly opposed by most diners, who argued that it was contrary to the American ideal of a society without stratification by social class. But tipping stuck, in part because business owners stood to benefit, as the practice shifts some of the burden of paying servers onto customers. Read More: ‘It’s the Legacy of Slavery’: Here’s the Troubling History Behind Tipping Practices in the U.S. From tipping on crushed ice to dinner at Chipotle, five consumers explore their relationship with tipping, and explain their tipping choices. Here’s what they said. (The following responses have been condensed and edited for clarity. The individuals featured asked to remain anonymous to protect their professional interests.) 26-year-old congressional staffer who makes $70,000 living in Washington, D.C. 60-year-old CEO of a consumer insights firm who makes over $300,000 living in Oviedo, Florida 30-year-old policy advisor who makes $120,000 living in Cambridge, Massachusetts 60-year-old consultant who makes $60,000 living in The Woodlands, Texas 27-year-old advocacy professional who makes $110,000 living in East Lansing, Michigan 26-year-old congressional staffer who makes $70,000 living in Washington, D.C. I try to tip fairly and well. I always tip reasonably at restaurants where I’ve received table service, and often when buying things at a counter—in part because the iPads present tipping options and it feels rude to click “no tip.” I never, ever carry cash, so I typically won’t tip at a hotel or after experiencing other interpersonal kinds of service (I recently went on a boat tour and they had a tip jar at the end). I feel bad about this, but not bad enough to start carrying cash. Also, as a teenager I was an ice cream scooper in a touristy destination and most of my income was through tips, so I will always tip high school kids doing the hard manual labor of being covered in dairy product. Day 1: I went to coffee near the office with a coworker to complain about work. I got a chai latte and a feta and mushroom pastry, which cost $10.22. I paid with Apple Pay. The payment tablet prompted me to add a tip—$1 was the lowest option. I went out to dinner with two coworkers to continue complaining about work. I paid the check—$138.60—with a credit card, and they Venmoed me their share. The tip was calculated for me on the receipt. I paid 20%, which was $23.10 and the middle of the three options offered (the others were 18% and 22%). Day 2: I took an Uber that cost $42.39. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4. I don’t intuitively think to tip Uber and Lyft drivers. I lived in San Francisco during the height of Uber’s VC funding, where traveling anywhere in the city was really cheap and tipping was not part of the app. I usually will tip drivers eventually, since I know that’s how they make much of their income, but I typically will do a few dollars, rather than the pre-suggested 20%, particularly on expensive rides. I ordered sushi takeout that cost $15.24. I paid with a credit card and tipped 20%, which was $2.79. We ordered takeout and paid at the counter. The receipt had boxes on it: 15%, 18%, and 20%. I checked 20% and told my friend about how I’m working on this tipping diary. She said “I would never tip for takeout, they didn’t serve us.” Day 3: For lunch, I had surprisingly good airport food from a counter serve place, which cost $16.02. I paid with Apple Pay and tipped $1.92, which was the lowest option of the pre-set amounts. I do think cashiers deserve to be tipped, and, again, it’s hard to click the “no tip” button. I took an Uber from the airport to my friend’s house, which cost $38.59. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4. Do people tip on Ubers? Am I being cheap here? Day 4: I got two coffees that cost $8.85 in total. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1.59, which was 18%. This was a coffee shop at a convenience store, but I practiced coffee shop etiquette and tipped. Lunch cost $16.81. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $3.03, which was 18% and the middle option on the tablet. Then, I got shaved ice that cost $9.11. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1, which was the cheapest of the pre-selected options. Later, I got cookies and pie that cost $14.41. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $2.16, which was 15%. In retrospect, I feel a little silly tipping for this—we grabbed a piece of pie out of a fridge and a package of cookies off a shelf and brought them to the counter to pay. Day 5: I bought coffees—they cost $12.42. I paid with my phone and tipped $1.86 (15%—the middle option). Later on, I got post-drinks pizza that cost $7.33. I paid by tapping my phone to the payment tablet and tipped $1.32 (18%). This was actually the worst pizza I’ve ever had in my life. Day 6: I got udon soup for dinner that cost $22.05. I ordered online and there was not an option to tip on this transaction! Later, I bought shaved ice for $7.55. I paid with Apple Pay and tipped $1.36, which was 18%. This wasn’t actually very good shaved ice. Day 7: I got sushi takeout for dinner that cost $15.56. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $3.11, which was 20%. This was a counter-service situation, but I could see the workers behind the counter making the rolls themselves to order! I took a Lyft to the airport that cost $32.82. I paid with a credit card saved to the app and tipped $4.92. This Lyft driver was particularly friendly and delightful, so I tipped more than I typically would. I got airport mac and cheese that cost $13.72. I paid with Apple Pay on a tablet and tipped $2.06, which was the lowest option of the pre-set amounts. After my flight, I took another Lyft that cost $10.99. I paid with a credit card saved to the app but I didn’t mean to not tip! I must have clicked out of the app without doing so. I don’t see a way to retroactively add a tip. Total in tips at the end of the week: $59.22 60-year-old CEO of a consumer insights firm who makes over $300,000 living in Oviedo, Florida I generally tip for service when the staff has done some “work,” like at a sit down restaurant or at a hairdresser where a personal service was provided. I’ll generally tip 15%-25% depending on the quality of the overall experience as well as the personal attention provided by the staff. Recognizing that servers in restaurants rely on their tips to make up for a below-market wage, I’ll tend to go on the higher side provided they show interest in earning it, with the minimum being 15%.I don’t like to tip in situations where there isn’t an extra element of service, like at a fast food place or, my pet peeve, at my dermatologist! I’ve noticed more institutions asking for a “tip” to be added to the bill with options starting at 18%. I don’t believe I should be tipping someone that is paid to do the job they are doing and the job is “put that pastry into a box and give it to the customer.” Also, I’m never quite sure who that tip goes to, so that is another reason for me not to tip. My general view is pay your staff a fair wage and then charge me accordingly. Don’t ask me to subsidize their wages or, worse, add to your bottom line by shaming me into a tip. Day 1: I got dinner at a local taco joint. It cost $43.23. I paid with a card and tipped $6.77 to take it up to $50. I generally tip 15% and round things off—it’s easier for me when reviewing charges on the back end. Day 2: N/A Day 3: I got carry-out baked goods from a local bakery. I paid cash for the goods ($11.60) then put $2 in the tip jar. They did a great job explaining how the two items compared and packed them in a box really well. They were very pleasant and polite. I generally would just have tipped $1. Day 4: I bought carry-out Indian food for $78.43, which I paid with a card. I don’t feel like carry-out in a dine-in restaurant warrants a tip. There is no element of service that I experience. I’ll occasionally tip 10% if the option is there on the screen to tap, but these guys gave 25%, 22%, and 18% along with “other.” The ridiculousness of thinking I’ll give a tip when their staff has to do zero work and making that above the norm annoyed me. Day 5: N/A Day 6: N/A Day 7: N/A Total in tips at the end of the week: $8.77 30-year-old policy advisor who makes $120,000 living in Cambridge, Massachusetts I’ll always tip in situations in which it’s clear it’s expected of me. I’ll also tip if I pay after receiving a service, and I thought it was good. I’m more likely to tip if I like the employee(s) I’m dealing with or like and/or frequent the establishment. Day 1: I went to Chipotle for a chicken burrito bowl with a fountain soda, which cost $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. I go here for lunch at least once a week. The staff were friendly today. They did give me a scoop of mild salsa when I asked only for the spicy, but I wasn’t going to tip anyway. I just don’t get the sense that I’m expected to at fast casual places like that. Day 2: I went back to the same Chipotle as before and got another chicken burrito bowl with a fountain soda for $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 3: I went back to the same Chipotle again and got a steak burrito bowl with a fountain soda for $18.03. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 4: I got coffee and a breakfast sandwich from my locally owned coffee shop for $9.76. The employees know me by name there so I paid with a card and tipped $1.95. I love this coffee shop—I go there regularly, and I feel it’s expected to tip at coffee shops. For lunch, I went back to the same Chipotle and got another chicken burrito bowl for $16.16. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. I took an Uber that cost $17.58. My driver was prompt and polite so I paid with a card, gave five stars, and tipped $1.76 which was 10%. I had dinner at a restaurant before going to see a play that cost $70.80. I paid with a card and tipped $14, which was 20%. I always tip 20% for meals with servers unless the service is especially bad. After the play I had drinks at a bar that cost $38.70. I paid with a card and tipped $7, which was 20%. I always tip 20% for drinks. I took another Uber home that cost $16.59. My driver was prompt and didn’t, like, say anything rude during the ride so I gave him five stars and a 10% tip ($1.66). Day 5: I got a black coffee from the local coffee shop I love for $3.80. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip this time. I wasn’t really thinking about it in the moment, but I think it was because I just got a black coffee and there’s not much that goes into preparing that. For breakfast, I went to a fast casual place I had never tried before and got another coffee and a breakfast sandwich for $9.85. I paid with a card and tipped $1.97, which was 15%. After that, I stopped on a long bike ride and got a salad for $14.99 from a locally owned place. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip. I like to tip at locally owned places, but I saw that the salads were pre-made when I was checking out, which I didn’t like. Honestly, it was also probably because I knew I’d never go back there. I went back to the same Chipotle for lunch, and got a steak burrito bowl for $18.03. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Day 6: I went back to my regular local coffee shop and got coffee and a breakfast sandwich for $14.03. I paid with a card and tipped $1.83 which was 15% as usual. Later, I got drinks at Topgolf (the indoor driving range) that cost $28.09. The service was fine, so I tipped 20% ($4.70) as per usual. Day 7: I got a turkey sandwich, water and chips for lunch at a ski lodge cafeteria for $15.41. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip since there was no service and the food wasn’t made to order. Later, I had dinner which included a sandwich and two beers and cost $33.81. Since there was table service, I paid with a card and tipped $5.60, which was 20%. Total in tips at the end of the week: $40.47 60-year-old consultant who makes $60,000 living in The Woodlands, Texas At places where I stand in a line to order—fast casual places—I tip 10%-15%. I tip 20% if I am getting good table service. I don’t tip for take out. Day 1: I went to Nando’s in Houston. I paid $23.98 with my card, and tipped $3.89. It was a quick lunch and there was no table service. Day 2: I had a casual dinner with friends at Palette Indian Kitchen. It cost $67.12 and I tipped $13.42—the table service was good. Day 3: I got a quick lunch back at the Kitchen. I paid $16.24 on card and tipped $2.44—no table service. Day 4: I went for dinner at Oporto, a local restaurant. I paid $390.50 on my card and tipped $78.10—it was my treat. We were a party of eight so the tip was automatic. I did not mind paying the 20% since the service was good. Day 5: N/A Day 6: N/A Day 7: N/A Total in tips at the end of the week: $97.85 27-year-old advocacy professional who makes $110,000 living in East Lansing, Michigan People deserve to be paid for their work. I used to tip 20% on basically everything, back when you would only be asked to tip in a small number of places. I still tip 20% for any sit down meal service, bartender, rideshare, and delivery, but now I don’t tip for takeout, or checking out at coffee shops unless there’s like a specific reason to. I also believe that the wage should be on the establishment, not the customers, and I would much rather pay a bit extra for the base price, and know that every staffer is paid a consistent or fair rate, than having tipping allowing businesses to skirt paying their people. I know this is different for servers specifically, who make more on average, but tipping has extended far beyond servers at this point. Day 1: I got dinner from Chipotle, which cost $9. The woman working was nice, and the guy in front of me was rude to her, so I paid with a card and left a $2 tip. She was also generous with portions, which deserves a tip at Chipotle. I also picked up takeout sushi for my wife for $26. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip—I just don’t see a reason to tip on takeout. Day 2: I went to a local taco restaurant for lunch and paid $18.99. Since it was a sit-down restaurant, I paid with a card and tipped $5.01, which was close to 20%. I added an extra cent because whole numbers make my brain feel good. I picked up Pad Thai takeout for my wife. It cost $10.50, I paid with a card and did not leave a tip since it was takeout. I went to CVS and bought masks for a man outside the store for $15.89. I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. There was a donation screen, but since I was quite literally buying something for a random man on the street, I felt like I didn’t need to add a donation on top of that. Day 3: I bought movie tickets, popcorn, and a drink for $39.96. I paid with a card, but did not leave a tip when prompted. I don’t feel I need to tip in situations like cafeteria-style or movie theaters. After the movie, I went to a bar and had drinks that cost $12.44. Since there was a bartender, I paid with a card and tipped $3, which was around 20%. Sometimes I tip based on how many drinks I’ve ordered rather than a flat percentage. I’ll do a dollar a drink or something, but this time I just tipped doing quick math, which was around 20%. Day 4: I went for lunch at a Chipotle-style restaurant called Los Amigos Taqueria and got food that cost $12.57. The person working was nice so when the tablet prompted tip amounts of $1, $1.50 and $2, I went in the middle. I went out to dinner, which cost $68.90. Since it was full service, I paid with a card and calculated 20% on my phone which came out to $13.79. I think I literally did the calculations on my phone for this. I don’t have a strong reason for why I did this, but just did. Day 5: I got food from a cafeteria that cost $21.60. When I was asked to tip at checkout, I paid with a card but I did not leave a tip. I was actually a little taken back. I went to a cafeteria where I had to pick out my own food and was asked for a tip at checkout. It’s like if I were to go grocery shopping and then was asked for a tip from the cashier. Later, I went to a restaurant with 15 people and put it all on my card—it cost $664.20. The others Venmoed me later. The tablet prompted 18%, 20% and 25% so I hit 20% which was $132.84. Day 6: I went to breakfast at a cafe in Portland on the drive back to Brighton from a ski trip in Maine, and had food that cost $21.19. Since it was a sit-down cafe with a server, I paid with a card and tipped $5 which was close to 20%. I had to leave quickly so I tipped fast. Day 7: I bought a takeout salad that cost $16.48. Since it was takeout, I paid with a card and did not leave a tip. Later, I went to a cafe in Brighton, where I was staying with a friend, and had food that cost $23.75. Since it was a sit-down with a server, I paid with a card and tipped $6.50 which was around 20% calculated quickly. Total in tips at the end of the week: $169.64.....»»
