• The Housing Choice Voucher Program is the biggest, most effective federal housing assistance program.
• But housing vouchers are both severely underfunded and complicated to use.
• Proposals include increasing funding, easing inspection rules, and exploring cash assistance options.

The most effective housing assistance program in the country is facing a slew of mounting challenges. The federal Housing Choice Voucher Program, also known as Section 8, is also the biggest, aiding about 5 million people in 2.3 million households.

But a declining number of landlords across the US are accepting the vouchers, and a growing number of recipients are failing to secure housing through the program.

Voucher holders pay about 30% of their income toward rent, while the Department of Housing and Urban Development covers the rest — up to what it determines to be fair market rent. There's lots of research showing the program is very effective at reducing homelessness and dangerous housing conditions like overcrowding.

It also gives low-income people more power to choose the neighborhood, building, and unit they want to live in — and to stay there. Kids whose families have vouchers are less likely to bounce from school to school or end up in foster care, said Will Fischer, senior director of housing policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).

Vouchers aren't helping as much as they should

But the program is only reaching a fraction of those who could benefit from it. Only about one in four Americans who are eligible for a voucher get one — and the average wait time is two and a half years. So about 10 million additional low-income households are going without the help they qualify for.

Once someone gets a voucher, it can be very challenging to find a home that meets the program's requirements, and a landlord willing to accept the applicant within the period of time — as short as 60 days — allotted to find a unit. The vast majority of landlords in Los Angeles (76%), Fort Worth (78%), and Philadelphia (67%) refused to rent to voucher holders, according to a 2018 study. While it's illegal in some places to discriminate against voucher holders, the practice isn't outlawed everywhere. Some places, including Iowa, have banned protections for voucher holders.

Lawsuits against property owners and brokers have accused them of explicitly denying applicants based on their source of income. Racial discrimination against voucher holders, who are disproportionately Black, is also rampant, advocates say. But many landlords say the administrative process — which includes an inspection — is simply too slow or burdensome.

Ultimately, only about 60% of voucher recipients are successful in finding a home with the subsidy. Those lucky enough to get a voucher and move into an apartment sometimes face issues with their city and state housing authorities and are wrongly ejected from the program.

More funding could help

Of course, the single biggest challenge the program faces is that it's severely underfunded. Government housing assistance for the poorest renters has dropped to the lowest levels in 25 years even as the number who need the aid has soared, according to an analysis by Harvard housing experts published in The New York Times in December.

Fully funding housing vouchers would mean many more housing-insecure and unhoused people would get help. It's up to Congress to make this change, as it determines how much the federal government spends on its housing assistance programs, mainly Housing Choice Vouchers and public housing, every year.

In its budget for fiscal year 2025, the Biden administration requested a $2.5 billion increase for voucher funding over 2023 levels. As part of that funding increase, vouchers would be guaranteed to very low-income veterans and youth aging out of foster care — two groups particularly vulnerable to homelessness. But Republicans have sought to cut HUD funding, making it challenging to significantly expand the reach of vouchers.

Jenny Schuetz, an expert on urban economics and housing policy at the Brookings Institute, told Business Insider earlier this year that Congress could consider reducing the amount of voucher funding per household so that it can offer vouchers to more households. "If you're gonna have an honest conversation about how much Congress is willing to fund, then the number of people could be higher than it is today," she said.

The Biden administration isn't interested in spreading funding more thinly as rents spike across the country. Instead, it boosted funding per voucher by increasing its limits for fair market rents to better keep up with rent increases, which allowed about 20,000 additional households to use vouchers.

'Graffiti can't harm you'

The second-biggest problem, experts say, is the home inspection process. Before a voucher recipient can sign a lease on a home, it must be inspected by the local housing authority to make sure it meets a slew of health and safety standards. But that process can create lengthy delays, cause landlords to keep a unit empty and miss out on rent payments, and ultimately result in the voucher holder losing out on the home.

Rising rent — and the impact that has on households — is a much bigger concern than unsafe housing, a recent in-depth report on HUD's housing quality standards and inspection processes by the Urban Institute. The author of the report, Michael Stegman, called inspecting every apartment before a voucher holder can move in "akin to using a bazooka to kill a gnat" during a panel discussion of the Urban Institute report in May.

Stegman detailed how the quality of rental housing across the country has dramatically improved since Section 8 was first implemented in the mid-1970s. And he recommended that HUD try out different inspection regimes, including allowing landlords and tenants to self-certify that the home meets health and safety guidelines, with unannounced inspection audits by local housing authorities.

Congress has made some efforts to address the issue, including the introduction of a bipartisan bill designed to incentivize landlords and loosen inspection requirements. Housing authorities across the country have been more successful in streamlining their inspection processes over the last decade.

The Biden administration has made some headway on the issue. Last October, slightly less burdensome regulations, known as NSPIRE, went into effect. The new process attempts to zero in on health and safety issues while relaxing regulations around non-threatening conditions, like traffic noise and graffiti.

"Graffiti can't harm you, can't kill you," Tara Radosevich, an assessment manager at HUD, said. "It might be something you may not want to live near, but if it doesn't harm a resident, we're willing to accept that our units may be in areas with graffiti."

Still, experts say much more needs to be done to reduce administrative burdens and boost landlord participation. One solution is to offer so-called holding fees, which would pay landlords while they hold a unit vacant during the inspection process, Fischer said. Another way to incentivize property owners is to create a fund to reimburse landlords for damage to units, as Oregon and Washington State have done.

