More and more "forever renters" are giving up on buying a home or choosing not to own one.
Renters have more flexibility and avoid ownership costs but aren't building home equity.
We asked four experts why the trend is on the wise — and whether it's a shrewd move.
Owning a home has been the keystone of the American dream for generations, but a growing number of people expect to rent one their entire lives.
These "forever renters" vary widely in their reasons for not pursuing home ownership.
Some have simply given up on buying a home due to affordability, as house prices have climbed to record levels, mortgage rates have surged to multi-decade highs, and saving for a down payment has become unfeasible as living costs soar. Others prefer the flexibility to move and freedom from ownership costs that renters enjoy.
Homeownership and renting have numerous pros and cons, making it hard to say whether forever renters are acting shrewdly or making a big mistake.
Business Insider asked four experts to weigh in on the trend. Here are their comments, lightly edited for length and clarity:
1. Grant Wilson, assistant professor of marketing and innovation, University of Regina
"There is a misconception that all renters can't afford to purchase a home or condo. In fact, there is a growing trend toward individuals and families choosing to rent versus buy. Some rent-versus-buy decisions reflect larger market conditions such as inflation, interest rates, and downpayment requirements, but certainly not all.
"My research finds that lifestyle renters — those that choose to rent over buy — 'perceive renting to have affordability, flexibility, location, and limited liability benefits over home ownership.'"
2. Eunjee Kwon, assistant professor of real estate, University of Cincinnati
"Home ownership is important because rent payments do not build equity, and there is always the potential for rent increases, making renting less affordable over time. Renters also face less stability due to eviction or non-renewal risks, especially in major US cities.
"However, renting could offer several advantages over homeownership. It provides greater flexibility for relocation, which is beneficial for younger adults seeking job opportunities. Renters avoid large down payments and the varying costs of homeownership, such as mortgage payments, taxes, maintenance, and repairs. Additionally, real estate is a less liquid asset and a large portion of household assets, exposing households to market fluctuations."
3. David Brasington, Kautz chair in political economy, University of Cincinnati
"The historical return to homeownership over the last 50 years in the US is about 4% per year, and the average return to stock ownership over the same time is 10%. On the surface, stock ownership is a no-brainer, but stock returns are more volatile, and the biggest return to home ownership is that you get your rent back when you sell the house: it's like living there rent-free.
"But then you have to calculate all the costs of owning a home, like maintenance and repair, lawn upkeep, insurance, and so forth. There's also a question of financing. To rent, you have to come up with monthly rent plus a deposit. To buy, you have to come up with a down payment of 20%. It's also cheaper to change the place you're renting than the place you're buying because of real-estate agent fees."
4. Colin Lizieri, professor of real estate finance, University of Cambridge
"In the Anglosphere, there seems an unspoken assumption that owner-occupation is the 'natural' form of housing tenure — the 'American dream' of owning a house and a car — that is reinforced in the media and reflected in public policy.
"But in other successful Western economies, many adults remain in rental housing for much or all of their lives: Germany or Switzerland, for example, where over half of households rent, with a much higher proportion in cities.
"If markets were efficient, then households would be able to choose freely between renting and buying, with the lower capital costs and greater mobility of the former set against any investment potential of the latter. Housing affordability is essentially about supply, not tenure."
An age-old question
Forever renters, whether they've been priced out of buying a home or they're choosing to rent for the long run, stand to lose by handing cash to their landlord each month. They could be paying down a mortgage to gradually gain ownership of a home, which they would likely be able to sell for a profit or pass on to their loved ones.
Renters often have less control and certainty over their living situation as well. But at the same time, they can more easily pick up and move; they avoid a massive downpayment and tying up a huge chunk of their net worth in a single asset; they escape ownership costs like maintenance and insurance; and they might be more able to save and invest each month and earn better returns than a homeowner.
The right option clearly depends on personal and financial circumstances and goals, and people's local rental and housing markets.
But it's worth questioning whether home ownership should hold such primacy in people's minds and propel the nation's housing policies when that isn't the case in other countries.
