• I loved my job, but my coworker hated me and started badmouthing me to everyone. 
• It got so bad that I quit the job, and enrolled in grad school.
• In school, I learned to move on and accept myself and others.

In my early 30s, my job involved extensive traveling with a team. During my first year with a luxury car company, we worked hard, bonded quickly, and had a blast together. When I moved to a new team, we didn't become fast friends the same way, but I enjoyed the job, the pay, and the opportunity to visit new and familiar places.

Over time, I realized one of my new coworkers did not like me. She ignored me, cut me out of conversations, rolled her eyes at my suggestions, and directly contradicted me whenever she could. She complained about me to our teammates — some of whom would quietly tell me what she was saying behind my back.

When we had a break in our travel, I hoped the time apart would change the dynamic. Instead, her anger toward me escalated. I tried to stay out of her way and focus on work, but when she started complaining about me to my boss, I worried about keeping my job.

I knew I had to quit

My coworker's behavior was making me miserable. Her behavior was making it impossible for me to do my job. Quitting would have meant a financial loss, and I would miss the travel, but working with her was torture.

I told my supervisor I was leaving. She was sympathetic but saw it as a simple personality conflict, implying I was also to blame. I felt undervalued and misunderstood. It turned out to be the best work-related decision I've ever made.

I enrolled in a master's degree program in clinical psychology. I'd been fascinated by human nature my whole life, and this disorienting experience with my coworker made me even more curious.

Going back to school helped me move forward

When I took a break from the professional world, I was able to analyze myself and see myself in a new light.

I learned that not everyone needs to like me. This seems obvious, but I have always tried to shape myself into who I thought people wanted me to be. The fact that someone hated me no matter what I did or said was painful, but it helped me realize that some people aren't worth trying to please and some relationships are impossible to fix. I still want to be liked these days, but I've stopped trying to please everyone I interact with.

I also realized that in my personal life, I'm creative, a little messy, and wear my heart on my sleeve. But at work, my personality tended to be structured, no-nonsense, and leadership-oriented. That sometimes rubbed people the wrong way.

I've learned to soften that first impression by bringing genuine curiosity and more of my "inner me" — the one I naturally show when I'm more comfortable — to early interactions.

Studying human nature helped me feel less powerless

One of my favorite psychology professors used to say, "You're not responsible for your first thought in a situation, but you are responsible for every subsequent thought and action."

I learned not to beat myself up for an initial reaction I wasn't proud of, which was often deeply conditioned and unconscious. Now I notice when I'm reacting badly. I then choose a different thought and decide how to move forward. Having this skill might have changed how my coworker acted toward me, and it would have helped me feel less powerless and frustrated around her.

One of the most valuable lessons I learned was "hurt people, hurt people." This simple truth reminds me to bring understanding and compassion to every personal interaction. I don't know what happened in my coworker's life to cause her intense dislike for me. As hurtful as it was on my end, I can look back and see there was a bigger picture I didn't understand.

While compassion is not a reason to tolerate bad behavior, I also learned to set clear boundaries for how people treat me. It helps me see each person as multifaceted, with a lifetime of shaping experiences. It reminds me to be kind to everyone I meet, even if we're never going to be close.

I learned all this by simply stepping back from my job, taking a break, and immersing myself in an entirely new field. It turned out to be the best professional decision I ever made.

• The housing market appears to be entering a recovery period, Charles Schwab said in a recent note.
• They say supply, price growth, and home sales all look to be improving from past conditions.
• "That comes with an important distinction, though: A recovery is not synonymous with a booming expansion."

The housing market is on a slow climb out of its affordability crisis, though time is still needed to properly relieve consumer pain, Charles Schwab said in a note on Wednesday. 

"As housing was the first sector to kick off the rolling recessions we've pointed out for more than two years, it now looks like it's participating in the start of rolling recoveries," the bank said. "That comes with an important distinction, though: A recovery is not synonymous with a booming expansion."

Instead, it's more that runaway price and sale trends are easing from extremes, while supply-side conditions are showing signs of meaningful improvement. 

First, the steep acceleration in home-price growth looks to be over, Schwab said. That's in reference to the marked increases seen between 2022 and 2023, as pandemic buying fever turbocharged pricing. Just four years into this decade, prices have rocketed 47% higher.

While growth has normalized, prices still remain elevated, with median prices of existing and new homes both near all-time highs. Prices for the two property types average $412,000 and $433,000, respectively.

But according to a new report from Redfin, sale-price growth could keep softening in the coming months. That's amid a rebound of sellers that are slashing their asking prices.

Second, sales are steadily picking up, though meaningful bounce-back hasn't happened yet, Schwab said. 

In the past few years, home sales plummeted, falling by a maximum drop of 41%. That's been outdone by new home sales, which fell almost 50%. 

Though still below their cycle peaks, both are up 9% and 22% from their recent troughs.

Third, new inventory supply has soared, as homebuilders hurried to respond to unmet demand. Even before the pandemic, a shortage of housing has been a point of pressure for consumers, only made worse by homeowners that have been kept from moving due to today's high mortgage rates.