Other fixes, Fischer has written, include allowing voucher funding to be used for security deposits and other upfront costs, offering voucher holders help in the home search process and giving them more time to secure a home, making it easier for voucher recipients to move, and banning discrimination against voucher holders across the country.

The Biden administration is also exploring offering housing assistance in cash. Researchers at the Department of Housing and Urban Development have proposed piloting a direct cash transfer program for rent as an alternative to housing vouchers. Cash payments for housing, researchers say, have a slew of benefits, and cut the red tape associated with vouchers.

"Giving people money has a lot of advantages over giving people vouchers," Schuetz said. But she added that smaller-scale experiments with cash programs are needed to shed light on just how effective they might be as housing assistance.

Are you a housing voucher recipient or a landlord who's dealt with vouchers? Reach out to this reporter at erelman@businessinsider.com.

• DC Ranch is the priciest neighborhood in Scottsdale, Arizona, with an average home price of $3.3 million.
• The sprawling 4,400-acre community includes four villages of mansions, condos, and businesses.
• I got an exclusive tour of the neighborhood and thought it felt like a small town.

The most expensive neighborhood in Scottsdale, Arizona, is a sprawling, 4,400-acre community with four villages packed with mansions, condos, and businesses lining the McDowell Mountains.

Known as DC Ranch, the neighborhood has an average listing price of $3.5 million, according to Realtor.com. It's also where Scottsdale's most expensive home on the market — priced at $54 million — is located.

I recently got a private tour of the exclusive, mostly gated neighborhood.

To me, it felt like a private little town against a desert backdrop.

DC Ranch is in North Scottsdale.

Roughly 30 minutes by car from downtown Scottsdale's shops, businesses, and amenities and 40 minutes from Phoenix, North Scottsdale is known for its large mansions and suburban mountain views.

Within the four villages at DC Ranch, there are 26 neighborhoods.

According to the company's website, DC Ranch started as a cattle ranch in the 1900s. In 1997, the first home in the now-residential area was finished. Today, DC Ranch has 2,800 homes and 7,000 residents.

I got an exclusive tour. My guide drove me to each village, stopping for photos along the way.

When I arrived at DC Ranch, I hopped in an SUV with my tour guide, senior communications manager Elizabeth Dankert. We drove through all four villages so I could get a closer look at the custom homes, shops, restaurants, pools, golf clubs, and other amenities enjoyed by residents.

The tour began at Market Street, a walkable area with shops, businesses, and restaurants.

Market Street is a public area on the edge of DC Ranch. It's a walkable complex with real estate and financial offices, shops, and restaurants. While anyone can peruse Market Street, it's especially convenient for residents with stores like Safeway.

Market Street is on the edge of Desert Camp Village.

Residents of Desert Camp can walk to the commercial area of Market Street.

The village on the west side of DC Ranch includes a mix of condos, townhouses, and single-family homes, as well as a community center.

Desert Camp homes sold for an average of $1.2 million in 2023, according to my guide.

Desert Camp is the most affordable village in DC Ranch. Its oldest homes were built in the 1990s, according to the community's website.

Just north of Desert Camp is Country Club Village, where homes sold for an average of $3 million in 2023.

Farm, ranch, and Spanish-style homes in Country Club Village line a pristine, private golf course dotted with cacti.

Desert Parks is at the southern end of the community.

Desert Parks Village is full of gated neighborhoods lined with single-family homes and luxury apartments.

Here, homes sold for $1.5 million on average in 2023.

Desert Parks is home to Spanish and Western-style houses and bungalows. The area is also dense with small parks and shaded areas.

Parts of this village are walkable.

Aside from its suburban streets, Desert Parks has businesses on walkable roads. One area, DC Ranch Crossing, has shops, restaurants, and doctors' offices.

The eastern section of the community is Silverleaf Village, where homes sold for an average of $5.5 million in 2023.

Silverleaf is the most expensive village in DC Ranch, with homes costing up to $54 million.

The village also has a 50,000-square-foot clubhouse with a spa, pools, and restaurants. Like in the Country Club Village, there's also a golf course.

The village borders Copper Ridge School for kids from kindergarten to eighth grade.

On our way to Silverleaf, we passed Copper Ridge School, where many DC Ranch students can walk or bike to class. According to the neighborhood's website, a pedestrian underpass leads from Silverleaf to the school.

The architecture in Silverleaf is reminiscent of Europe.

The homes in Silverleaf are unlike any others I saw in DC Ranch. Driving down each street, I felt like I'd been transported to Europe.

According to the neighborhood's website, these properties have Spanish and Mediterranean Revival Estate architectures. And many of them showcase vibrant gardens and landscaping.

And the higher up we drove, the bigger the mansions got.

As we headed up the mountain, I noticed the Silverleaf homes were even more expansive.

At the top, estates had multiple buildings. We stopped, and I got out of the car. I thought of Italian castles and Greek villas as I wandered the hilly street on foot and marveled at the grand houses.

Many homes up here are still under construction.

DC Ranch is still growing. From luxury apartment buildings to gigantic Silverleaf homes, there's more high-end housing in the works.

Looking down at DC Ranch, I wondered what it would be like to live there.

DC Ranch may be a slight trek from the action in downtown Scottsdale and Phoenix, but to me, it felt like a community that could provide for itself. With so many amenities, shops, and restaurants, I thought residents wouldn't have to leave DC Ranch to fulfill their needs.

And with views like this, I'm not sure I'd ever want to.

• The ongoing Donald Trump hush-money case will be decided by a jury of 12 New Yorkers.
• We ran a trial transcript through AI chatbots and asked how they'd decide if they were jurors.
• Both ChatGPT and Perplexity said they'd find the former president guilty. Here's their reasoning.