Government incentives can drive up housing demand far beyond the available supply, pushing up prices and exacerbating the affordability crisis. That's a concern that should live rent-free in all our minds.
A few years ago, Nathaniel Hudson-Hartman, 38, calculated that he'd need about $1.5 million in savings to retire comfortably in his sixties.
"I was making roughly $50,000 a year between my W-2 job and gig work, and I hope to enjoy retirement for about 30 years," he said.
As of March, the Portland-based gig driver had roughly $100,000 in his 401(k) from a previous job and about $12,000 across other savings and investment accounts.
In other words, he still has a ways to go.
The average millennial said they expected to need about $1.7 million in savings to retire comfortably, according to a Northwestern Mutual survey of 4,588 US adults conducted by the Harris Poll between January 3 and January 17. However, the average millennial reported roughly $63,000 in retirement savings so far.
Meanwhile, the Census Bureau's 2022 survey of consumer finances found that only about 62% of Americans between the ages of 35 and 44 had a retirement account like a 401(k), and among those who did, the median balance was $45,000.
!function(){“use strict”;window.addEventListener(“message”,(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data[“datawrapper-height”]){var e=document.querySelectorAll(“iframe”);for(var t in a.data[“datawrapper-height”])for(var r=0;r<e.length;r++)if(e[r].contentWindow===a.source){var i=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";e[r].style.height=i}}}))}();
A common rule of thumb when it comes to retirement savings is that by age 30, one should have saved up 100% of what they make in a year. So if one earns a $75,000 salary at 30, they should have $75,000 in total across their savings, retirement accounts, and other assets. While millennials will need more money to retire comfortably, many are far away from the savings milestone experts suggest.
However, millennials have their own unique set of obstacles compared to boomers. Millennials are more saddled with student debt than prior generations and face some of the worst housing affordability levels relative to income ever seen. What's more, the future of the US Social Security system is uncertain, and longer expected lifespans — while a positive development — will require more retirement savings.
How to figure out how much retirement savings you need
Tiffany Bell, a 36-year-old business management professional based in Houston, didn't always take retirement savings seriously.
When she was 23, she said she didn't participate in her company's 401(k) plan. But after about a year of "chastising" from one of her supervisors, she said she finally gave in.
"Their harping significantly changed the course of my life over the next decade," she told Business Insider.
Over the past 10 years, Bell said she's meticulously tracked her budget and focused on saving. She now has roughly $280,000 in savings and retirement accounts.
That's way ahead of many of her peers, but it might not be enough.
Bell would like to retire around age 65 but isn't sure this will be possible.Using the NerdWallet retirement calculator, she estimated she'd need several million dollars in savings to retire comfortably. Assuming a 4% annual investment return on her $280,000 savings, she'd have about $900,000 in 30 years, her target retirement date. She'd have to invest an additional $40,000 each year to get to $3 million in savings by age 65.
Initially, she put into the calculator that she'd need 80% of her annual pre-retirement income — which is currently in the six figures — to maintain her lifestyle in retirement. But when the calculator spit out a savings goal of over $6 million — which felt impossible — she tried 40% instead. This provided a $3 million savings goal, which she said still felt out of reach, but is a more realistic goal for now.
"Ideally, I'd like to overshoot the target and actually have something to pass down to family," she said. "But it is depressing to think I might not even be able to save enough for myself."
Fidelity recommends that people plan to need between 55% and 80% of their annual pre-retirement income to fund a retirement lifestyle they're satisfied with, though it depends on one's personal circumstances.
While saving for retirement can be a challenge, developing retirement savings goals — and figuring out if they're realistic — is a crucial yet complicated part of the process.
For example, the suggestion that people should have saved 100% of their salary by age 30, has many issues, experts say. One of them is that people don't always start working at the same point in their 20s, said Chris Chen, a certified financial planner and cofounder of financial advisory firm Insight Financial Strategists.
"A lot of the time, when kids graduate from college, not very long thereafter, there might be graduate school, and that's going to put a dent in their style," Chen told Business Insider. "And for these people, getting to the level of one-times earnings can be very difficult."
Meanwhile, he said, salaries for those who don't go to graduate school often won't be as high as those who do.