"For any recent or aspiring homeowner, it's no surprise that affordability is significantly constrained in this cycle. This has prevented individuals and families from purchasing a home, forced them into intense bidding wars, or caused them to make more painful financial tradeoffs in order to purchase a home," Schwab said.

In fact, the Housing Affordability Index fell to its all-time low last year, but Schwab noted that it seems to be pushing back up from the bottom. However, investors should expect this recovery to be sluggish.

The bank added that mortgage rates are likely to keep drifting higher, as federal interest rates normalize at around current levels. Though mortgage highs have been a headwind for consumers, buyers are likely to adjust to this over time.

"That doesn't mean housing can only fully recover if prices and rates come down dramatically, given there are other (perhaps stronger) factors at play, such as supply," Schwab said. "Yet, a stabilization in activity, price growth, and interest rate volatility will likely provide a more stable foundation for the sector."

• Carnival Cruise Line is set to launch its new private destination, Celebration Key, in 2025.
• The $600 million project has amenities similar to Royal Caribbean's private island.
• Carnival is "clearly following Royal Caribbean's footsteps," one analyst told Business Insider.

Step aside, CocoCay. Royal Caribbean's private island could soon face some serious competition.

About 140 miles east of Miami, Royal Caribbean's Perfect Day at CocoCay receives thousands of eager families virtually every day of the year, drawn to the private Caribbean island's irresistible waterpark, beach clubs, and family-friendly amenities.

The tropical destination has become a massive hit with the cruise line's guests. And it seems Carnival, which also targets cruising families, wants a slice of its competitor's winning pie.

Carnival already operates its own private island, Half Moon Cay.

But what's better than one exclusive port? Two of them.

The cruise giant is now building another destination just for its guests: Celebration Key, a mile-long resort-like getaway on Grand Bahama Island.

The $600 million project, Carnival Corp's largest, is set to open in 2025 — a sign that the company is "clearly following Royal Caribbean's footsteps," Patrick Scholes, lodging and leisure research analyst at Truist Securities, told Business Insider in March.

Carnival’s promises for its private destination might sound familiar.

Royal Caribbean's private island has a waterpark with 14 slides and children's play areas.

Similarly, according to Carnival's recent announcement, Celebration Key will have a large, family-friendly freshwater lagoon with two 350-foot-long waterslides and a children's water playground.

It's a scaled-back version of CocoCay's popular feature — for now. Looking ahead, Carnival said it plans to build a waterpark and zipline course, too.

Celebration Key would also offer amenities like ping-pong, basketball, and volleyball.

As you might've guessed, these activities are also available on Royal Caribbean's island as well.

Looking to escape the sound of screaming children? Carnival says Celebration Key will have a separate adult-only section, again with frills reminiscent of CocoCay's recently opened pool club (as in, a swim-up pool bar, a DJ, and no kids in sight).

It wouldn’t be a cruise-owned private island without up-charged amenities.

Travelers at Perfect Day at CocoCay can splurge on private beach clubs, cabanas, shopping, food, and alcohol.

The same goes for Celebration Key. In fact, "You'd be surprised at how much people are willing to pay to rent cabanas for the day," Josh Weinstein, president and CEO of Carnival Corp, told investors in late March.

Like CocoCay, Carnival expects its private destination to be a big money maker with increased ticket revenue and "incremental in-port spending," Weinstein said. Plus, it'll be near Florida's major cruise ports, allowing Carnival to save money on fuel — another major benefit to owning private Caribbean properties.

Celebration Key is already included in over 500 of Carnival’s itineraries across 18 ships.

We're still a year from its debut, but that's not stopping the company from planning the expansion of its upcoming property.

Carnival said it'll spend $100 million extending Celebration Key's pier, which, when completed in 2026, will allow it to accommodate four of Carnival's largest cruise ships.

By 2028, the cruise line says the destination will be able to accommodate 4 million travelers annually.

• US presidents are driven in a heavily armored limousine nicknamed "The Beast." 
• It features a secure communications system and fridge stocked with the president's blood type.
• Military cargo aircraft transport the presidential limousine for use abroad.

When US presidents aren't flying on Air Force One or taking helicopter trips in Marine One, they're driven around in a presidential limousine nicknamed "The Beast."

Weighing in at 20,000 pounds and outfitted with advanced security and communications systems, the newest model of "The Beast" debuted during the Trump administration in 2018.

Take a look inside the famous vehicle.

US presidents travel in a secure limousine nicknamed "The Beast."

US presidents rode Lincoln limousines for most of the 20th century until the 1980s, when the Reagan administration switched to Cadillacs.

The latest model of the presidential limousine was commissioned by the US Secret Service in 2014 and used for the first time in 2018 by President Donald Trump.

Designed to look like a longer version of a Cadillac XT6, the chassis of the car is actually that of a Chevrolet Kodiak truck produced by General Motors, NBC News reported. The vehicle weighs around 20,000 pounds and cost around $1.5 million to build.

The heavily armored vehicle is bulletproof, blast-resistant, and sealed to withstand biochemical attacks.