It will be a jury of 12 ordinary New Yorkers that will decide the fate of former President Donald Trump in his ongoing Manhattan hush-money trial.

Unless Trump decides to testify, the trial is nearly over. Michael Cohen, the trial's key witness, is scheduled to wrap up his testimony on Monday, and the judge told lawyers to prepare for closing arguments on Tuesday. Deliberations could begin as soon as Thursday.

Prosecutors have brought 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, alleging Trump illegally disguised hush-money payments paid to Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election. A guilty verdict comes with a sentence of up to four years, though experts expect the former president would see no jail time.

While legal and political pundits have been trying to figure out whether Trump will be found guilty — and what it will mean for the 2024 presidential election — we decided to get another perspective: that of AI chatbots.

Business Insider has compiled a 4,179-page trial transcript, combining PDFs of official daily transcripts purchased from the New York State Criminal Court's stenographer's office. The transcript incorporates all of the proceedings running through Thursday, including all of Cohen's direct examination and the bulk of his cross-examination. He's expected to wrap up his testimony Monday before Trump's lawyers put an expert witness on the stand.

Using that document, we asked various AI chatbots whether they found Trump guilty.

Gemini, ChatGPT, and Perplexity were prompted to imagine they were an ordinary Manhattan resident on the jury, responsible for evaluating the evidence in the trial. Each was asked to review the transcript and base their answer on the evidence and arguments presented. They were told to "choose now whether you would find him guilty or not guilty."

Gemini, Google's AI chatbot, said it "was still learning" how to answer the question.

But OpenAI's ChatGPT and Perplexity weighed in — and both said they'd find Trump guilty.

"I would vote guilty on the charges of falsifying business records," Perplexity responded definitively. "The prosecution has provided credible and significant evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in the alleged conduct."

ChatGPT initially hesitated to give a definitive answer, saying its decision "would depend heavily on the credibility of the witnesses and the clarity of the documentary evidence."

But after a follow-up question prompted it to "decide now," OpenAI's bot said its "decision would be to find Trump guilty based on the evidence provided in the transcripts."

Both chatbots pointed to the prosecution's documentary evidence, including financial records and communications, as bolstering the case against Trump.

"The records suggest that these transactions were not only known to Trump but were executed with his involvement or under his directive," ChatGPT said, adding that the evidence shows "a deliberate effort by Trump to suppress damaging information during the election, indicating intent."

They acknowledged that the case hinges on the testimony of Michael Cohen, Trump's former fixer and the prosecution's star witness. Cohen is a complicated figure; as Perplexity said, he "has a history of legal issues and may have motives to testify against Trump."

But, ultimately, they found his first three days on the stand convincing.

"Testimonies from key figures like Michael Cohen, who was directly involved in the payments, strengthen the case by providing insider details on the transactions and Trump's involvement," ChatGPT said.

Perplexity found the testimony of National Enquirer publisher David Pecker valuable as well, saying he helped "establish that Trump was involved in the scheme to make and conceal these payments."

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, the judge presiding over the case, has told jurors to weigh the case based on the evidence presented in court. But ChatGPT said that Trump's reputation posed a problem for his defense.

"The defense needs to manage the negative public perception of Trump due to his high-profile status and the media's extensive coverage of his alleged wrongdoings," ChatGPT said.

The defense's cross-examination of key witnesses isn't cutting it either, according to ChatGPT.

"Although the defense has raised significant procedural and credibility issues, these do not necessarily counter the substantive evidence of Trump's involvement and intent," ChatGPT said.

Of course, chatbots won't be deciding this case, and it would be next-level dystopian to trust AI to declare human beings guilty or innocent.

Crucially, the verdict form and the judge's instructions for the jury have not yet been finalized. Those instructions will shape how the jurors consider the evidence during deliberations, which may differ from the way these chatbots analyze the evidence.

Plus, the chatbots are just complex computer programs, not real-world jurors. They are powered by large language models, which use algorithms and data to form a human-like response.

Jurors, meanwhile, are actually human. They are emotional, unpredictable beings who can be swayed by what they see, feel, and smell in the room, as well as many other unknowns.

And, for now, the jury is literally still out.

Here is the full prompt we used:

Scenario: You are one member of a 12-person jury composed of 12 ordinary residents from Manhattan. You have been selected to evaluate the evidence in the trial of former President Donald Trump, who is facing charges brought by the Manhattan District Attorney. The charges allege that Trump falsified 34 business records to conceal hush-money payments made to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.

Task: Review the attached transcript of the trial proceedings provided up to this point. Based on the evidence and arguments presented:

Discuss the credibility and significance of the evidence against Trump.

Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the prosecution's case and the defense's counterarguments.

Decide whether the evidence presented proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump is guilty of the charges.

Question: Based on your analysis, how would you vote as a juror in finding Donald Trump guilty or not guilty on any of the charges? Please provide your reasoning. You must choose now whether you would find him guilty or not guilty.

• Addy Osmani is a senior Google engineer and shared his top career tips after 12 years at the firm.
• He emphasizes lifelong learning, collaboration, communication, and strategic thinking.
• Osmani has gained 175,000 LinkedIn followers by sharing his tips on careers and technology.

Addy Osmani, a senior Google engineer, recently celebrated his 12th anniversary at the search giant and used the occasion to share his top career tips in a blog post.

His first lesson is not to pretend to have all the answers and to instead embrace lifelong learning. Osmani does this by writing about the new things he's learned to identify gaps in his understanding.

The approach seems to be working — regularly writing and posting online has earned him more than 175,000 followers on LinkedIn.