Another problem with the rule is that the cost of living varies greatly depending on where one lives, says Judi Leahy, senior wealth advisor for Citi Personal Wealth Management. In big cities, costs are going to be much higher, but this is where job opportunities for some industries are concentrated.
"If you're living in New York, it's going to be harder to save money than if you're in Montana," Leahy said.
While financial advisors say you should have savings that equal your salary at 30, they recommend that people have three times their annual salary saved by 40.
While still difficult, this one should be easier to achieve, in part because of the law of compound interest on previous savings, Chen said. When one is invested in securities like a bond or dividend-paying stock, they can choose to reinvest the yields they earn. Doing this repeatedly then snowballs the total return for the investor.
In addition to speaking with a financial advisor, some free online retirement tools — like those from Vanguard, Bankrate, and NerdWallet — may be able to help people develop more personalized retirement goals,experts told BI.
But these tools aren't without their limitations. Bell — who used one of those calculators — said her future is too uncertain to accurately assess her retirement needs. For instance, Bell doesn't know where she'll be living when she retires and if that home will be paid off. What's more, she can't anticipate what health needs she'll have when she stops working.
"I have no idea where I'll be at that point in my life," she said. "To me, it seems almost impossible to guess what is really needed."
To be sure, many millennials may feel similar to Bell: It can seem impossible to predict how much you'll need for possibly 20 or 30 years of your life without an annual salary. Even if someone saves what they think is enough, there's no telling exactly how much they'll need for any family emergencies or health crises that arise. If it turns out they haven't saved enough, the lack of a social safety net in the US means they may be forced to work well past their desired retirement age.
How millennials can get their retirement savings back on track
While some millennials are struggling financially, it's not all doom and gloom when it comes to their retirement prospects.
A Vanguard report released in October found that early millennials — people between the ages of 37 and 41 — were better positioned for retirement than older generations. Vanguard attributed this in part to the passage of the Pension Protection Act in 2006, which it found made it easier for Americans to join their workplace retirement plans and increase their savings rates over time.
In a Fidelity survey conducted last December — in partnership with consumer research firm Big Village — of more than 2,000 US adults with an investment account, 75% of millennials surveyed said they were confident they'd be able to retire when and how they want. The survey found that millennials started saving for retirement earlier than both Gen X and boomers. What's more, Fidelity research published last year found that, since 2020, millennials have seen a larger increase in median income than any other generation.
But experts told Business Insider that for the other millennials who are behind on their retirement savings, there are a few tricks that can make up for lost time.
First, start saving whatever you can, when you can. Nilay Gandhi, CFP senior wealth advisor at Vanguard, told Business Insider that he recommends people put between 10% and 15% of their annual pre-tax income toward retirement savings.
Second, make sure you are putting money into a retirement account like a 401(k) or a Roth IRA — which offers diversified investments and tax advantages — and getting any deposit matches that your company might offer. Many firms match deposits up to a certain percentage of an employee's salary. The maximum one can contribute to a Roth IRA, which is funded by post-tax deposits, is $7,000 in 2024. For a 401(k), which is for pre-tax deposits, the maximum this year is $23,000.
"They should religiously put their money in there, whether it is the Roth version or the traditional version, and at the very least pick up the match," Chen said.
Third, if you have an investment portfolio, make sure it has the right mix of stocks, bonds, and cash.
Leahy said that those in their 30s may want to think about leaning more heavily into stocks given their longer investing timeline and higher risk tolerance. Older investors may want to consider higher allocations to safer options like fixed-income assets, she said.
"If you're trying to play catch up at 45 or 55 and you think you want to go all in on equities, it might not be your best bet," she said.
The concern for some millennials isn't that they don't have the money to put toward retirement savings, it's that they're investing it too conservatively, Rita Assaf, vice president, retirement savings at Fidelity Investments, told Business Insider.
Assaf said Fidelity's research found that millennials have seen the largest drop in "age-appropriate asset allocation," meaning they're holding too much of their savings in cash and bonds than she would typically recommend.