While details about the limousine's security measures remain classified, NBC News reported that the vehicle features a night-vision system, tear gas firing capabilities, and door handles that can be electrified to prevent intruders.

The windows are believed to be 3 inches thick and the vehicle's armor around 8 inches thick.

"The Beast" is also equipped with medical supplies, including a refrigerator stocked with the president's blood type.

The limousine's secure communications system is able to dispatch the launch codes for nuclear weapons.

The presidential seal appears throughout the design of the car.

The seal, featuring an eagle holding an olive branch and 13 arrows in its talons below a banner reading "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of many, one"), appears on both the interior and exterior of the passenger door.

The limousine can seat up to seven people.

The interior features water bottle holders and plush leather seats. Previous presidential limousines have also included a fold-out desk, according to the US Secret Service.

"The Beast" travels with the president.

Presidential limousines are transported by military cargo aircraft, such as US Air Force C-17s, for use during the president's travels, according to the US Secret Service.

When abroad, the presidential limousine flies the American flag and the flag of the host country.

When Biden visited the UK in June 2021, the presidential limousine flew both the American flag and the Union Jack.

On Inauguration Day, Secret Service agents change the car's license plates as a new president takes power.

Some presidents have used the Washington, DC, "End Taxation Without Representation" license plates, while others have removed the slogan, Axios reported.

Accompanied by the presidential motorcade, "The Beast" remains an instantly recognizable symbol of the power of the presidency.

"It is safe to say that this car's security and coded communications systems make it the most technologically advanced protection vehicle in the world," the assistant director for the US Secret Service's Office of Protective Operations said of "The Beast, " according to the US Secret Service's official website.

• A major supplier of ammunition for Ukraine described the struggle to get quality components.
• Czech defense CEO Michal Strnad told the FT that soaring prices and poor quality made the job difficult.
• Ukraine has been experiencing chronic ammunition shortages.

Central Europe's largest ammunition supplier said that quality and cost issues meant that half of the shells it's sourcing for Ukraine can't be sent directly to the country, according to the Financial Times.

"Every week the price is going up and there are big issues with the components," Michal Strnad, CEO of Czechoslovak Group, or CSG, told the paper.

"It's not an easy job," he added.

CSG, which has been acquiring ammo on behalf of the Czech government for Ukraine, has found that supplies being brought in from Asia or Africa are often missing components, or need work, the paper reported.

As such, the company is being forced to add missing components of its own, which has slowed delivery.

Strnad told the paper the initiative is still "on track," with deliveries expected in June.

Strnad's remarks came as five European leaders met in Prague on Tuesday to discuss plans to obtain 800,000 155 mm artillery shells from non-EU countries to send to Ukraine, Radio Free Europe reported.

The $1.7 billion project is funded by 15 EU states as well as NATO, per the outlet.

In a joint statement, the group of leaders said that half a million rounds of ammunition would be delivered by the end of the year.

In January, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the war in Ukraine had "become a battle for ammunition."

It's a message Strnad wishes Western leaders had taken on earlier.

He told the FT that he had warned policymakers two years ago that the ready availability of ammunition would define the war, but says his message went unheard.

"They didn't think that there could be some war where artillery would play the major role," he said. "Everybody thought about drones, artificial intelligence and new trends."

Rapidly developing technologies such as drones and electronic warfare have indeed played a crucial role in the conflict. But Ukraine's inability to advance along the front line this year — and its losses — have been attributed to a chronic shortage of soldiers and ammunition.

In April, the situation led one US veteran serving there to describe Russia as the "alpha predator" of the war, as Business Insider's Sinéad Baker reported.

Ukraine has been forced to limit itself to firing 2,000 shells per day for much of this year, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said.

And it's only been since mid-May that its forces have started to breathe more easily over their ability to expend shells, Zelenskyy said.

Since the outbreak of Russia's full-scale invasion, CSG has derived much of its profits from supplying Ukrainian forces.

In March, it announced that it was looking to start several joint ventures in Ukraine for the manufacture of heavy ammunition and equipment, Reuters reported.

• Ride-hailing drivers are reporting sub-$3 fares, often earning less than a cup of coffee per trip.
• It's part of a broader trend of gig drivers saying they're seeing lower pay.
• Uber and Lyft told BI that drivers earn more than $30 an hour while engaged on the apps.

The Uber or Lyft driver who took you from the office to a nearby restaurant downtown might not be able to even buy a cup of coffee with the money made from your trip.

Eight ride-hailing and delivery drivers shared screenshots this month with Business Insider showing nearly two dozen recent trips, ranging from five minutes to 15 minutes, that paid at or below $3, excluding tips.

One screenshot from a Lyft driver based in Arizona showed a $2.62 ride that took 15 minutes and traveled 4.32 miles, not counting the few minutes it took to drive to the passenger. This was the amount offered to the driver on the platform before it was accepted and before tips. Similar screenshots came from drivers in Cleveland, Houston, Fort Lauderdale, and Orange County.