Why CEO Statesmanship Matters
Private sector leaders can use their platforms to sway public opinion and inspire action. In an era characterized by rapid technological advancements, shifting societal norms, and unprecedented global challenges, the voice of the CEO has emerged as a pivotal force—shaping not only the future of their organizations, but also the broader contours of society. Historically, CEOs were primarily seen as stewards of their companies, tasked with maximizing shareholder value and ensuring the financial success of their organizations. Today’s CEOs, on the other hand, are increasingly recognized as integral players on the world stage, with the power to influence public policy, societal norms, and even the course of global events. While public officials and civil society leaders continue to play essential roles, there is a growing expectation for CEOs to step forward, using their platforms to influence, prioritize, and drive meaningful change for the greater good. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] It’s a phenomenon that I call CEO statesmanship; the idea that private sector leaders can use their platforms to sway public opinion, inspire action, and mobilize resources in ways that few others can. This is not merely a function of their economic power, but also of their ability to convene, to set agendas, and to influence a wide array of stakeholders including employees, customers, investors, and policymakers. From climate change and inequality to data privacy and ethical governance, the decisions made by corporations have far-reaching implications – and as the leaders of these entities, CEOs are uniquely positioned to advocate for change, not just within their organizations but across the global community.But how should a CEO take on this role? How can they maximize their impact? How does a CEO separate flurries of activity from true leadership? First, a CEO statesperson should be prepared to speak out on critical issues. With great power comes great responsibility— and the visibility of CEOs also gives them a responsibility to be informed and thoughtful. More than ever, CEOs are expected to share their views and express their values; to engage in national conversations and contribute to social progress. Saying nothing and aggressively avoiding the spotlight may feel safer—but a CEO who stands for nothing is dispensable. Hiding from stakeholders and from the public is a sure path to irrelevance. Leaders, as the saying goes, lead. Second, though, a CEO statesperson should lead with purpose. A CEO shouldn’t make a statement about every news headline, or take a position on every national challenge. Especially in recent years, we’ve seen the impact of oversaturation and statement fatigue. When leaders begin to opine on every topic, they will quickly find that they are expected to respond to issues over which they have no control and may have no expertise—a perfect recipe for missteps and the loss of authority. So how does a CEO statesperson choose when to speak, and when to stay silent? A CEO should consider the issues that especially impact their organization—either because of the sector in which they operate, or the communities in which their employees and other stakeholders are located. They should think about the subjects that matter to them personally because of their background or identity. They should pinpoint the specific ideas and values that move them as a leader. By focusing on initiatives and issues that resonate with their own knowledge, interests and values, they can make a meaningful contribution to the conversation—and ensure that they are taken seriously. Finally, a CEO statesperson should act as a catalyst for change. Words matter—but one of the benefits of private sector leadership is the ability to take decisive action. If a CEO is passionate about diversity, they can invest in an outstanding DEI program. If they are energized by sustainability, they can implement internal programs to reduce their organization’s carbon footprint. Stakeholders can see the difference between lip service and genuine commitment. When a CEO decides to make a statement on a matter of public concern, it must be backed by concrete actions and a clear alignment with the company’s values and operational practices. That means fostering an internal culture that reflects the company’s stated commitments. It means leveraging their resources and convening powers to bring together allies who are passionate about the same goals. By leading by example, CEOs can cultivate organizations that not only excel in their business endeavors but also contribute positively to society – and drive others to do the same.In our interconnected world, the ripple effects of a CEO’s statements and actions can be profound. By prioritizing issues of public concern and leveraging their resources and convening power, CEOs have a unique opportunity to advance the common good. At a time when public trust in many institutions is wavering, the business community—led by its CEOs—can offer a beacon of stability, ethical leadership, and forward thinking. By articulating a vision that transcends the bottom line to include societal well-being, CEOs can help bridge divides and build consensus on the path forward.As we navigate the complexities of the 21st century, CEO statesmanship will matter more than ever. By speaking out on critical issues, leading with purpose, and acting as catalysts for change, CEOs can help steer society towards a more sustainable, equitable, and prosperous future......»»
Gerald Levin, Orchestrator of Time’s Mergers With Warner and AOL, Dies at 84
As Time’s chief strategist, Levin orchestrated the 1990 merger of Time with Warner Communications, creating the world’s largest media and entertainment company. Gerald Levin, who helped lead Time Warner Inc.’s rise into a late 20th century media powerhouse, as well as its disastrous first step into the internet age, has died. He was 84. Levin, who lived in Long Beach, California, passed away in a hospital on Wednesday, the New York Times reported, citing his grandchild Jake Maia Arlow. Levin had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, the newspaper said. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] At Time Inc., Levin, an avid runner who quoted Homer, the Bible and Albert Camus, had a hand in turning a fledgling cable operation, Home Box Office, into a pay-for-view giant. He had the breakthrough idea to provide premium content through satellite delivery. As Time’s chief strategist, Levin orchestrated the 1990 merger of Time with Warner Communications, creating the world’s largest media and entertainment company. Its components included a publishing division producing TIME, People and Fortune magazines, a movie studio and a music company. In his decade as Time Warner’s boss, Levin oversaw the purchase of Turner Broadcasting in 1996, acquiring Cable News Network. He also beat back a takeover by Seagram Co., which had acquired a 15% stake in his company. But Levin may be remembered more for a disastrous decision: Selling venerable Time Warner to upstart America Online Inc. at the peak of the internet bubble. Levin pitched the 2000 deal as a visionary marriage of old-media assets with the online future. Disastrous deal Instead, he ended up trading solid businesses for AOL, whose high-priced stock had been held aloft more by hope than profit. Faster broadband services, including some owned by Time Warner, quickly eclipsed AOL’s slow dial-up service, the supposed vehicle for digitizing Time Warner’s valuable content. Making matters worse, AOL’s accounting practices had made its business look healthier than it was. Time Warner later paid $510 million and restated three years of results to settle government charges that AOL overstated its advertiser revenue and subscriber counts. A decade later, the merged company’s stock, initially valued at $350 billion, including AOL’s new Netscape browser unit, was worth only one-seventh of that amount, according to the New York Times, which noted business schools had taken to studying the deal as the worst ever. “It’s just a stunning piece of history,” Levin told CNBC on the 10th anniversary of the merger. “And so, I invite business schools to continue to study it.” Gerald Manuel Levin was born in Philadelphia on May 6, 1939, to David Levin and the former Pauline Shantzer. Levin’s father had a thriving grocery business while his mother was a piano teacher. His family settled in Overbrook Hills, Pennsylvania. HBO’s birth Levin earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy at nearby Haverford College in 1960 and graduated from the University of Pennsylvania’s law school in 1963, then worked at a law firm and an investment company. In 1972, cable television pioneer Charles Dolan hired him to draw up the business plan for Home Box Office and secure rights to programming. Time Inc. took over HBO in 1973. Levin, working under then-chief executive officer J. Richard Munro, helped negotiate the 1990 merger with Warner. He climbed the ranks of the combined companies, becoming CEO in 1992 and chairman a year later. Levin left AOL Time Warner in 2002 after the company posted big losses amid plummeting internet stock values. Nicknamed Jerry, Levin was married three times. In August 1959, at the beginning of his senior year in college, he married Carol Needleman, a University of Pennsylvania law student. In 1970, they divorced, and Levin married Barbara Riley, an interior designer. Family tragedy The family suffered a well-documented tragedy. In 1997, his son Jonathan, a 31-year-old high school English teacher in the Bronx beloved by his students, was murdered by one of them in his apartment—for the code of his bank card, prosecutors said. In 2003, Levin married Laurie Perlman, a former talent agent-turned-clinical psychologist. Levin helped Perlman open the Moonview Sanctuary, a health and wellness treatment center in Santa Monica, California. Levin invested in and became a board member of OrganizedWisdom, an internet-based business designed to collate information from medical professionals to educate consumers with medical concerns. After Levin was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 2006, he and Perlman also opened a center to help patients with the ailment. Levin’s first marriage produced two children, Laura and Leon, in addition to Jonathan. With his second wife, he had a son, Michael, and a daughter, Anna......»»