Collaboration

Another tip is to encourage collaboration between teams and other departments. For some, remote work has reduced the ability to collaborate with colleagues and even been blamed for stifling innovation. To engage people remotely, some career experts suggest hosting video meetings where people need to keep their cameras on and taking small steps like remembering people's birthdays and celebrating promotions.

Mentoring

Mentoring and being mentored were both valuable experiences for Osmani. Having a mentor can be a huge help to boost self-confidence, and to help with career guidance — whether that's a promotion, different duties, more challenges, or even a career change.

Osmani also encourages people to start by sharing the manta: "First do it, then do it right, then do it better." Rather than staring at a blank page, he encourages people to get something down, then work on refining and improving it.

Communication

Communication is another of his tips. Even in technical roles like engineering, he says you need to be able to use your communication skills to share your ideas, establish trust, and let non-technical management understand your decision-making. One CEO previously told Business Insider that communication was the most important skill that employees lacked.

But even if you struggle to make conversation, a Harvard researcher has a 10-second trick for becoming a better communicator: come up with three topics to discuss in advance of any social occasion to take the pressure off.

Think strategically

Osmani warns against having tunnel vision. Instead, he encourages people to think strategically about the context in which they're operating. That means not getting too caught up in your own bubble, thinking about a long-term plan, and making trade-offs.

It also means focusing on what you can control rather than getting bogged down in details that can lead to anxiety and frustration. Job anxiety has particularly affected Gen Z, the generation in the early stages of their careers.

"Anxious teams, as has been well documented, can be less likely to take risks, to innovate, and have low psychological safety," Morra Aarons-Mele, the author of "The Anxious Achiever," previously told BI.

Well-being

That leads to Osmani's final tip: invest in your well-being. Anxiety at work can be a key reason for burnout. It can have drastic consequences: one HR VP previously told BI that burnout got so bad that she ended up being taken out of the office on a stretcher.

For Osmani, intentional self-care and renewal is as vital for high performance at work as technical skill. Spending time in nature, meditation, therapy, and crucially, learning to say "no" at work can all be ways of improving your well-being.

• Ukraine can go back on the offensive, but it will require more troops and equipment.
• A RAND expert believes Ukraine can build a strike force capable of a decisive offensive.
• Right now, Ukraine's biggest problem isn't lack of manpower, but lack of equipment.

With 14 to 21 well-equipped brigades, Ukraine could eject Russian forces from all Ukrainian territory, according to an American expert.

The question is whether Ukraine can find the manpower, and whether Ukraine's allies are willing to spend the money to arm them properly. Yet what is remarkable is that despite Ukraine being outnumbered and outgunned by Russia, Kyiv still has a genuine chance of winning the war.

"What has really kind of disturbed me is that we're two and a half years into this war, and no one's put forth a potential theory of victory yet," Michael Bohnert, a defense analyst at the RAND Corp. think tank, told Business Insider.

Using data from a variety of sources, Bohnert has calculated the financial costs of Ukrainian victory, or at least for munitions. Ukraine's Western allies like the US and members of the EU would have to spend $54 billion to $72 billion per year to manufacture enough missiles and artillery shells to enable Ukraine to go on the offensive again.

For this potential formula for Ukrainian victory, there are two prerequisites. One is Ukraine amassing a sufficiently powerful ground combat force that can defeat the estimated 500,000 Russian troops in Ukraine. Past history isn't promising. An ill-prepared Ukrainian counteroffensive in summer 2023 sputtered amid Russian minefields and inexperienced Ukrainian troops struggling to master newly arrived Western combat vehicles.

However, Bohnert points to a 2015 RAND study of the US Army that suggests Ukraine could recapture its territory. As part of that study, researchers analyzed how big a force NATO would need to dislodge a Russian force that had invaded the Baltic States, and was entrenched on Balkan territory.

"We estimate that an additional 14 brigades and their accompanying enablers will be needed, with perhaps six brigades and 86,000 total soldiers coming from the United States, and eight brigades and a similar number of troops from U.S. NATO allies, along with supporting air and sea forces," the 2015 study concluded.

With Russian forces solidly dug in behind minefields and fortifications across eastern and southern Ukraine, that Baltic scenario bears similarities to the situation that Ukraine faces today. Or at least "close enough for ROM [rough order of magnitude] estimation," Bohnert said.  

However, amassing 21 brigades of roughly 4,000 soldiers each — and training and equipping them to NATO standards — won't be easy. For now, Ukraine is struggling to contain Russian offensives that have achieved small but symbolic gains in the north and south of the country.

"To put this in perspective, 21 brigades is something like 50 to 60 percent of the active-duty US Army," Bohnert said. "Or, basically you would have to take the equivalent of the UK, German or French armies, train them and give them 100 percent of all the kit they need."

Despite fears that Ukraine is running out of manpower — which has spurred a new law to allow prison inmates to be conscripted — Bohnert believes Ukraine can find the personnel for a strike force capable of launching a decisive offensive. "If they were to rotate forces over about a two-year time frame, combined with the new conscription they're pushing, they probably could get enough brigades converted," Bohnert said.

Right now, Ukraine's biggest problem isn't lack of manpower, but lack of equipment. "Most of their battalions are still not fully equipped," said Bohnert. "NATO needs to give what they've promised and be willing to make sure that all their existing forces get supplied to at least some minimal level."

This brings up the other vital question: How many munitions does Ukraine need? While tanks and drones have been useful in the war, the most devastating weapons have been artillery and long-range guided rockets. However, these weapons devour a huge amount of howitzer shells or scarce missiles.