"These indicators point toward a trend of millennials taking a more conservative approach to investing, which likely stems from the fact they have multiple other savings priorities of their own," she said. "The concern is that millennials may not end up with the appropriate mix of assets to help them adequately achieve their retirement goals."
While a solid investment strategy is important, allocating more money toward saving is the most important step.
"If an individual is not saving enough, even the best investment strategy is unlikely to help them reach their goal," Gandhi said.
Savings outside a retirement account are also important, Chen said, and one should start by building up at least six months of expenses for an emergency fund. One way to do this is to have money deposited directly from their paycheck into a separate account. And with certificates of deposit paying annualized rates around 5% at the moment, Leahy said savers are even more incentivized to hold onto their money.
Both Leahy and Chen also agreed that credit card use should be avoided for those who are not highly confident that they can pay off their balance every month.
"Do not maintain a credit card balance. That's a great way to erode capital because the card is charging you anywhere from 12% to 22%," Leahy said. "So that item that you bought that was on sale that you really didn't need wasn't worth it."
But for some millennials, following most of this advice might not be enough for them to reach their retirement goals. It could force them to join the millions of Americans working well into their sixties and later.
Bell, for example, has started coming to terms with the possibility that she might have to work later in life than she initially hoped.
"I'm fortunate to be in an industry that allows you to work well past retirement age because it's not very physically intensive," she said.
Similarly, Hudson-Hartman said he takes comfort from the fact he enjoys working — and has an income stream he can count on well past age 70 if necessary.
"I always planned to do gig work part-time in my later years," he said. "I plan to just dial it back and work during busy times and keep my mornings and afternoons free."
Russia's ballistic missiles on display at the Moscow Victory Day parade on May 9, 2024.
Cao Yang/Xinhua via Getty Images
US firms need to be vigilant with their exports, says Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh.
Singh said an "unacceptably high" number of US components have been found in Russia's weapons.
Companies shouldn't become "unwitting cogs in Russia's arsenal of autocracy," Singh said on Tuesday.
An "unacceptably high" number of US arms components are landing in Russian hands, a US official said on Tuesday.
"The percentage of Russian battlefield weaponry with US or allied branded components is alarmingly and unacceptably high," said Daleep Singh, US deputy national security advisor for international economics.
Singh was speaking at an event hosted by Washington think tank Brookings Institution on May 28 when he urged US tech companies to be more vigilant with their exports, per Bloomberg.
"I want to issue an urgent call for corporate responsibility," Singh said.
"Put your creativity and resources to work, know your customers, know their customers, and know the end users," he added. "Ensure that American firms are not unwitting cogs in Russia's arsenal of autocracy."
The 48-year-old Harvard and MIT graduate is widely seen as the architect of the Biden administration's economic sanctions on Russia when it first invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
Singh's remarks on Tuesday spotlighted the difficulties the US faces in limiting the flow of its goods to Russia.
According to an investigation conducted by Nikkei Asia last year, Russia still managed to acquire hundreds of millions of dollars worth of US-made chips in spite of prevailing sanctions. The outlet said most of the goods were routed into Russia through Hong Kong and China.
"It took decades to build the financial sanctions architecture after 9/11. We've got to do that at warp speed for technology and goods companies," Singh said on Tuesday.
Representatives for the State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI sent outside regular business hours.
To be sure, there are industrial uses for gold too, but as Morgan Stanley explained, half of all silver is used in heavy industry and technology.
"The fact that silver has been outshining gold in recent weeks is due mostly to its application in manufacturing," wrote Daniela Hathorn, a senior market analyst at online trading platformCapital.com, on Tuesday.
"Whilst it also attracts safe haven demand — even though not as much as its yellow counterpart — its industrial demand has been driving the moves higher given the resilience in manufacturing activity in the US," added Hathorn.
Silver is used in solar panels and also in general industry
In particular, silver is a key raw material for solar panels. They're in demand amid the world's transition to sustainable energy, and China has raced to manufacture them.
China's silver imports hit a three-year high of 390 tons in December before falling back to over 340 tons in April — well above the monthly five-year average of 310 tons, according to Bloomberg on Wednesday.