How to Reset Your Thinking Around Spending Money, According to Experts
Experts discuss how to better manage your relationship with money Money is one of the most significant stressors for Americans, according to a 2023 American Psychological Association report. The number of Americans who reported money as a stressor, has only increased since before the COVID-19 pandemic. Of parents who said they have multiple stressors causing significant strain on their lives, nearly 80% said that money is one of those factors. Single adults pointed it as the most significant source of stress, over housing costs and personal safety. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] The report comes despite a resilient U.S. economy. Job growth seems to be at a steady pace—although numbers fell short of the gains seen in 2021 and 2022—and the unemployment rate has remained below 4% for the past two years. However, inflation has remained persistently high, with rising energy, food and housing costs putting a strain on households. Still, even Americans who appear to be doing well financially struggle. More than 50% of Americans who make more than $100,000 a year are living paycheck to paycheck as of September 2023, according to a Lending Club report. “A lot of Americans don’t necessarily realize that there’s a difference between your wants and your needs,” says Dr. Traci Williams, a financial therapist and board certified clinical psychologist. “When things are tight, we have to focus on our needs and maybe let go of our wants temporarily.” According to the American Psychological Association report, 61% of adults say that people around them expect them to just “get over their stress,” without providing any actionable guidance on how to do so. TIME spoke to experts about how to better manage your relationship with money. Here are their tips. Understand your ‘money story’ Before trying to budget and figure out a financial plan, experts advise people to assess their personal relationship with money. That involves thinking about their parents’ relationship with money, how adults around them modeled spending, and whether they personally overspend or underspend. “The hard part is it’s not something that’s really tied to your personality,” says Jack Heintzelman, a certified financial planner. “It’s just really how you grew up and how you were educated on money…If you’re able to think back on [it], It gives you a different perspective.” In order to best assess areas to improve, Williams advises folks to recognize their triggers and note their reaction. “What are the things that money is providing that speak to you as a person that can help you to get some indicators,” says Williams. “For some people that might look like: ‘I am looking for security’ or ‘I am bored,’ or ‘I do not feel a sense of high self esteem. And so money helps to provide that for me.’” Read More: 7 Ways to Manage Financial Stress Williams notes that spending money releases endorphins and dopamine, triggering feelings of pleasure. “There are other things that you can do to feel good in your life, that can create those feel good hormones,” she says. “Whether it’s spending time with loved ones, or baking with your kid, or going for a walk, listening to music, things can be affordable.” Meanwhile, so-called underspenders, who worry about money despite being financially stable, might have to work on neutralizing what it means to spend money. “There is no such thing as the right or wrong way to do things. They’re just the choices that we make,” Williams says. Come up with personal goals Experts say that everyone’s financial plan should accommodate their own desires, needs, and lifestyle. For some, it can be as simple as checking their credit card’s app and looking at the amount they spend on categories like food, bills, or subscriptions. For others, it might be better to physically highlight a bank statement or write out purchases to adequately visualize their spending. Heintzelman says he’s personally a fan of the 50-30-20 method, which has individuals spend 50% of their income on their needs, such as rent or food, 30% towards less essential “wants,” and 20% towards savings. But he stresses that everyone should work around what best suits their future goals. “Try your best to not worry about what other people are doing and just think about the path that you’re on and be comfortable with that,” he says. Read More: Why a 60/30/10 Budget Could Be the New 50/30/20 The goal is to eventually be able to instinctively set aside a certain amount of money and know that it cannot be touched. “If you can be more natural with it and let it automate, then that can help with being more under control,” Heintzelman says. Recognize when you need support While finances are one of the leading causes of stress, only 52% of U.S. adults say they feel comfortable discussing it with others. But experts say it’s better to discuss financial goals, plans, and stress with a spouse, friend, family member, or others to get different perspectives and share anxieties. Around 35% of U.S. adults have a financial advisor. Heintzelman says they can be helpful for clients who are looking for someone to make them accountable for their financial decisions. Financial therapists, meanwhile, work at the intersection between a client’s finances and their mental health. Read More: 11 Ways to Get Free Financial Advice “If your worries are affecting your ability to work or your relationships with your family members or your friends, or your ability to take care of yourself, those are usually indicators that you need extra help,” says Williams. “That help can look different for different people depending on what your situation is and what your need is.”.....»»