Sergio Avedian, a gig driver and senior contributor at the gig-driver-advocacy blog and YouTube channel The Rideshare Guy, has started encountering sub-$3 rides over the last several weeks in Los Angeles. He said many drivers across the country have written to him recently complaining about these rides, which can be unprofitable after accounting for driving expenses.

"These short trips actually put more wear and tear on your car than these long trips because you're braking and accelerating constantly," Avedian said, noting it's becoming increasingly rare he gets well-paying rides.

For some drivers, these sub-$3 trips are a symbol of their broader frustrations with their pay. In recent months, several gig drivers have told Business Insider that driving is less profitable than it used to be and that ride-hailing giants are taking a larger cut of rider fares. Research shows that drivers across six ride-hailing and delivery platforms earned well below the local minimum wage after accounting for expenses, even with tips included. Drivers' frustrations have led to protests and calls for higher guaranteed pay nationwide.

To be sure, gig drivers who come across a sub-$3 trip can always reject it — but many say profitable trips have become harder to come by.

$3 trips aren't worth it for many drivers

The screenshots showed that the sub-$3 trips generally required drivers to drive no more than 10 minutes, including the time spent driving to the pickup location and then to the customer's destination.

According to some drivers, shorter rides can be preferable if they pay more per mile. But for many, the math on these rides doesn't add up.

For example, a Florida-based driver sent a screenshot of a ride that paid $2.36 after deductions and required an estimated four-minute drive to the pickup location — and then an additional six-minute drive to the destination. Less than $3 in earnings for 10 minutes of work translates to almost $15 an hour, slightly above the state's $12 minimum wage.

But this doesn't account for the time drivers wait for customers to find them at a pickup location. Nor does it account for driving expenses like gas, maintenance, and depreciation that can eat into a driver's profits. In February, Lyft estimated the typical driver had about $7 each hour in vehicle expenses.

A customer tip can tilt the math back in the driver's favor, but they're not guaranteed. A study of over 500,000 US gig drivers by Gridwise, a data analytics company that helps drivers track their earnings, found that 28% of Uber and Lyft ride-hailing trips received tips.

Business Insider reached out to Uber and Lyft for comment. An Uber spokesperson said that across the US, drivers are "earning more than $30 an hour while engaged on the app." They added that in states like California, where a minimum pay standard is in effect, drivers can count on a certain level of pay.

A Lyft spokesperson wrote in an email: "In Q1 of this year, the median US Lyft driver earned $31.10, including tips and bonuses per hour of engaged time. After considering estimated expenses such as gas and maintenance, that's around $24.25 per engaged hour."

Earlier this year, Lyft announced it would start guaranteeing drivers earn 70% of their riders' payments each week after external fees. In December, Uber said that its "take rate" — the share of ride-hailing revenue as a percentage of gross fares — is well below 20% when one excludes the commercial insurance costs the company provides to drivers.

To be sure, rides with bottom-of-the-barrel fares appear to be rare. Data provided to Business Insider by Gridwise showed that so far in 2024, fewer than 1% of completed US Uber and Lyft trips paid drivers below $3, excluding tips. In comparison, over 36% of Uber Eats, DoorDash, and Grubhub completed deliveries paid less than $3 before tips. However, after tips, the share of sub-$3 deliveries fell to below 2% on all three platforms.

Compared to January 2023, sub-$3 trips — excluding tips — have become more common for DoorDash, Grubhub, and Uber Eats drivers and less common for Uber and Lyft drivers, per Gridwise.

Gridwise noted that its earning data does not include earnings tied to promotions or minimum pay standards. Given it only included completed trips, it doesn't account for the sub-$3 trips, for example, that a driver sees and declines.

The $3 ride could have a future if drivers stay desperate

Avedian explained that because of the oversaturation of ride-hailing drivers, desperate drivers are bound to accept these trips. He said even if he rejects a low-paying ride, it "gets snapped up immediately." Otherwise, the pay would likely increase if drivers rejected these rides since drivers would be more likely to accept a higher-paying ride.

"In 2024, putting a human in my car for $3 or less is asinine to me," Avedian told BI. "Gas prices in California are hitting $5.50, and to me, this goes to show how out of touch these companies are that our expenses have gone up 40%, 50%, even 80% in a lot of cases, and the fares have gone down."

He said the risk-reward is "completely upside down," arguing these companies should set minimum fares of at least $5.

"I will reject a million of those and then turn my app off and go home," Avedian said. "I cannot run a profitable business by doing $3 trips."

Drivers say they're seeing more sub-$3 trips

Randy Scott, 46, has driven for almost six years and has over 25,000 rides on Uber and Lyft. He drives in between managing local and state political campaigns. The South Florida resident said he's recently seen more rides under $5 coming in, which he suspects is because more immigrant drivers in his area regularly accept these rides.

A screenshot he shared with BI shows a ride for $2.30. From a business perspective, he said he understands why these companies would continue offering low rates if they'll always be accepted eventually.

"At the end of the day, people are out driving in good faith, trying to make money and work, but they don't necessarily have the knowledge to say, 'wait a minute here, they're offering me $2,'" Scott said. "There's got to be a line drawn somewhere."