China's demand for silver is so strong that domestic prices of the precious metal are higher than international prices, which is likely to send more imports to the East Asian nation in the coming weeks, per Bloomberg.
Global demand is also set to outstrip supply for the fourth straight year in 2024, according to the Silver Institute, an industry association.
Solar panels are a sore spot between the West and China.
The US, Europe, and their allies accuse China of unfair trade practices, including making and exporting so many solar panels — among other goods — that it's impacting their economies.
Beijing has pushed back on the West's claims of overcapacity, saying they are aimed at containing China's economic growth.
To be sure, there isn't overcapacity and overproduction in all sectors of China's industry, as a Bloomberg analysis in April found. The problem is mainly in areas where China already had the upper hand over the West, such as lower-tech goods and building materials.
China's production of solar panels and batteries also exceeds the demand for them. But the competition doesn't extend to a key emerging area of contention: electric vehicles.
The West's hawkish moves toward China now follow the East Asian giant's breakneck industrialization to its position as the factory of the world over the past four decades. That quick ascendance wiped out jobs and decimated communities elsewhere — a phenomenon three researchers termed "China shock."
An F-35 Lightning stealth jet performs a flypast during the commissioning ceremony for 809 Naval Air Squadron at RAF Marham in King's Lynn in Norfolk.
Joe Giddens/PA Images via Getty Images
A new F-35B crashed in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Tuesday, leaving its pilot injured.
The jet was a new model being transferred from a Lockheed Martin facility to the US military, per reports.
F-35s have been reported to cost up to $135 million each, but it's unclear how much this one was worth.
An F-35B Lightning II fighter jet crashed near the Albuquerque International Sunport in New Mexico on Tuesday, and its pilot has been seriously injured, local authorities said.
Fire rescue teams responded to the crash just before 2 p.m., and the pilot was sent to hospital while conscious, said Albuquerque Fire Rescue spokesperson Lt. Jason Fejer.
On May 28 at 13:54 AFR, BCFR & Kirtland AFB responded to University south of Rio Bravo for a plane crash. BCFR and AFR’s Batt 1 confirmed a downed aircraft on fire. The pilot was located & transported while fire was extinguished. Scene has been turned over to Kirtland. pic.twitter.com/P0aaMvuod0
Two other civilians on the scene were assessed for injuries and released.
CBS News reported, citing two unnamed US officials, that the F-35 was a new developmental model being delivered to the US military from Lockheed Martin.
The jet was being transferred from a Lockheed Martin facility at Naval Air Reserve Station in Fort Worth, Texas, to the Edwards Air Force Base in southern California, per the outlet.
ABC News reported, citing one unnamed US official, that the jet crashed just after refueling in Albuquerque and was being flown by a pilot for a defense contract agency. The outlet also reported that the F-35 was new.
Fejer told NBC affiliate KOB that local fire crews needed assistance from Kirkland Air Force Base.
"We carry 500 gallons of water on our apparatus and small foam tanks, but it's no match for a jet fuel fire of that scope," said Fejer, per KOB.
The Albuquerque-based outlet published footage of firefighters spraying water on the smoldering wreckage of the F-35 with a main road in view.
Lockheed Martin and Kirkland Air Force Base did not immediately respond to requests for comment sent outside regular business hours by Business Insider.
The last report of an F-35 crash was in September when a pilot ejected during training over South Carolina. The stealth fighter then went missing, flying about 80 miles before crashing.
F-35Bs have been reported to cost up to $135 million per fighter, but it's unclear how much the jet that crashed on Tuesday was worth.
Photos of a Buk M-1 launcher identified by Ukrainian media as a "FrankenSAM" were posted by the East Air Command on Monday.
Ukrainian East Air Command
Ukraine's East Air Command unveiled photos of a "FrankenSAM," a blend of Soviet and US weapons.
The combined air defense systems were announced in October, but this is the first time one was officially revealed.
Ukraine and the US have been working on "FrankenSAM" projects to make use of Kyiv's older inventory.
Ukraine on Monday unveiled the first official photos of a "FrankenSAM," a hybrid air defense system that combines Soviet launchers with US missiles.