Why We’re Spending So Much Money
How the rise of frictionless payments drove consumers to buy more My credit card is a mangled thing. Its blue plastic backing is peeling so much that it doesn’t work in swipe machines; it looks like a dog chewed it up and spat it out. It seldom leaves my wallet anymore. But that doesn’t matter. In the two weeks before I wrote this story, I spent more than $4,000 on my card without laying eyes on it. Each of these transactions was made online, where my card number is stored by Uber or Walmart or Google Chrome. That’s probably why I didn’t flinch when I spent $333 on groceries for a weekend with friends, or $48.34 on a pizza through Uber Eats, or even $1,533 for an Airbnb when my extended family comes to visit. Without having to type in my card number, the pain of the purchase was dampened. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Frictionless transactions are common in today’s economy—you can wave your cell near a cash register, press “buy” on Amazon without really knowing which credit card you’re charging, and send money to a stranger via your phone without having met them in person. There’s even a company, McLear, marketing a ring that you can use to pay for things. These technologies, often referred to as “fintech,” for financial technology, make spending easier than ever before— and there’s growing evidence that they’re making us shell out more than we realize. With so many different accounts to keep track of and so many merchants smoothly debiting what we owe every month, we just keep on spending, whether we can afford it or not. U.S. consumers spent a record $19 trillion in December 2023, up 6% from a year prior and 29% from February 2020. Spending has soared despite high inflation, high interest rates, and repeated commentary from economists that this ebullience can’t continue. And yet it has. Read More: Is It Finally Time to Buy a House? There are, of course, a few reasons why people are spending a lot of money right now. Consumers saved a lot of money when they were stuck at home during the pandemic, and now they’re making up for lost time by traveling, eating out, and doing all the things they couldn’t’ during quarantine. The government helped consumers feel flush by sending out stimulus checks and pausing student loan payments. After years of slow wage increases, workers’ payments are finally growing more quickly than prices, giving them extra pocket money. But there’s one additional factor that has changed since the beginning of the pandemic: people are more accustomed to using financial technology to pay for things, which eliminates barriers that might have once slowed their spending. “Convenience makes it much easier to enjoy the process of shopping, removing the additional difficulties of buying things,” says Yuqian Xu, a professor at UNC’s Kenan-Flagler Business School who has studied frictionless payment methods. Research shows that the more frictionless the payment method, the more money people spend. By 2023, 73% of consumers had paid for something through a website or browser on a phone or computer, according to a McKinsey survey, up from 46% in 2019. People are also more comfortable using mobile payment apps like Apple Pay, Google Pay, PayPal, and Venmo; more than 53% of Americans surveyed by Forbes Advisor in 2023 said they used digital wallets more often than traditional payment methods. Paying with a mobile phone is faster than using a credit card—it takes an average of 29 seconds versus 40, according to Xu, the UNC professor. That speed and convenience accelerates spending, Xu and her colleagues found in a July 2023 study that tracked spending after the launch of Alipay, a mobile payment service. It indicated that credit card transaction amounts increased by 9.4% once people could use a mobile device, while the frequency of transactions increased by 10.7%. The result is a cycle of tech adoption that has loosened customers’ wallets. Once consumers started using mobile payments, they became more comfortable with making credit-card payments on their computers, and started moving more money digitally. And once they were comfortable spending money digitally, they started spending more money overall. Elizabeth Mendoza, a 33-year-old who lives in Washington state, says she was getting her debt under control before the pandemic by setting aside cash twice a month for various budget categories like groceries, gas, or her cat. She found that she spent less using cash, because she would think twice about parting with a large bill. But once COVID-19 hit, Mendoza got into the habit of buying things online and saving her credit card information in different apps. Soon, she found herself back in about $20,000 worth of debt. “Once I stopped using my cash,” she says, “I stopped paying attention to what I was doing.” In October 2023, Mendoza vowed to get out of debt and removed her credit card from any app that would save it, including Apple Pay. She creates colorful envelopes every month to put her cash in to make the process more fun. It’s more of a hassle to buy things online now since she has to go find her wallet and type in her information. But she says it’s made a huge difference in her spending. “It’s just so easy to fall into using your credit card and not keep track of what’s going on,” she says. Economists refer to the way people organize and spend their money as mental accounting. Humans are often irrational with the way they choose to spend and save money—splurging with a $100 bill found on the sidewalk while fastidiously saving every penny of their salary, for instance, or spending more money on the same item if they’re paying via credit card than if using cash. Read More: The Solar Power Industry Is in Trouble. Mental accounting is a big reason people spend more with frictionless payments. Consumers think of new apps like Buy Now Pay Later or Apple Pay as a separate budget category that enables new spending, says Michael Gelman, a finance professor at the University of Delaware. In an experiment, Gelman tracked the behavior of consumers who had received a random credit card in the mail. While those consumers’ spending behavior on their old credit cards remained the same, they started to splurge on their new one, dropping 26% more than people who had not received a new card. “Once you open a new budget category, you manage it separately,” he says. “It can have an effect on total consumption: you consume more because you have the opportunity.” Yanibel Colon, a 35-year old account manager who lives in the Bronx, was once the type of person who would buy things with cash and use her credit cards for emergencies. But cooped up at home during the pandemic, she started putting more things on her credit card, and using Buy Now Pay Later services. She mentally categorized Buy Now Pay Later spending as cash, which got her into trouble. “I was like, ‘Well, it’s not a credit card, I don’t have payments,” she says. Now, she sets a budget every month for certain categories like food, and makes sure she doesn’t exceed them, no matter how she is paying. Strong consumer spending has helped stimulate the economy and provided healthy profits for companies that depend on the American consumer. Walmart, for instance, saw online sales grow 17% in the last quarter, and made about $1.2 million a minute in 2023. Amazon reported its highest operating profit in history in its February earnings report. But many American consumers are spending beyond their means. Household debt reached a record $17.5 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2023, and has increased by $3.4 trillion since the end of 2019, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Credit card debt has “passed a milestone,” says Michele Raneri, VP and head of U.S. research and consulting at TransUnion. Credit card balances now stand at $1.05 trillion, 13% higher than a year ago. The percent of credit card balances that are 90 days or more delinquent ticked up in the last quarter of 2023, according to the New York Fed, reaching nearly 10%. That’s partly because people have a hard time keeping track of all the places they’re spending money, credit counselors say. The rise of digital payment systems like Apple Pay and Buy Now Pay Later “creates this scattered universe of different payment options that can lead to overspending and financial instability.” says Bruce McClary, senior vice president at the National Foundation for Credit Counseling (NFCC), the largest nonprofit financial counseling organization in the U.S. “People ask me, ‘How could you let this happen,’” says Britt Reynolds, 28, who uses TikTok to chronicle her journey getting out of $36,000 of debt. “I want to say, ‘Credit card companies gave me a $43,000 credit line, and spending money is the easiest thing in the world.’” Tanya Menendez, the co-founder and CEO of Snowball Wealth, a financial tracking and education app, says she frequently sees clients who have lost track of their spending because of the many ways they can pay for things. She recently held a workshop for clients and asked them to estimate how much they spent every month on ride-share apps like Uber. They’d estimate they spent $400, she says, only to find that they spent double that on average. Many of the apps that helped people track their spending have disappeared in recent years. Mint, the personal finance app, will be shutting down on March 23, according to Intuit, the company that owns it. There aren’t many good free options left. “Tracking your spending is really difficult,” Menendez says. “It’s like a vitamin that people aren’t taking.” Credit counselors have a variety of tips to help combat overspending on frictionless transactions. Jessica Spangler, a money educator whose book, Invest Like a Girl, comes out March 26, recommends not storing payment information in apps. She also tells people to set up their phones so that they get a notification every time they make a purchase, no matter what payment method they use. “That way you’re not just swiping into the void,” Spangler says. Read More: 11 Ways to Get Free Financial Advice McClary, of NFCC, recommends having only a few accounts where you spend money so you can more easily track them. It’s easy, he says, to set up new accounts through Google Pay, for example, and then forget which credit card it’s linked to, which makes it harder to calculate whether you’re overspending. And those mobile accounts aren’t doing you any favors—the more time you have to think before you make a purchase, he says, the more likely you’ll evaluate whether you can afford it. As for me, I’ve started putting reminders on my calendar to check my credit card balances so that I can track how my spending on apps is piling up. Not that it’s easy. Digital payments are swift but the process of logging into my account to track them is a headache that involves remembering bank passwords and logins and then waiting for the bank to send me a code to verify my identity. If spending money was as hard as tracking it, we might not do so much of it. Your Money My $18,000 Debt Journey: Jamie Feldman carried a lot of debt and a lot of shame. Then she turned to TikTok. Why Burgers Cost So Much: We break down the inflated cost of the classic meal—bite by bite. Reset Your Spending Mindset: Experts explain how to better manage your relationship with money......»»