He said the positives of driving still outweigh the negatives, as he's developed strategies for earning about $900 gross revenue driving 50 hours a week. Every week, his strategy is different, as his area is seasonal with tourists.

Still, he said even on slow days, he'll take the $4 ride as it's at least a couple of dollars, plus a tip.

He said gig driving feels like the "Wild West" right now, noting that state governments should work to regulate the driver market to help drivers earn a living wage."I don't think drivers are asking for the moon," Scott said.

Moises Diaz, a 41-year-old Uber and Lyft driver in California, started driving part-time in December. But May was the first month that he started seeing rides that paid roughly $3 or less, and now they're "coming in very often," he told Business Insider via email.

Even for longtime drivers, the appeals of driving may not be enough to overpower the declining pay.

Joe, a 53-year-old in Florida, has been driving for Uber since 2014. He asked to use a pseudonym for fear of retribution and told BI he's "never seen pay this low."

"I see these sub-$3 fares at least between five to 10 times during a six-hour shift," he said.

Are you a gig driver who is struggling to make ends meet? Reach out to these reporters at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com or jzinkula@businessinsider.com.

• I tried the biggest burgers at McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, In-N-Out, and Shake Shack.
• Shake Shack's burger was a little overwhelming, in my opinion.
• Burger King's Triple Whopper impressed me with its flame-grilled patties and fresh toppings.

The biggest burgers at fast-food chains are usually more expensive, but how do they rank in terms of taste and value?

Price is a hot topic when it comes to fast food. Business Insider previously reported on how hikes in fast-food prices and the rumored practice of "shrinkflation" — a phenomenon in which customers claim menu items are getting smaller while either remaining the same price or costing more — are upsetting customers.

I recently compared six of the biggest burgers sold at fast-food chains, testing burgers from McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, In-N-Out, and Shake Shack to see how they stacked up in terms of taste, price, and overall value.

Shake Shack's double cheeseburger was a little too heavy for my liking, while Wendy's and Burger King both impressed me with their triple-stacked burgers. 

Here's how the biggest burgers at five fast-food chains ranked, from worst to best.

Shake Shack's double cheeseburger, my personal least favorite, was particularly large.

It cost me $12.49, not including tax, making it the most expensive burger I tried. I chose pickles, onions, and Shack sauce as my toppings.

The burger patties were perfectly crispy on the outside and covered in gooey melted cheese.

The pickles were large and crunchy, and the amount of other toppings was generous. The chain's signature Shack sauce also added a ton of flavor, and the cheese was perfectly melted.

However, the burger was almost too heavy to pick up.

Biting into the Shake Shack burger was a little overwhelming, in my opinion.

I know I purposefully ordered the largest burger on the menu, but this burger was massive. I saw it as a hindrance rather than an asset, and I struggled to get through more than a few bites.

Despite being the most expensive burger, I'm not sure it was worth it. The burger patties were much thicker than quite a few of the other burgers I tried, and the toppings definitely enhanced the flavor. However, it was simply too big, to the point where it tasted like a giant meat-and-cheese grease-bomb. 

My second-to-least favorite burger was a classic: a McDonald's Big Mac.

I was conflicted over whether the biggest burger at McDonald's was the Big Mac — which is physically the largest thanks to the extra bun — or the Double Quarter-Pounder, which is the burger with the most meat. I decided to try both to appease both sets of McDonald's fans who argue for one over the other.

A Big Mac cost me $7.29 at my local McDonald's, excluding tax.

There was a generous layer of pickles, lettuce, and sauce on the sandwich.

The burger patties weren't overwhelming, nor was the sandwich as a whole. I also liked the tangy, creamy Big Mac sauce. However, I thought the added bun made the sandwich taste too much like bread and the other flavors were slightly lost, in my opinion.

The sandwich was a good size and very filling, but I wasn't crazy about the flavor profile.

I simply wanted more flavor happening. Between the extra bun and the generous serving of Big Mac sauce, that was all I could taste. Tomato, cheese, or simply other condiments might have taken the sandwich to the next level.

The 4×4 is the largest burger available at In-N-Out.

The burger, which is on In-N-Out's "not-so-secret" menu, is also referred to as the "Quad Quad," and comes with four beef patties, four cheese slices, lettuce, tomato, spread, and the option to add onions. It cost $9.49, excluding tax and fees.

The giant burger was difficult to hold in one hand, let alone bite into.

The burger was far too large for me to eat in one sitting, though the flavor made me want to. 

All of the elements of the burger were delicious, from the juicy beef patties to the layers of cheese and fresh lettuce and tomato.

However, the additional burger patties ended up detracting from the burger's overall ranking instead of enhancing it. The burger was overwhelmingly heavy, with the tomato and lettuce failing to offset the excessive amount of meat and cheese.

The buns couldn't contain the juicy beef patties, and they started disintegrating as I ate the burger. Truthfully, I wouldn't order this again. Although it was tasty, the amount of meat was just too much for me.