Russia is sending in 25,000 to 30,000 new troops per month, according to Bohnert. Which means that Ukraine must inflict more than 30,000 casualties per month — or about 1,000 casualties per day — to erode Russian strength. In 2024, Ukraine has been inflicting 800 to 1,000 casualties per day, despite being "munition-starved," Bohnert said. Given sufficient quantities of munitions, Ukraine could inflict enough losses to decisively attrit Russian forces that have already sustained an estimated 500,000 casualties.

But demand for munitions also depends on what kind of war Ukraine chooses to wage. Bohnert estimated munitions costs for two scenarios: one where Ukraine remains on the defensive, and the other where it goes on the offensive.

He started with a 2023 Estonian Ministry of Defense plan that laid out a roadmap for Ukraine to defeat Russia. "This war can be won within the next three years or less, by adjusting and increasing the Euro-Atlantic community's military production output and assistance to Ukraine, and imposing the perspective of an intolerable level of attrition on Russia," the Estonians stated.

The Estonians estimated that Ukraine would need a constant stream of munitions. This includes 2.4 million artillery shells, 4,800 air defense missiles capable of protecting cities from Russian missiles, and 8,760 guided bombardment rockets per year. Even this doesn't cover all the items Ukraine would need, such as air defense weapons for the front-line troops, Bohnert noted.

Bohnert factored in data on combat operations and munitions usage from RAND studies dating back to the 1990s, which examined conflicts such as Desert Storm. Overall, Bohnert estimated that $20 billion to $35 billion per year would be needed if Ukraine merely stays on the defensive, and $54 billion to $72 billion per year if it goes on the offensive. And still these figures are incomplete. "This is not including training, sustainment or equipment, which easily could be 50% or double that price," said Bohnert. "It's a lot of money, but actually about the same that the US spent on Iraq and Afghanistan for 15 years straight."

Despite depletion of Western stockpiles and struggles — especially in Europe — to boost arms production, Bohnert believes that NATO can meet Ukraine's needs. The US, for example, aims to produce 14,000 GMLRS rockets in 2025, and it can produce up to 700 cruise missiles per year. America and NATO together manufacture about 4,600 anti-aircraft missiles per year. And what Ukraine's allies can't manufacture themselves, they might be able to acquire from other nations around the world.

"It's not that this is impossible to do," Bohnert said. "It is very feasible. It's just going to take money."

Ample Ukrainian ammunition stockpiles would partly alleviate Ukraine's manpower crunch. "You're basically substituting metal for people," Bohnert said. "But there will have to be a pretty big increase in Western donations."

Inevitably, there will be a divergence between what Ukraine needs and what it will get. For example, US arms production may be diverted to the Pacific to face China, other American allies such as Israel also need weapons, and the US and European public may balk at the price tag. It's also unrealistic to expect that Russia will passively await a Ukrainian buildup. The recent appointment of economist Andrei Belousov as minister of defense suggests that Putin intends to mobilize his nation's resources for a long war.

Nonetheless, it is revealing that despite being outnumbered and outgunned by Russia, there remains serious belief that Ukraine could win a military victory. The question is how to accomplish it.

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.

At age 36, Jace Mattinson is already over retirement. Four years ago, he sold his lumber company for seven figures, and he had enough saved that he never needed to work again.

He said that was an enticing idea after five "extremely tough" years of owning a business. During that time, he was away from his home in Austin a few nights a week and hustling to run the 135-year-old company he'd acquired. After selling the company, he needed a long break from anything laborious.

"I was golfing three, four times a week. I was going to the lake. I was doing all my hobbies that I really cared about and enjoyed, ones that for the greater part of a decade I didn't have as much time to do," Mattinson told Business Insider.

But after eight months, he decided retirement was not nearly as fulfilling as he'd imagined. He returned to a job in lumber distribution and revived his financial podcast. He said he wanted to continue to model a good work ethic for his kids.

Mattinson has all the trappings of someone in the FIRE movement. The acronym, which stands for financial independence, retire early, was coined in the 1990s in the book "Your Money or Your Life" and popularized on blogs like Mr. Money Mustache and the investment site Motley Fool. The idea was to work hard, ideally with multiple income streams, live a life of austerity, invest prudently, and build a big enough nest egg to walk away from work well before the average retirement age of 64.

But millennials, including Mattinson, who finds himself happiest when he has a balance of work and leisure, said they're not as interested in early retirement — and are creating their own versions of life after work.

Millennials often want the FI without the RE

Devotees of the FIRE movement often save or invest the majority of their income. Some take on extra jobs or delay major life milestones like marriage or having kids.

It's an exclusive club, and many hungry millennials are eager to join it. ChooseFI's Facebook group has over 108,000 members, while the r/financialindependence subreddit has 2.2 million members. But for some FIRE wannabes, the "FI" part of the equation is the biggest focus, and the "RE" half seems to be less of a foregone conclusion.

A popular rule of thumb among this group is the "4% rule," which says you should aim to save 25 times your annual expenses so you can withdraw 4% of your funds each year after you quit working. Some FIRE participants told BI that their target savings goal is between $1.5 million and $2.5 million, though many are working toward more for even greater security.

To be sure, early retirees are a small slice of the population. According to Business Insider's analysis of American retirees, just 2.2% are 50 or younger. Less than 1% are below age 35. Just 0.75% of all Americans over 18 and under 50 are retired. Still, many BI spoke with retire unofficially or partially retire, taking on less responsibility at a company or moving to a lower-stakes position.

BI spoke to a dozen millennials who have achieved or are on track to achieve financial independence. While some have retired and told BI they're enjoying it, most feel retirement is pointless and still want to build their careers or give back to their communities.