Why a Burger Costs More Now
The factors driving the inflated cost of a classic meal—bite by bite The good news about inflation in recent months is that it’s slowing, but that probably doesn’t matter much to the American consumer; slowing inflation still means that prices are rising. The cost of groceries ticked up just 0.3% from the previous month in January, but has grown 28% since January 2019. No wonder Americans still get sticker shock when they look at their grocery bills. It may seem contrary that prices are still rising when so many of the events that kicked off the high inflation of recent years—the COVID-19 pandemic, the resulting supply chain headaches, the war in Ukraine—started years ago. But there are dozens of different factors that go into food inflation. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] To explain these factors, TIME picked a meal that might be typically consumed by an American household—a cheeseburger and fries—and looked at what’s driving prices higher for different ingredients. We found that the cost of ingredients for a cheeseburger and fries—$4.69—is roughly a dollar more than in 2019, though just pennies from a year ago. Wells Fargo chief agricultural economist Michael Swanson explains the factors driving up prices bite by bite: White bread: Up 59% since 2019 Bread is one of the items that jumped the most in price since the beginning of the pandemic. The dollar figure isn’t much—a pound of white bread costs $2.03 now, up from $1.27 in January 2019, according to government data. What happened? Bread was really cheap for a long time, Swanson says. The price was so low that it essentially fell from 2014 to 2019, as cheap wheat and robust bakery competition forced bread makers to lower prices. The bread business was so tough that many bakeries went out of business or consolidated. Prices started rising at the beginning of the pandemic, but really jumped in early 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine and the price of wheat spiked. The price of wheat has since cratered, but the Russian war gave producers an excuse to increase prices. For years, bakeries really needed the price of bread to go up to cover their labor, energy, and transportation costs, and finally, they had the opportunity. “Once the dam broke, it was going to be quite awhile for the inflation to go back down,” Swanson says. Processed cheese: Up 25% since 2019. In 2022, the price of milk was too low for farmers to make money, so they started culling their herds; cheese buyers, anticipating that there would be a shortage of cheese, started “leapfrogging each other to get supplies purchased,” Swanson says. That drove cheese prices up to their peak in April 2022. The same thing may be happening now, he says; a recent milk production report showed heavy signs of culling. Even if the price of cheese drops on commodities markets, it can take awhile for consumers to feel the difference. When cheese prices skyrocketed in 2022, retailers couldn’t raise prices that much, Swanson says. So when cheese prices fell back down, retailers tried to recover what they had lost. The price of processed cheese is still 25% above what it was in January 2019. Ground beef: Up 32% since 2019 In the beginning of 2024, there were only 87.2 million cattle and calves in the United States. That may seem like a lot of cows—roughly one for every four people in the U.S., but that number actually represents the lowest inventory since 1951. Fewer cows means higher prices for the ones that are getting sold and turned into meat. U.S. herds are at such low levels primarily because of drought and high supply costs. In the last four years, as drought plagued Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and other cattle-raising regions, farmers found that it was costing a lot of money to feed their cows. They started selling them—and, unusually, they also sold female cows, who would typically have been held back for breeding, according to economists from the American Farm Bureau Federation. Now, El Nino has brought moisture to much of the U.S., and farmers are trying to rebuild their herds. But doing so will be expensive, keeping the cost of beef high. While the U.S. had a record corn crop in 2023 and prices of feed are falling, some farmers are holding back cows they otherwise would have sold in order to rebuild their herds. With higher interest rates for borrowing and more expensive cows, beef prices aren’t likely going anywhere soon. In February, economists from the American Farm Bureau Federation predicted that 2024 would be characterized by record-high beef prices in the grocery store. Tomatoes: Down 1% from 2019 One of the only foods that have not experienced major price increases over the past four years. That’s in part because they were already expensive compared to other fruits and vegetables. But tomato prices are also affected by trade rules; ever since 2013, U.S. and Mexican producers have essentially agreed to set the price of tomatoes so one country’s farmers don’t have an advantage over another. Potatoes: Up 30% from 2019 Potato crops in 2021 and 2022 were severely affected by drought and wildfire smoke, reducing yields. With fewer potatoes in the U.S. and abroad, prices jumped. In 2023, though, U.S. potato production increased for the first time in seven years, which should temper prices. Romaine Lettuce: Up 19% from 2019 An insect-born virus destroyed huge swaths of lettuce crops in California in 2022, causing costs to spike. The price has fallen since then, but labor and transportation costs are still higher than in 2019, which means suppliers aren’t rushing to bring down prices further. You Won’t Save Money Dining Out Your restaurant burger is probably going to get more expensive, too, as wages continue to rise in a competitive job market. “Across the board, everything is just up,” says Brian Arnoff, the co-owner of Meyer’s Old Dutch, a hamburger restaurant in Beacon, N.Y., his restaurant has done two pricing increases since the pandemic, its burger now costs $16, up from $13 in 2019. For restaurants, though, labor accounts for much of the increased cost of food. Meyer’s Old Dutch can’t even get applicants to come to interviews unless he offers $18 an hour, significantly higher than the state minimum wage of $15 an hour. Wages across his business have climbed as he tries to retain talent; cooks who made $18 an hour in 2019 are now starting at $20. Until the pandemic, Arnoff says, the cost of food and other supplies surpassed the cost of labor. Now, he spends more on labor than on ingredients. .....»»
Thailand’s New Prime Minister Is Getting Down to Business. But Can He Heal His Nation?
Srettha Thavisin didn’t win Thailand’s general election—but he’s determined to turn Thailand into Southeast Asia’s most dynamic investment hub. There is zero chance, aides insist, of accessing the second floor. The upper reaches of Bangkok’s Venetian Gothic Government House are strictly for official work. Journalists (and even respectable guests) are only permitted to loiter among the watercolors and marble ornaments that adorn the ground-floor reception rooms. Everything above the grand staircase is strictly off-limits. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] It doesn’t take long for Thai Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin to overrule this staid protocol, beckoning me up to his inner sanctum on the second floor, banishing the chastened courtiers and settling down to chat for an hour without notes. A former property mogul who took office in September, the 62-year-old Srettha is nothing if not outgoing. He has made over 10 foreign trips to court investors including China, Japan, the U.S., and the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland. The small meeting room where he sits down with TIME is ringed by whiteboards chock-full of scrawled policy objectives: digital wallets, national aviation hubs, potash mining, Tesla. His efforts are already paying dividends: foreign direct investment (FDI) in the fourth quarter of last year was double year over year. In November alone, he unveiled investments in Thailand by Amazon Web Services, Google, and Microsoft worth a combined $8.3 billion. It’s with a salesman’s avuncular charm that he says, “I want to tell the world that Thailand is open for business again.” It’s about time. For the past two decades, the self-styled Land of Smiles has been racked by bitter political schisms that led the Thai military to seize power in a 2014 coup and rewrite the constitution to guarantee a guiding role for the nation’s armed forces. (Srettha replaced the general who staged that putsch.) But under the following decade of fumbling quasi-military rule, Thailand’s economy—Southeast Asia’s second biggest—stagnated while inequality soared. In 2018, Thailand’s richest 1% controlled 66.9% of its wealth, according to