I also tried McDonald's Double Quarter-Pounder with cheese. I preferred it over the Big Mac.

Looking at the burger in the box, I immediately noticed that it had more meat than the Big Mac. The meat was clearly the star of the show, with the other toppings barely visible beneath the patties and bun.

The burger cost me $9.79, excluding tax. I thought this was a fair price for the meat-heavy burger.

The Double Quarter-Pounder with cheese comes with a whopping half-pound of meat, pickles, onions, ketchup, and mustard.

I found this burger to be pretty flavorful, especially thanks to the condiments and large slices of crunchy pickles. However, I wasn't crazy about the bun — while I normally love a sesame-seed bun, I found this one to be pretty bland, airy, and artificial-tasting.

I would order this burger again.

Despite having a ton of meat, the burger didn't feel too overwhelming to eat. I thought it was a realistic sandwich, especially compared to the gigantic burgers from Shake Shack and In-N-Out.

The second-best burger I tried was Wendy's Dave's Triple.

When I arrived at my local Wendy's drive-thru, this extra-large burger wasn't even on the menu. However, thanks to my online research, I knew it could be made and decided to order it anyway. I did wonder how popular this sandwich was, and if many people opt for the triple-patty burger.

The Dave's Triple burger cost $11.24, excluding tax.

Wendy's Dave's Triple burger comes with nearly a pound of beef, American cheese, crisp lettuce, tomato, pickle, ketchup, mayo, and onion.

The sandwich was difficult to pick up, but all of the ingredients appeared to be well-balanced. There was a large serving of tomatoes, pickles, and cheese, so it didn't look like the beef patties would be overpowered. 

I thought this burger had a ton of flavor. The cheese was perfectly melted, and the patties were super juicy.

While I personally couldn't finish the entire thing, I definitely thought the flavors were there and it was a good value for the price.

If I were to change one thing, it would be to remove the mayonnaise. It ended up mixing with the juice from the tomatoes in an unappetizing way, creating a tomato-mayo sauce that I thought brought the other flavors down.

My favorite burger I tried was the Triple Whopper with cheese from Burger King.

Similar to the Dave's Triple, the Triple Whopper also comes with three quarter-pound beef patties, although the ones at Burger King are flame-grilled. The burger cost me $11.29, excluding tax, making it the second-most expensive burger I tried.

Unlike the other burgers, the Triple Whopper only comes with one slice of cheese.

However, I felt that this allowed the other flavors to really come through, and it led to a less gut-filling, more appetizing eating experience.

The lettuce, tomatoes, and onions all tasted fresh, and they added a delicious crunch to the burger.

I also liked the beef patties on this burger the most out of the ones I tried.

The burger patties had a smoky, savory flavor that made the sandwich taste fresh off the grill. I also thought the patties' shape, which were larger in circumference but flatter than some of the other burgers, made the sandwich easier to eat. 

Overall, I really enjoyed this burger and would definitely order it again — if I have the appetite.

While I'm not sure I'm happy to pay more than $10 for any fast-food burger, it was a very generous serving and the most flavorful out of the bunch, without being overwhelmingly huge.

• Max Burgers is selling less beef to address the climate crisis.
• The chain labels menu items with carbon footprints and promotes chicken and plant-based burgers.
• Between 2015 and 2021, emissions dropped 30% and meals without red meat grew to 18% of sales.

One of Sweden's oldest burger chains wants its customers to stop eating so much red meat. 

It might sound counterintuitive, but Max Burgers, a family-owned fast-food company, realized way back in 2007 that it couldn't address the climate crisis while continuing to sell as much beef. Beef has the largest climate impact of any food, largely because cows burp methane and need vast amounts of land.

Since then, Max Burgers has labeled menu items with their carbon footprints and started offering a lot more chicken and plant-based burgers. The company wants half the meals it sells to be free of red meat. It came close last year, when about 46% of meals sold across 188 locations in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Poland were red-meat-free, said Kaj Török, its chief sustainability officer. Denmark on its own surpassed the goal.

All the changes are making a dent in the chain's greenhouse-gas emissions, which dropped by 30% between 2015 and 2021. Török said Max Burgers has remained one of Sweden's most profitable restaurant chains, even as plant-based, vegetarian, or "lacto-vegetarian" options with dairy products grew to 18% of sales volume in 2021, up from 2% in 2014. 

"Until we hit the pandemic, the transformation was really fast. In the last 12 months, we've struggled to keep that percentage up," Török said, adding that he thinks customers may be choosing meat because they see it as getting more for their money during a period of high inflation.

Now the company, which is privately owned and doesn't disclose its financial information, is exploring how to communicate the health benefits of a plant-based diet.

Max Burgers' climate strategy is an outlier in the restaurant industry, particularly compared with US fast-food chains that have been quick to abandon plant-based burgers when they don't test well in small markets. Even the salad chain Sweetgreen this month added steak to its menu in hopes of boosting sales at dinnertime. A Los Angeles vegan restaurant also announced in April that it was rebranding by adding meat, dairy, and eggs to the menu.