The East Air Command posted the photos on its Facebook page with an interview of an officer in charge of the defense system.
Two images show a self-propelled Buk-M1 launcher with camouflage netting draped over its top, obscuring parts of the system.
Ukrainian defense news outlets identified the system as a "FrankenSAM" fitted with RIM-7 missiles, noting that the Buk appeared relatively unchanged from the outside, with its original launch and radar dome intact.
Two other photos show debris from destroyed drones, with the interviewed officer saying his crew took out a Lancet drone and an Orlan-10 drone — indicating that the "FrankenSAMs" can be deployed to destroy smaller targets.
Ukraine has been experimenting with US engineers for months on using its existing inventory of Soviet-era Buk systems to fire old RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles supplied by Washington. It's difficult for Kyiv to acquire munitions for its Buk launchers because Russia manufactures them.
The New York Times reported that Ukraine and the US were also trying to pair AIM-9M Sidewinder air-to-air missiles with Soviet radar systems and Patriot missiles with Ukrainian-made radar systems.
It's an experimental marriage of systems built separately on opposing sides of the Cold War, but one that appears to be working. The "FrankenSAM" scored its first reported kill in January, when Ukraine said it took out a Shahed drone at 5½ miles.
According to Ukraine's Air Force, the RIM-7 missiles, developed in the 1960s, have a shorter range than the traditional Soviet-made munitions the Buk was designed to fire.
In November, a spokesperson for the force at the time, Yuriy Ignat, told the Ukrainian outlet New Voice that the "FrankenSAM" would be effective in "a small radius."
The RIM-7's range is about 12.5 miles in flat distance and about 9.3 miles in altitude, while the Soviet 9M38 can hit targets about 18 miles away and an altitude of 12 miles.
The official photos of the "FrankenSAM" were posted about three weeks after Russian forces claimed to have destroyed a Ukrainian Buk M-1 with drones in Kharkiv. A video published online appeared to show the Buk with custom-mounted missiles.
Kevin O'Leary is a Canadian investor and "Shark Tank" host.
Frazer Harrison / Getty Images
Kevin O'Leary said on Tuesday that he wants to crowdfund buying TikTok.
The move comes after US lawmakers agreed on a plan to ban Chinese-owned TikTok unless it is sold.
Other potential buyers include former Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and Steven Mnuchin.
Kevin O'Leary has put himself on the notably short list of people who say they want to buy TikTok — and he's making it a group effort.
The "Shark Tank" investor said on Tuesday that he set up a crowdfunding website to gauge interest in collectively buying the social media platform. The site allows anyone to "reserve" spots to become investors in the potential US version of TikTok. It's not accepting any payments yet, and reservations are only a way to indicate interest.
If the crowdfunding campaign kicks off, it would be subject to US rules that limit investors to people who earn over $200,000 or have specific finance qualifications.
"I'd like to democratize TikTok and turn it into a platform where the user data is protected from the prying eyes of foreign adversaries," O'Leary said in a video he posted on Instagram.
The announcement follows a decision by US lawmakers last month to ban Chinese-owned TikTok from US app stores unless it is sold in less than a year. TikTok's parent company ByteDance, sued the federal government over the ban earlier this month. TikTok has already said it has no plans to sell the platform.
O'Leary, a Canadian investor, first raised his hand to buy the platform in March, saying that TikTok is "not going to get banned because I'm gonna buy it." He said that he didn't think Google or Meta would be able to purchase it because of antitrust concerns. The same month, he said his starting bid would be $20 billion to $30 billion — a 90% cut in valuation based on the company's last funding round.
The new website, however, did not share details of how much money he plans to raise or whether his project is already in talks with TikTok.
Representatives for O'Leary did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
In March, O'Leary said that it is unlikely that the Chinese government will sell TikTok with its algorithms, and a potential buyer would have to "re-emulate" the platform.
Before he joined "Shark Tank" at the show's 2009 outset, O'Leary bought and consolidated software businesses in the late 1980s and 1990s.
Europe may want to reconsider their calls for Ukrainian strikes on Russia, says Vladimir Putin.