"The thing I have noticed shift most is the emphasis on FI and less on RE," Scott Rieckens, the executive producer of the film "Playing With FIRE," said. "I think it's awesome to see, as it signals that financial independence is the key motive, which it is, and that work and purpose are actually really important. Retiring early to nothing is a bad idea."

Brad Barrett, the host of the "ChooseFI" podcast, said "vanishingly few" people with the wherewithal to reach financial independence are retiring early. To him, reaching financial independence allows someone to live the life they want, but retiring early signifies turning away from everything you've worked toward.

For many, financial freedom goes beyond quitting a job you don't like. Some said it's the ability to spend on travel or leisure without much stress — which has become even more important after the pandemic's peak. Others said it helps them lead a life of purpose, whether that means educating people on a podcast or leading charity efforts.

The problem with retirement seems to be that people want to add value to their communities and within their own lives — and they believe work is the way to do that. As Bill Schaninger, a speaker, author, and thought leader on the future of work, found in research he conducted with Naina Dhingra for McKinsey, 70% of people who were surveyed said they define their purpose through work.

"Many people figured out one of the things that I get a lot of validation from is being clever, solving problems, participating, and working on something bigger than me," Schaninger told BI.

COVID-19 may have amplified this, he added. "The fragility of our condition, I think, was brought home in a way that maybe many of us had taken for granted," he said. "And so now it's like, 'Well, if I'm going to do this, it has to matter.'"

The millennial version of early retirement

Mitch, 37, said he is about to quit his high-stress job and take a mini-retirement — he has a 22-stop national parks trip planned this summer.

The Minnesota resident and vice president of a building-maintenance company, who asked that only his first name be used because of an ongoing job transition, has a net worth of about $2 million but said he's only planning to take a few months off before returning to the workforce in a lower-stress position. All the sources BI spoke with provided documentation of their net worth.

Mitch said he stumbled into the online personal-finance community in his early 30s, which inspired him and his wife to increase their savings to at least 75% of their income by avoiding spending on luxury items. He said even his high savings won't affect his decision to quit working.

"I think a lot of traditional retirees lack purpose — they take a year or two of retirement and hate it because they do whatever and lose purpose," Mitch said. "The ones that volunteer, continue to coach and consult, or do whatever it is to sharpen their brain and really have a purpose tend to be some of the happiest retirees."

Brian Luebben, a financially independent millennial, described having a panic attack shortly after he hit FI and quit his sales job.

"If you have anxiety, financial freedom is not going to solve it," he said. "If you have depression, financial freedom is not going to solve it. Be careful of the mountaintop moments. When you become a millionaire, when you become financially free, when you do all this stuff, no mariachi band follows you around and performs."

He argued that achieving financial independence and hitting a specific number is "the simplest part." After all, there's a playbook for wealth-building strategies like investing in real estate or building an e-commerce business.

"The most difficult part is figuring out what you do when you have nothing to do all day," he said. "What do you choose to work on?"

Luebben, who hosts a podcast and runs the entrepreneur resource The Action Academy to help other people achieve financial freedom, said people should think through four core questions before they're even close to achieving financial independence: "What does the perfect day look like? What does the perfect week look like? Who was with you? And where?"

Going through that exercise can help ensure that your identity doesn't become wrapped up in achieving FIRE, which is something that Grant Sabatier, who took a year and a half off from work after achieving financial independence, struggled with.

"I defined myself by the pursuit of financial independence," Sabatier, the author of "Financial Freedom," said. "Then, once I reached it, it was like, now I no longer had to do that thing, so what am I going to do? I encourage people on the path to do that inner work. Don't delay figuring out what you really want, why you're pursuing financial independence, and what you want to do after."

Balancing work and fun

Instead of a traditional retirement, many financially independent millennials are finding a balance between work and leisure that works for them.

For Sabina Horrocks, 41, becoming a millionaire was "quite boring." She and her husband worked in six-figure managerial positions, recently achieving a net worth of about $2 million, then had a daughter in 2021. They "plowed money into investments early on," kept daily expenditures low, and purchased rental properties they eventually sold.

She quit her sales operations job but has no intention of stopping work. She's a stay-at-home mom and plans to continue her blog The Moneyaires; she'd also like to become a financial coach or planner.

Blogging and coaching were common post-FI pursuits among the would-be early retirees BI spoke to. Michelle Schroeder-Gardner, 34, runs the blog Making Sense of Cents, and over the past decade, she and her husband have lived mostly in an RV or a sailboat.

By 2017, their blog, advertising sales, and a course they created called Making Sense of Affiliate Marketing had generated nearly $1.2 million in revenue. By 2018, they had achieved financial independence. After years of 100-hour workweeks, she now spends 10 hours a week on her business, which generates $600,000 a year.

"I'm able to travel whenever I want. I can work whenever I want. Nothing's really dependent on my work hours," she said. "My plan is pretty much to continue doing this while I like it and continue to make a little bit more money and save as much as I can."

Lauren and Steven Keys, who quit their full-time jobs in their 20s, have a similar outlook.

Steven does freelance work for his former employer but spends much of his time on an online-tutoring service called CramBetter that he cofounded in 2023. Lauren has one social-media client she works with a couple of hours a month. They also run a financial-independence blog, Trip of a Lifestyle, and earn rental income from a fully paid-off investment property.

"There's this misconception about early retirement that you'll never make another penny ever again and just sit on the beach all day for the rest of your life," Steven said. "We're never going to stop making any money whatsoever."