Both Sweetgreen and the Los Angeles restaurant, now called Sage Regenerative Kitchen & Brewery, said they were focusing on "regenerative agriculture" to meet their climate commitments. Fast-food giants like McDonald's, Taco Bell, and Burger King are similarly focused on the farming practices in their supply chains.

But research is limited on the climate effects of regenerative agriculture, a loosely defined set of farming practices that aims to improve soil health so it stores more carbon, uses less chemical fertilizers and water, and boosts biodiversity.

Raychel Santo, a food and climate research associate at World Resources Institute, told Business Insider that while storing more carbon in the soil may offset some emissions from beef production, it's unlikely to offset all the emissions from a cow's life cycle. 

"There are a few studies that have even claimed carbon-negative or carbon-neutral beef, but they've only looked at the last phase of the cow's life," Santo said. 

She cited an analysis by her colleagues of research comparing the environmental effects of conventional livestock production, where cows end up on a feedlot, with "alternative" practices such as organic, pasture-raised, grass-fed, and regenerative. The analysis found that alternative practices tended to have higher total climate footprints (but better animal welfare) than conventional ones. 

"That's not to say conventional systems are better," Santo said. "It's about balancing and recognizing these trade-offs."

Santo said that either way, people in wealthy countries need to reduce their beef consumption for the world to meet its climate goals. In the US and Europe, people eat the equivalent of three and two burgers a week, respectively. Cutting that consumption in half would make a huge dent in planet-warming emissions.

Török said 'less but better beef' is the mantra of researchers he's spoke to.

He added that because Max Burgers is family-owned, it can take more risks than publicly-traded fast food chains worried about their stock price.

MAX Burgers has introduced many iterations of plant-based and chicken options to improve the taste, and scrapped those that didn't land with customers. A falafel burger launched in 2009 was eliminated several years later because it wasn't popular with consumers, for example. In 2016, the company quintupled its plant-based options, Török said, including a "green burger" that's been changed several times.

"Taste is our secret climate weapon," Török said. "If something doesn't work, we try to make it better."

• Trump vowed to commute Ross Ulbricht's sentence at the Libertarian National Convention.
• Libertarians view Ulbricht's life sentence as a symbol of government overreach.
• Trump also promised to include a Libertarian in his cabinet if elected.

Donald Trump made an address at the Libertarian National Convention on Saturday, promising to commute the sentence of Ross Ulbricht, the jailed founder of the infamous online drug marketplace Silk Road.

"If you vote for me, on Day One, I will commute the sentence of Ross Ulbricht," Trump declared to enthusiastic applause from the crowd in Washington, DC. 

The move to highlight Ulbricht was strategically catered to Libertarian voters.

Ulbricht, now 40, who was imprisoned for life in 2015, is a hero of the US libertarian movement.

The Libertarian Party, with its long-standing advocacy for drug legalization and criminal justice reform, has consistently lobbied for Ulbricht's release, viewing his life sentence as a symbol of government overreach.

Ulbricht became interested in libertarian values at university, according to a Wired report, where he discovered the ideas of Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, an advocate of the moral purpose of free-market capitalism and staunch opponent of interventionism. Ulbricht embraced these ideas of uncompromised freedom, per Wired.

"When I created Silk Road, I wasn't seeking financial gain," Ulbricht's wrote in a heartfelt letter to the trial judge in 2015.

"I created Silk Road because I believed at the time that people should have the right to buy and sell whatever they wanted so long as they weren't hurting anyone else," he wrote.

In 2015, he was given life in prison without the possibility of parole. He was also fined $183,961,921.

Ulbricht is being held at the United States Penitentiary in Tucson.

The majority of goods sold on Silk Road were illegal hardcore drugs, said the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York at his trial.

"Silk Road was supposed to be about giving people the freedom to make their own choices, to pursue their own happiness," wrote Ulbricht. "While I still don't think people should be denied this right, I never sought to create a site that would provide another avenue for people to feed their addictions."

Trump, who was loudly booed and heckled during much of his speech at the Libertarian National Convention, did manage to partially win the audience around by committing to free Ulbricht.

Katherine Yeniscavich, a Libertarian Party national committee member, told Politico, "It's one of the things we wanted from his first term."

In addition to the Ulbricht pledge, Trump made further pledges, promising to include a Libertarian in his cabinet and others in senior administrative positions if elected.

Correction: May 30, 2024 — Due to an editing error, an earlier version of this story called Ross Ulbricht "unjustly imprisoned" without making clear it was characterizing the view of his supporters.

• This post originally appeared in the Insider Today newsletter.
• You can sign up for Business Insider's daily newsletter here.

Almost Friday! You'll likely never be as rich as Nvidia's Jensen Huang, but you can start to write emails like him. More on his "TL;DR approach."

It's the last day of our Memorial Day sale for 80% off a Business Insider subscription.

In today's big story, we're looking at the wave of talent-focused deals set to shake up the AI startup market.

What's on deck:

• Markets: The biggest threat to obesity drug makers could be South Park.
• Tech: Why is a popular email service still stuck in the Stone Age? It's time to fix Gmail.
• Business: The workplace habits that annoy the hell out of your boss.