Putin hinted that Russia could retaliate against their "small and densely populated countries."
"This unending escalation can lead to serious consequences," the Russian leader warned.
Russian leader Vladimir Putin says European countries should rethink their calls to let Ukraine use Western arms to strike his country.
"So, these officials from NATO countries, especially the ones based in Europe, particularly in small European countries, should be fully aware of what is at stake," Putin told reporters on Tuesday.
"They should keep in mind that theirs are small and densely populated countries, which is a factor to reckon with before they start talking about striking deep into the Russian territory," he continued.
Putin's warnings come after several European leaders said that Ukraine should be allowed to attack Russian military targets. While Ukraine has been a large beneficiary of Western military support, US restrictions mean that the country isn't allowed to mount attacks on Russian soil.
NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg told The Economist, in an interview published Friday, that the prohibitions should be eased so that Ukraine can better defend itself.
"The time has come for allies to consider whether they should lift some of the restrictions they have put on the use of weapons they have donated to Ukraine," Stoltenberg said.
"Especially now when a lot of the fighting is going on in Kharkiv, close to the border, to deny Ukraine the possibility of using these weapons against legitimate military targets on Russian territory makes it very hard for them to defend themselves," he continued, referencing a recent attack on Ukraine's northeastern city of Kharkiv.
But such a move, Putin warned on Tuesday, could have "serious consequences" for Europe.
"This unending escalation can lead to serious consequences," Putin said. "If Europe were to face those serious consequences, what will the United States do, considering our strategic arms parity?"
Representatives for NATO didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from BI sent outside regular business hours.
Stoltenberg isn't the only European leader who believes that Ukraine should begin taking the fight to Russia.
"According with the law of war, it is perfectly possible, and there is no contradiction," EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Tuesday. "You have to balance the risk of escalation and the need for Ukrainians to defend."
Borrell's comments echo that of French President Emmanuel Macron, who also called for restrictions to be lifted on Tuesday, per the Financial Times.
"How can we explain to Ukraine that they need to protect their cities but that they don't have the right to attack where the missiles are coming from?" Macron told reporters. "It's as if we were telling them we're giving you arms, but you cannot use them to defend yourself."
"We must allow them to neutralize the military sites from which the missiles are being fired. But we cannot allow other targets in Russia to be hit, obviously civilian or military targets," he added.
Steven Hirsch – Pool/Getty Images // Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images
Sen. Marco Rubio is a leading contender for Donald Trump's vice president pick in 2024, per a new report.
The New York Times reports that Rubio has taken a low-key approach in his bid to run alongside Trump.
However, Rubio's approach has left Trump a bit perplexed, the Times reports.
Sen. Marco Rubio is apparently playing hard to get when it comes to beating out the competition and making it as Donald Trump's VP pick, The New York Times reports.
Through his support behind the scenes, Rubio has become a "leading contender" as the vice president pick, The New York Times reported, citing advisors to Trump.
According to the Times, Rubio hasn't been keen on joining the president at rallies or hanging out at his Mar-a-Lago home. Rather, he became an "occasional policy advisor" to Trump.
But Rubio's approach to supporting Trump has apparently confused the former president, who "privately wondered how much the senator wants the job," the Times writes, citing two people close to Trump.
Rubio is one of over a dozen GOP personalities vying to be Trump's running mate for 2024, but the former president and the Florida senator have not always been friendly.
The senator ran against Trump during the 2016 GOP primary election, where both candidates tossed insults at each other. Trump called Rubio "Little Marco Rubio," and Rubio returned fire by saying Trump has small hands. Rubio later came to regret the insult.
The pair moved past the schoolyard insults and have supported each other politically. In 2022, Trump stumped for Rubio's senate campaign. On Thursday, Trump named Rubio as one of the people who could join his ticket during a local cable news interview at his New York Rally.
Marco Rubio sits at the number three spot in Business Insider's power ranking of Trump's potential vice presidents — though Rubio faces the challenge of deciding whether he would leave Florida. The 12th Amendment dictates that a presidential and vice presidential candidate "shall not be an inhabitant of the same state."