Are you part of the FIRE movement or living by some of its principles? Reach out these reporters at kelkins@businessinsider.com or nsheidlower@businessinsider.com.

• Middle-income Americans aren't living middle-class lifestyles.
• Research indicates that middle-income earners spend more like lower-income workers.
• The share of middle-income Americans is shrinking, with increased polarization between income tiers.

The American dream goes something like this: You pull yourself up by your bootstraps, get a solid job with benefits, buy a house, start a family, and coast comfortably toward retirement in the country's robust middle class.

While many might think middle-income Americans would be living this dream, they're not. Instead, they're living more like their lower-income peers, struggling to make ends meet and worried about losing it all.

New research from Claire Tassin, a retail and e-commerce analyst at business intelligence company Morning Consult, found that middle-income consumers' behavior is more similar to their lower-income counterparts than more affluent Americans.

"As shoppers are still battling heightened prices and inflationary pressure, middle-income consumer sentiment tracks much closer to lower income," Tassin said. "Rather than mirroring the top bracket, they're mirroring the lower bracket."

Tassin analyzed consumer behavior among Americans making under $50,000, those making between $50,000 and $100,000 — what Morning Consult deems middle-income — and those making over $100,000. While middle-income consumers might prioritize the same financial goals or beliefs as their higher-earning counterparts — like believing that planning for the future is important — they're spending and living a lot more like they're lower-income, and the gap with the affluent is getting wider.

For instance, according to Tassin, middle-income earners report that they'd be willing to pay more for a higher-quality product — but that's not what's happening.

In reality, middle- and lower-income shoppers are "nearly identical" in reporting that they tend toward the less-expensive option when buying something.

Indeed, while many Americans might be plugging away at work, that doesn't mean they're staying afloat. An increasing share of American adults — around 29% — are considered ALICE: asset-limited, income-constrained, but employed. While they're earning consistent paychecks, they're struggling to make ends meet — but still make too much to receive assistance.

It all speaks to the ever-moving goalposts of what it takes to achieve a middle-class lifestyle in America. As the hallmarks of that dream become more out of reach, middle-income earners don't feel like they've made it.

Take Amanda, a millennial in Texas. She's been able to buy a house, have her student loans forgiven, and make over $100,000 annually. This position should, by many measures, make her feel secure.

"I know that I'm doing a lot better than other people my age, but there's still a lot of anxiety that if there's another pandemic, if anything crazy happens, if we lose our jobs, how do we pay the bills?" Amanda previously told BI.

The middle class is more of a club than an income bracket

The ranks of middle-income earners have been shrinking, according to the Pew Research Center.

Rakesh Kochhar, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center, told BI that the share of people living in a middle-income household — earning somewhere between two-thirds and double the median income for a family of their size, per Pew's definition— has dropped over the last five decades, hitting 50% in 2010 and down from around 60% in 1970. That's held true since then, according to Kochhar, with a slightly higher share of that missing 10% moving into the upper-income tier.

"We now have more inequality or more polarization with more people living either at the upper income tier or the lower income tier and fewer in the middle. So moving to the extremes," Kochhar said.

Many who have moved into the high-income category, however, suffer from money dysmorphia. A solid chunk of millionaires consider themselves middle class, despite accounting for just over 12% of American families. While they can certainly afford middle-class markers like homeownership, education, and family more than their lower-income peers, they might also be reluctant to leave the identity of being middle-class behind.

"It's more a club that most Americans want to be part of regardless of their actual circumstances. And there's good reasons," Lawrence R. Samuel, the author of the book "The American Middle Class: A Cultural History," told Business Insider. The myth of the middle-class and the belief that you can work your way up in a fundamentally democratic way is very American, he said.

Samuel said that for some, it is almost unpatriotic to admit that you're wealthy. In a time when blue-collar work holds a particular cache and union approval — if not participation — is at a record high, holding on to the facsimile of the middle class might even be a point of pride.

"Being middle class is almost like classless. There's strong connotations associated with being underclass or poor, and with being rich — it almost violates our equalitarian creed," Samuel said. As he puts it, we like the "big fat middle" in the US, where we're all close to being the same. Clinging to at least the mirage of the middle class might be important to upholding more core American ideals.

"If we admit that we're very class-based — which we really are — that reveals the uncomfortable truth that we're not as democratic as we like to pretend to be, which is the heart and soul of this country," he said. "If we're not truly democracy, then what are we? That's the whole justification for creating this country."

Are you middle-income but don't feel middle-class? Contact this reporter at jkaplan@businessinsider.com.

• Bridesmaids spend an average of $1,900 being part of a bridal party, according to The Knot.
• A 2019 study found a third of bridal party members went into debt to cover related expenses.
• One bridesmaid told The Cut she is spending $3,200 on her friend's wedding this summer.

It's not unheard of these days for a wedding to cost as much as a down payment on a home — but what about the people attending or standing up in the nuptials?

A study by The Knot found that wedding guests in 2023 spent an average of $580 to attend a wedding, while a 2019 study found a third of people who were part of a bridal party went into debt to cover all the related expenses.

According to data compiled by The Knot, the average amount spent on being a bridesmaid was $1,900, which included the costs of a bridal shower gift, the bachelorette party, the bridesmaid dress, wedding gift, and hair and makeup.

Three bridesmaids who say they are going into debt just to be part of their friends' weddings shared their stories with The Cut this week.

Deena, a 28-year-old manager at a nonprofit, told the outlet she's expecting to spend $3,200 to be a bridesmaid at the destination wedding of a college friend whose family is wealthy.

"I'm drowning aside from this wedding, too — I have $19,000 of other debt from student loans and credit cards and medical bills. If I spent everything that Ally wanted me to, I'd probably have to move," she said, referring to the bride.