the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Databook. (In the U.S., it’s around 26.5%) Meanwhile, thousands of young people took to the streets over the past four years to demand the military and royal palace stop meddling in the democratic process, flashing the three-fingered Hunger Games salute as a sign of dissatisfaction with both the democratic vacuum and fiscal bungling. Read More: Thailand’s New Prime Minister Tries Old-Fashioned Populism Average GDP growth in Thailand—a country of 70 million—has been below 2% over the past decade, while neighbors like the Philippines, Indonesia, and Vietnam registered double to triple that rate and ate Thailand’s lunch on FDI. Compounding matters, the pandemic devastated Thailand’s vital tourism industry, with foreign arrivals still only 70% of its 2019 peak. “Thailand has been a real laggard in terms of recovery from the pandemic,” says Gareth Leather, a senior economist for Asia at Capital Economics. “It’s worse than pretty much anywhere else in Asia.” Srettha is straightforward about the stakes. Thailand is in an “economic crisis,” he says, one that must be tackled head-on. Already, he’s slashed fuel duties, announced a three-year debt moratorium for beleaguered farmers, and plans to roll out a digital-wallet scheme that will hand 10,000 baht ($280) to every Thai adult to stimulate consumption. He’s waived visas for visitors from China and India, with plans to extend to several other countries. Aside from tourism, Srettha wants to boost Thailand’s role as a logistics, health care, and financial hub. He’s also set about raising Thailand’s profile on the world stage, hosting U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and China’s top diplomat Wang Yi in January for sensitive discussions between the superpower rivals. He hopes Thailand, America’s oldest ally in Asia with deep historical and cultural links to China, can serve as “a bridge” and “safe space,” he says, while enhancing its international prestige: “I want to see Thailand shine.” Yet the path ahead remains distinctly murky. Srettha’s Pheu Thai (For Thais) party did not win May’s general election but came in second behind the anti-establishment Move Forward Party, whose radical manifesto called for bridling the nation’s generals, conglomerates, and royal palace. It was blocked from power by a military-appointed Senate despite securing a plurality of 151 out of 500 legislative seats. Pheu Thai then cobbled together a motley coalition of 10 royalist and establishment parties to secure Srettha the top job thanks to Senate backing. The paradox is that Srettha is fighting to fix Thailand’s economy by partnering with the same forces invested in thwarting major reform. And given the dire state of the Thai economy and his contentious route to power, he is under intense pressure to deliver real gains—and fast. Not that Srettha chooses to frame things in quite those terms. Read More: Thailand to Restrict Cannabis Use, New Prime Minister Says, After Decriminalization Last Year “Pressure doesn’t come from being runner-up,” he says of the election. “Pressure comes from the need to [tackle] poverty, to improve the well-being of all Thais. Those are the pressures I face every day.” Few Thais saw Srettha’s political rise coming. Formerly the CEO of property developer Sansiri, he only joined Pheu Thai in 2022 and held no public office until he scored the top one. After earning his undergraduate degree in civil engineering at Bangkok’s prestigious Chulalongkorn University, he studied economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and then gained his M.B.A. at Claremont Graduate University. His nickname is Nid, which means tiny in Thai—a wry flick to that fact the 6 ft. 3 in. leader is anything but—and has a reputation for being both dynamic and short-tempered. Srettha’s overwhelming desire is to cut to the chase. He is only the second Prime Minister in Thai history to install a bedroom at Government House rather than commute through Bangkok’s notoriously snarled streets. On the bed sits a stuffed-doll rendition of Srettha he was gifted, complete with trademark gaudy socks. (Srettha’s penchant for luminous red or pink socks has sparked heated social media debates on protocol.) Exposed racks of business suits and formal wear fill one corner; gym equipment occupies an anteroom. Aides glued to laptops crowd around a large communal desk. Read More: Her Family Was Ousted From Power in Thailand. Now She Wants to Be Asia’s Youngest-Ever Female Leader “I can have early-morning and late-night meetings, which is ideal,” he says of his new digs. “And I don’t have to disrupt the traffic with motorcades.” Not a single scrap of paper lies on Srettha’s official desk; he prefers to float between different teams depending on the discussion, though he always carries a tattered leather briefcase that he bought in Germany 36 years ago. “I think the only time I used the desk was to take a call from [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu,” he says. Srettha is not the first businessman turned politician to strive for corporate dynamism in government, though all are confronted by the moment when the differences between boardroom and Cabinet are laid bare. For Srettha, that came barely a month into office when Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel claimed the lives of 39 Thai migrant workers and took 32 others captive. His government has since negotiated the release of all but eight hostages. “The news came out slowly, but what struck me most were the deaths,” he says. “Soon it was eight, nine, 10. I just remember feeling, When is it going to stop?” Since then, getting the country moving has been his overriding focus. In addition to Prime Minister, Srettha also serves as Finance Minister, yet Thailand still hasn’t passed a national budget, post-election wrangling severely hamstringing his ability to enact meaningful change. The digital-wallet rollout has put him at loggerheads with the Bank of Thailand, which fears the $15 billion cash handout will spark inflation. “Being CEO of a company, you realize you have a limited amount of power,” he says. “But what I find most surprising is the lack of power that the Prime Minister has.” Srettha less than most. Another more diminutive figure looms over Thai politics: Pheu Thai’s founder and patriarch, billionaire former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, returned from 15 years of self-imposed exile on the same day that Srettha was confirmed as Prime Minister. Thaksin was arrested at the airport and sentenced to eight years for historical convictions of corruption and abuse of power, though within hours the 74-year-old was transferred from jail cell to a hospital suite. On Feb. 18, he was granted special parole. That Pheu Thai entered a Faustian pact with the military and palace to engineer Thaksin’s return has enraged both progressive Thais and diehard supporters, some of whom burned effigies in protest outside the party’s headquarters. “Pheu Thai betrayed the Thai people,” says Dr. Weng Tojirakarn, a former Pheu Thai lawmaker and a leader of the pro-Thaksin Red Shirt protest movement. Bold reform plans like ending military conscription have since been shelved. The overwhelming impression across Thailand is that Srettha is merely a stooge for Thaksin and that same elite power nexus. “He’s a puppet,” says Chuwit Kamolvisit, an anti-corruption crusader. “Thaksin has the remote-control—right, left, Mr. Srettha has to go that way.” Srettha bristles at the suggestion. “I am in control,” he says resolutely. Read More: The Brothel King’s Last Crusade Srettha has made it abundantly clear where his focus is: foreign investment, trade, and trying to energize a moribund economy. Many Thais fear that values are back-burnered as a result. True, Srettha’s government is pushing through legislation on marriage equality and LGBT rights, which have broad public backing and could boost tourism through so-called pink-dollar arrivals. Yet myriad other issues seem to be backsliding. Srettha is mulling rolling back reforms to Thailand’s fishing industry, for example, which were designed to curb once rampant human trafficking. “It’s pretty clear that human rights are not at the top of Srettha’s agenda,” says Phil Robertson, Asia deputy director for Human Rights Watch. Nor, it appears, is national reconciliation. Almost 2,000 young Thais are still facing prosecutions for actions connected to peaceful pro-democracy protests that gripped the nation in 2020 and 2021. On Feb. 12, two Thai journalists were arrested for interviewing an activist who spray-painted an anarchist symbol and a symbol critical of lèse-majesté royal-defamation laws on a Bangkok temple wall. Since November 2020, more than 200 people have been arrested under the draconian legislation, the youngest just 14 years old; last March a man was jailed for two years merely for selling satirical calendars featuring a rubber duck—a pro-democracy protest symbol. The Move Forward party’s manifesto pledge to reform the much-maligned law was one of the drivers behind its landslide election victory. Srettha, however, sees no issues. “The right to fair justice, the right to be heard, is there,” he insists. Read More: ‘People Have Been Really Angry.’ The Political Journey of a Young Activist in Thailand’s Democracy Struggle It’s ruthless pragmatism that he applies to foreign policy too. In October, Srettha met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing to solicit Chinese investment, especially for a $3 billion southern land-bridge project, which aims to link the Andaman Sea port of Ranong via road, rail, and gas pipeline to Chumphon on the Thai Gulf, some 60 miles away. Asked his impression of Xi, Srettha pauses. “As a world leader, there’s an aura about him,” he says eventually. “I think he wants to trade. I think he doesn’t look to create any problems. He’s not looking for war.” The same cannot be said of Vladimir Putin, whom Srettha also met in October and invited to pay an official visit to Thailand despite an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant for the Russian President related to the forced deportation of Ukrainian children. (Thailand has signed but not ratified the ICC statute.) Srettha’s cozying-up to Putin has naturally raised eyebrows in Washington. “We’ve made clear [to the Thai government] our concerns about Putin’s actions and activities, including the unprovoked aggression in Ukraine,” says a senior U.S. official, speaking on background because of the sensitive nature of discussions. The recent death of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny in a Siberian penal colony—which President Joe Biden called “yet more proof of Putin’s brutality”—has added to the diplomatic unease. Srettha shrugs off any criticism. “Is there evidence that [Putin] is responsible?” he asks. “It’s a crime committed on their soil, if it is, indeed, a crime. We don’t interfere with other nations’ sovereignty.” Read More: How Tech Giants Turned Ukraine Into an AI War Lab For Srettha, the more than 1 million free-spending Russian tourists who visit Thailand every year take precedence. He has offered 90-day visa-free entry to all Russian passport holders—three times as long as Americans enjoy. “Srettha will leave no stone unturned in trying to bring more tourists to Thailand and do business deals,” says Robertson. But while Srettha tours the world hawking Thailand as an investment destination, it’s common knowledge that the nation is an oligopoly dominated by a handful of large conglomerates. For one, selling small-batch beer is banned in Thailand under a decades-old law that shields two huge family-run corporations that monopolize 90% of an $8 billion market. And for over two decades, one firm with close government ties has been awarded the sole duty-free concession to Bangkok’s main airports, creating a multi-billion-dollar family empire from scratch. “International companies would like to get into the telecom sector, the retail sector, the beverage sector, but everybody knows that these sectors are largely already occupied,” says Duncan McCargo, a professor and Thailand expert at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University. Although Pheu Thai’s manifesto pledged to trim the power of conglomerates, just one week after he was confirmed as Prime Minister, Srettha attended a dinner hosted by half a dozen heads of the nation’s largest companies, sharing the photo on X. Today, Srettha doesn’t see much wrong with the status quo, insisting there’s space for both Thai and foreign entrepreneurs to find market share. “I don’t think [the economy] is purely dominated by global conglomerates,” he says. A large number of Thais disagree, as evidenced by the 14 million votes cast for Move Forward’s bold pledge for “de-centralization and demonopolization,” says the party’s former leader Pita-Limjaroenrat, who by rights should today be Prime Minister. Srettha “is still stuck in the era of trickle-down economics,” Pita tells TIME inside Thailand’s teak-and-glass parliament building. Srettha is all too happy to make unscheduled visits to Bangkok’s Suvarna-bhumi International Airport to chastise staff on inefficiencies, and publicly lament Taylor Swift’s decision to play the Southeast Asian leg of her Eras Tour in Singapore over Bangkok. But eschewing the pomp and protocol of Government House is the easy part. Srettha will ultimately be judged on making tough choices to uplift society’s bottom even at the expense of his elite backers. Bold reform, after all, is what the Thai economy desperately needs. “From being the CEO of a company to the CEO of a country, there are many more stakeholders,” he says. And just like in the boardroom, power is never divided equally. — With reporting by Leslie Dickstein and Julia Zorthian/New York.....»»
Why Airbnb Is Banning Renters From Having Cameras Inside Their Listings
The property-rental company announced an indoor camera ban after years of reports of guests’ privacy being invaded. Airbnb hosts may have good reasons to want to install security cameras inside properties they rent out—they’ve been used to catch theft, or vandalism, or even just non-compliance with rental rules. But concerns about privacy violations have pushed the property rental company Airbnb to ban all indoor security cameras in all of its listings worldwide. “Our goal was to create new, clear rules that provide our community with greater clarity about what to expect on Airbnb,” Juniper Downs, Airbnb’s head of community policy and partnerships, said in a blog post by the San Francisco-based company announcing the new measure on Monday. “These changes were made in consultation with our guests, Hosts and privacy experts, and we’ll continue to seek feedback to help ensure our policies work for our global community.” [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] Changes to their policy, according to Airbnb, which previously allowed indoor cameras in common areas such as living rooms so long as they were disclosed, will take effect on April 30. The update “simplifies” Airbnb’s approach and makes clear that security cameras “regardless of their location, purpose or prior disclosure” are prohibited inside rented out properties. “As the majority of listings on Airbnb do not report having a security camera, this update is expected to impact a smaller subset of listings on the platform.” Read More: We Asked An Etiquette Expert About Home Security Cameras Airbnb has been dogged by controversies in which renters have found seemingly hidden cameras in their lodgings—including in areas with a reasonable expectation of privacy like bathrooms. In an essay titled “Airbnb Has a Hidden-Camera Problem,” former technology staff writer for the Atlantic Sidney Fussell reported in 2019 that in some cases, distressed guests had to resort to social media for Airbnb to settle their complaints. The problem has become so common that sites including the Washington Post and Fast Company have published guides on how to find hidden cameras in your Airbnb, and NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” aired a skit last week parodying Airbnb with references to cameras in the toilet and the bedroom. Last August, a couple filed a $75,000 lawsuit against a Maryland host for allegedly placing hidden cameras recording their intimate moments in the bedroom of a Silver Spring property they rented out. One member of the couple, who installs smoke detectors professionally, discovered the cameras after spotting two smoke detectors in the bedroom. And in September 2023, Indonesian police intervened after a newlywed Chinese couple took to Xiaohongshu—China’s equivalent of Instagram—to share that they found a small camera hidden in a wall power socket in an Airbnb room in Kota Kinabalu. The couple said they searched the room after a previous hotel they booked under the platform also had cameras. Airbnb also apologized to a New Zealand family in 2019 after the renters found a hidden camera live-streaming their stay in Cork, Ireland. In 2015, a German woman sued Airbnb and an Irvine couple after she said she hadn’t been informed of a camera in the living room of the southern California rental she had stayed in, where she walked around naked. The suit reached a settlement in 2017. Airbnb did not immediately respond to TIME’s request for comment. In its announcement about indoor cameras, the company clarified that “devices like doorbell cameras and noise decibel monitors continue to be permitted on Airbnb and can be an effective, privacy-protective way for Hosts to monitor security for their home and get ahead of issues like unauthorized parties.” However, outdoor cameras are prohibited from monitoring indoor spaces and spaces like enclosed outdoor showers or saunas, Airbnb added......»»