The Times reported that Trump is not budging, but Rubio is willing to part ways with his home state to run alongside Trump.
Representatives for Rubio and Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.
Hemant Pandey's job switches led to significant pay and role improvements.
Pandey's career includes stints at Tesla, SAP, Salesforce, and Meta.
Pandey recommends negotiation and leveraging multiple offers for optimal compensation.
Software engineer Hemant Pandey worked at four tech companies in six years.
Every switch was an opportunity to land a better role and better pay, the Bay Area-based engineer said.
"I've hopped quite a bit. I optimized for money and career growth," he told Business Insider.
He shared his compensation journey since graduating from university in 2017. His career path has brought him to Tesla, SAP, Salesforce, and his current role at Meta.
Tesla
Pandey joined Tesla in February 2018 after his master's in computer science. He got a standard new graduate offer for software engineers.
He was offered $150,000 a year for a base salary, restricted stock units, and an annual bonus. He negotiated his sign-on bonus from $8,000 to $12,000.
Since he needed a work visato stay in the US, he had about three months to find a new role. He began applying and landed a job at SAP at the end of July, seven weeks after he started looking.
SAP
Pandey joined the company in September in a new graduate role, like at Tesla.
"I had no competing offers so I did not have much leverage," he said. "But I negotiated base by 6% and sign on by 20%."
It added up to $165,000 annually, plus a $12,000 sign-on bonus. Pandey spent the rest of the year at SAP and received an annual performance-related appraisal of 5%, which brought his compensation to $173,250.
Friends spoke highly of Salesforce's company culture, and he thought he might be better compensated there. After a little over a year at SAP, he decided to apply for a job.
Salesforce
He moved to Salesforce, joining in a slightly more senior software role from his last role at SAP.
Salesforce offered Pandey a 30% increase on his total compensation, bringing the package toabout $190,000.
His base salary was about $150,000, stocks would amount to $17,500 per year, and his annual bonus was $15,000.
Before accepting the offer, he negotiated with Salesforce. That netted him a $10,000 sign-on bonus — the company hadn't offered one at the start.
"I always make sure to negotiate because there's always room from when they give you the initial offer," he said. "Most of the time they're willing to go 15% or 20% higher, so you don't want to miss that."
He suggests that all candidates negotiate, especially if they have leverage.
"If you have competing offers, if you have pending interviews, all these kinds of things — then definitely negotiate. You can increase the compensation between 20% to 30%," he said.
Pandey was promoted at Salesforce after 15 monthsand got a 20% bump from his previous pay, bringing his total to around $240,000.
The new role moved him from software engineer to senior software engineer. He led projects with two to three engineers and worked with product managers and customers. He also found that his work had more visibility.
After two years at Salesforce, he applied to Meta in 2021.
Meta
He joined Meta the same year he became a senior software engineer. It was still a vertical move because of the different ways Salesforce and Meta establish levels.
"The most significant thing happened in my career when I made the move from Salesforce to Meta, which was close to almost 80-90% hike" in pay, Pandey said.
Around the time he applied to Meta, Pandey also applied to TikTok, LinkedIn, and two other companies. He used offers from these companies to negotiate his compensation at Meta.
"Be very transparent that you have other offers, even if you have interviews going on mention those, because it's also leverage," he said. It signals to the recruiter that they have to move fast and work with your parameters.
Having other offers meant that Meta's recruiters tried to match base salary and restricted stock units from the highest of all offers.
Aside from being transparent,Pandey said it is important to be proactive and research how compensation works in different companies. For example, candidates should compare howstocks are refreshed, he said. A refresher is when the stock option portion of an employee's compensation is updated.
"I also negotiated my sign-on bonus and said, 'Hey, at Salesforce, I'll be leaving my 30 to 40k of annual bonus if I join you. Can you help me accommodate that?'"
Pandey was offered $520,000 in annual pay in that 2021 move.
He is currently a senior software engineer at Meta's Menlo Park office.
Business Insider has verified his offer letters, employment history, and Meta compensation.
Do you work in tech, finance, or consulting and have a story to share about your compensation journey? Email this reporter at shubhangigoel@insider.com.