But first, forget the milk; we'll take the whole cow.

If this was forwarded to you, sign up here.

The big story

M&A(I)

In the age of AI, if you can't hire them, acquire them.

Few things are more coveted in business nowadays than AI specialists. Everyone wants to supercharge their business with generative AI.

But with only so many AI specialists, the talent doesn't come easy. Compensation is steep — seven-figure pay packages — and competition is even fiercer. You know it's serious when Mark Zuckerberg is getting involved in recruiting.

So why worry about one AI specialist when you can get a company full of them?

The future of the AI industry could be a wave of "acquihires," writes Business Insider's Rebecca Torrence and Riddhi Kanetkar, who mapped out potential buyers and sellers in the space.

The M&A(I) industry is already off to a hot start this year, with 55 exits for AI startups in the first quarter, according to Crunchbase data.

And it's not just cutting-edge tech companies that are shopping. Acquihires give non-tech companies a chance to jumpstart an AI strategy that'd be difficult to stand up otherwise.

Acquihires come with plenty of risks.

Deals can be tricky in the best of circumstances, let alone in an overvalued market with high interest rates.

Companies looking to cut a deal are also flying a bit blind. VCs eagerness to back AI startups means there are plenty of companies big on valuation but little on substance.

And then there's the risk the people acquired aren't a good fit.

Technologists have the luxury of being particular about their work culture. Remember when OpenAI employees weren't pumped about potentially working at Microsoft amid the Altman ouster?

But some startups might not have a choice if funding gets tight and an acquihire is their only option. And if that's the case, that's a problem, Julia Gudish Krieger, a managing partner at Pari Passu Venture Partners, told me.

She's rarely seen acquihires work because the motivation for the deal is often more about getting a soft landing than having a passion for the product they'll be promoting or building in their new roles.

"If there are real synergies and the incoming group is genuinely excited to roll up their sleeves and help co-create, then I'm sure an acquihire can be magic in theory," Gudish Krieger said. "But this is easier said than done."

3 things in markets

1. Oh my god! They killed Novo Nordisk! South Park's latest Ozempic storyline could be bad news for obesity drug makers and their investors. Publicly traded US companies prominently featured on the comedy show have gone on to underperform the S&P 500.
2. The stock market and the economy are going their separate ways. Corporate earnings show continued growth despite a GDP slowdown. While rare, the divergence of the two typically means a great environment for investors. The S&P 500 has historically delivered average quarterly returns of 3.6% when that happens.
3. Don't expect stocks to slow down in June, according to Fundstrat. The always-optimistic Tom Lee sees the stock market rising 4% next month. Continued disinflation coupled with lots of cash sitting on the sidelines means the market has more room to run despite reaching record highs. Here's what else has him so bullish.

3 things in tech

1. Summer fit check: tech edition. In a wild turn of events, tech executives are grabbing (good) attention for their style. Fashion experts shared how tech workers can upgrade their often monotone wardrobes.
2. Gmail is stuck in the Stone Age. When Google introduced the tabbed inbox in 2013, it was a game changer. There was finally a way to separate important emails from the clutter. But in the decade since, Gmail has failed to keep up.
3. Apple comes under pressure. A group of French trade associations have implored CEO Tim Cook to halt the rollout of a new "web eraser" feature, over fears it could have a catastrophic impact on the online advertising industry. The tool would allow Safari users to remove unwanted content like ads, text, and images from webpages.

3 things in business

1. A bizarre government rule is preventing young men from getting jobs. America's young men aren't working. Recessions and low wages could be to blame, but our broken unemployment system might ultimately be making employers reluctant to hire them.
2. Your boss probably thinks you're annoying, too. As much as your boss gets on your nerves, chances are you're not completely innocent. From complaining to asking too many questions, career experts shared with BI the employee behaviors that drive bosses crazy.
3. Elon Musk in the White House? Donald Trump and the Tesla CEO have discussed a potential advisory role if the ex-president wins November's presidential election, The Wall Street Journal reported. Trump could give Musk input on border security and economic policies, per the outlet.

In other news

• The real reason Americans can't get enough sleep.
• Inside Henrik Fisker's staff meeting, where the CEO announced more layoffs hitting his electric car company.
• Biden's $1 billion weapons package to Israel is coming back to haunt him.
• A software engineer worked at Tesla, SAP, and Salesforce. Here's how he negotiated his salary, including a $520,000 Meta offer.
• We had cellphones, then feature phones, then smartphones. Now, 'IntelliPhones' are coming.
• A millennial who had a mini-retirement at 38 shares her strategies for achieving financial independence — and why she wants to return to the workforce.

What's happening today

• Today's earnings: Costco, Best Buy, and other companies are reporting.

The Insider Today team: Dan DeFrancesco, deputy editor and anchor, in New York. Jordan Parker Erb, editor, in New York. Hallam Bullock, editor, in London. George Glover, reporter, in London. Grace Lett, associate editor, in Chicago.