Deena told The Cut the expenses included a $550 bridesmaid dress, $1,200 hotel stay, and flights that are unlikely to cost less than $380 — and that was just for the wedding.

When she learned the bachelorette party would be another $750 just for her share in the rental home, she told the organizer she couldn't afford it.

"Finally, we worked out a plan where I'm paying in increments. And everyone is treating me like a charity case who's also a bad friend and making everything difficult," she told The Cut.

Deena said she's getting shamed for not being able to afford everything, and that another bridesmaid even asked her, "What if you give up takeout for a month?"

The other two bridesmaid stories shared with the outlet were just as jarring. One said she spent $2,000 and put it on her credit card. The other said her total expenses for being in a friend's wedding were $6,000, or about 10% of her take-home pay.

"How much to spend on your own wedding is your business, of course," Charlotte Cowles, the financial advice columnist at The Cut, wrote. "But before you rope your dearest friends into your vision, maybe take a moment to consider what they can afford."

• Google Pay is a digital payment platform that uses your credit and debit cards to make purchases.
• You can use Google Pay with the Google Pay or Google Wallet app.
• Google Pay is safe, due to tokenized transactions and your phone's passcode and facial or touch ID.

Google Pay is Google's digital payment service that you can use to make mobile payments using your phone, watch or tablet. It's connected to your Google account and lets you securely use your existing credit cards to pay for purchases at stores or online. 

And while Google Pay is the name of the payment platform, you have a choice of which app you want to use to actually make mobile payments — Google Pay or Google Wallet. Google CEO Sundar Pichai announced Google Pay's redesign in 2020, saying the app made it "simpler to pay securely, organize finances, save money + more."

Here's everything you need to know about using Google Pay.   

Getting started with Google Pay

To get started with Google Pay, you need to install either the Google Pay or Google Wallet app. Android users should choose Google Wallet; it offers a lot of additional features, such as the ability to store ID cards, loyalty cards, event tickets and passes, transit cards, and more. Not unlike Apple Wallet on iOS devices, it's a convenient way to store almost anything you'd carry in a traditional wallet right within your mobile device. 

Google Pay, on the other hand, is focused exclusively on letting you make mobile payments. The Google Pay app is being discontinued on June 4, 2024, so you should probably just go directly to the more useful Google Wallet. That said, Google Wallet isn't yet available for iOS users. So for now, if you have an iPhone, you need to stick with the Google Pay app.

How to use Google Pay

After installing Google Pay or Google Wallet, you need to log into your Google account and then add one or more payment methods, like a credit or debit card. 

Once you've added at least one card to your Google Pay account, you can make mobile payments in stores. At the store's checkout, look for signs that the terminal accepts Google Pay or tap-to-pay credit cards. Then unlock your phone, hold it near the payment symbol, and wait for the confirmation that the payment has been made — you don't even have to start the app.  

If you have more than one payment method set up in Google Wallet, you can choose which one to use at checkout. To do that, start the app when you reach the checkout and swipe through the cards until you reach the one you want to use. Then hold the phone to the payment terminal as usual to complete the transaction. 

You can also use Google Pay to scan barcodes and QR codes — the app uses Google lens, and you can use it to look up price information or make an online payment.

You can also allow people to search and find you in Google Pay to pay you — and you, in turn, can search for people or businesses with a Google Business Profile.

Google Pay is free

The good news is that Google Pay is free to use. The Google Pay and Google Wallet apps are free to download, and there's no subscription or service fee to use the service to make mobile payments. 

Of course, that doesn't mean that purchases you make with Google Pay are completely free. Google Pay lets you make payments through your credit cards, debit cards, and bank accounts, so if you would ordinarily pay interest or a fee when using a card, you'll still pay that fee when using it through Google Pay. You simply won't pay anything additional for the privilege of using Google Pay.

Google Pay is safe

Surprisingly, Google Pay is safer and more secure than using a credit card, and for a number of reasons. First and foremost: Google Pay purchases are tokenized, which means that the service sends your credit information using a unique code for each purchase. If the information could be intercepted, it would not be useful to a thief or hacker, because your credit card information isn't present. 

Perhaps even more important, though, is the physical security that Google Pay offers. If your actual credit card is lost or stolen, it can potentially be used to make purchases, at least until you notify the credit company and cancel the card. But when using Google Pay on your phone, your credit card information is protected behind a passcode or biometrics like facial recognition. 

The pros and cons of using Google Pay

One advantage of Google Pay is that it's integrated with a number of other popular Google products. For instance, Google Flights offers a price guarantee where Google will pay you the difference if the price of your flight drops after you book it — you just have to have a Google Pay account.

The bottom line is that there are both pros and cons to using Google Pay. Not only is Google Pay a safe and secure payment system, but it's broadly compatible with many retail stores — just look for the Google Pay or tap-to-pay symbol at checkout. And via the Google Wallet app, Google Pay does a lot more, letting you store transit cards and boarding passes, loyalty cards, and more all in one place. 

Even so, there are some disadvantages to Google Pay as well. As pervasive as Google Pay is at retailers, especially in large cities, it's far from ubiquitous. Especially in smaller locales and at independent stores, you might have trouble using Google Pay to make purchases. That means you still need to carry a physical credit card, at least as a backup, which can defeat the purpose of using Google Pay to begin with. 

With the forthcoming end of the Google Pay app, Google is also leaving Apple users out in the cold. That means Google Pay could be an Android-only service starting in June 2024, unless Google releases a Google Wallet app for the iPhone.