• Gwynne Shotwell seems to run the show at Elon Musk's SpaceX.
• She oversees most of the rocket company's central business, per an org chart from The Information.
• Here's everything we know about the SpaceX president and COO.

SpaceX president and chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell appears to be calling the shots at Elon Musk's company.

While Musk is the CEO and public face of the aerospace company, Shotwell handles nearly every team internally, according to an org chart reviewed by The Information.

Shotwell has 21 direct reports to Musk's four and oversees most of SpaceX's central business, including the teams working on Starlink, Falcon, and Starship.

One former SpaceX employee, Vincent Peters, told Business Insider that Shotwell "is the singular most important person within SpaceX outside of Elon."

"She moves the needle for employee morale and customer confidence in SpaceX and serves as an azimuth within the company as priorities evolve," he added.

Shotwell was one of SpaceX's earliest employees. Here's everything we know about the powerful SpaceX president.

Early life

Shotwell was born in 1963 and raised in Illinois. She is the daughter of a brain surgeon and an artist and has two sisters, according to an interview with the Los Angeles Times.

An A-student in high school, she later gained an MSc in mechanical engineering and applied mathematics from Northwestern University.

She told the LA Times she developed an early interest in machines. This evolved into a career in the automotive field before moving into the aerospace industry.

One of the first SpaceX employees

Shotwell was the 11th person hired by SpaceX.

She joined the company in 2002 as vice president of business development following a stint at spacecraft developer Microcosm.

Shotwell told the LA Times in 2013: "I knew early on if these guys [at SpaceX] couldn't make it in the space industry, nobody will. If we hadn't achieved success, I was willing to leave the aerospace industry altogether and go sell real estate or something. Fortunately, that didn't happen."

Over her 22 years at SpaceX, Shotwell has risen through the ranks to become COO and president, making her one of the most important figures.

Secret to SpaceX's success

Shotwell has long been rumored to pull the strings at SpaceX.

For much of her time at the company, she has overseen its operations and sales while Musk has focused on developing the technology. Investors have praised the pair's partnership and credit it with much of SpaceX's success.

Peters, founder of Inheritance AI, told BI that Shotwell was the "cornerstone of consistency and continuity at SpaceX" amid "Elon's involvement in his entities outside of SpaceX."

He said Shotwell's leadership style was "between transformational leadership and democratic leadership," adding she was extremely approachable to all employees.

SpaceX has about 13,000 employees in California, Texas, and Florida.

The COO has 21 direct reports, while Musk has only four. Shotwell also oversees most of SpaceX's central business, including the teams working on Starlink, Falcon, and Starship.

According to Forbes, Shotwell has an estimated stake in SpaceX of less than 1%.

It seems she enjoys getting hands-on at times:

Relationship with Elon Musk

Shotwell has said she enjoys working for Musk and previously praised the billionaire's management style.

"I love working for Elon," she said in a 2018 TED Talk.

"He's funny, and fundamentally, without him saying anything, he drives you to do your best work. He doesn't have to say a word. You just want to do great work," she told the audience.

Shotwell has come to Musk's defense on numerous occasions, most recently over claims about his conduct with female SpaceX workers.

In response to some of the claims in a Wall Street Journal report, she said: "I continue to be amazed by what this extraordinary group of people are achieving every day, even amidst all the forces acting against us. And Elon is one of the best humans I know."

Shotwell was also mentioned in the Journal report after one employee claimed the COO had accused her of having an affair with her husband.

Representatives for SpaceX did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

• Ariana Grande said Nickelodeon told the "Victorious" cast that inappropriate innuendos were "cool."
• The singer and actor spoke on "Podcrushed" about her experiences as a child star on the show.
• It's the first time Grande has opened up about Nickelodeon since the release of "Quiet on Set."

Ariana Grande said that Nickelodeon producers told the cast of "Victorious" that the innuendos they filmed as child actors were "cool."

It's the first time that the singer has opened up about her experiences on the series after the documentary "Quiet on Set" exposed some of the inappropriate behavior that went on at the kids' network in the 1990s and 2000s.

Most notably, "Drake and Josh" actor Drake Bell shared that he was sexually assaulted by Nickelodeon dialogue coach Brian Peck in the early 2000s.

Nickelodeon told Deadline in March: "Now that Drake Bell has disclosed his identity as the plaintiff in the 2004 case, we are dismayed and saddened to learn of the trauma he has endured, and we commend and support the strength required to come forward."

The documentary, which was released earlier this year, sent ripples through the entertainment industry, forcing audiences and actors alike to reevaluate whether certain scenes in kids' TV shows at the time were appropriate.

"Quiet on Set" highlighted how shows such as "Victorious" included scenes where child stars acted out scenes featuring sexual innuendos.

When speaking to Penn Badgley on Wednesday's "Podcrushed," Grande said that she was "reprocessing" her time on "Victorious."

Without referring to a particular scene or joke, Grande said: "Speaking specifically about our show, I think that was something that we were convinced was the cool thing about us. We pushed the envelope with our humor, and the innuendos were like… We were told and convinced that it was the cool differentiation.

"It just all happened so quickly, and now, looking back on some of the clips, I'm like, 'Damn, really? Oh shit.' I think about if I had a daughter."

She went on: "There's also a strange pattern that occurs where it's really taken advantage of how much it means to the young performer to get a laugh from video village," Grande said. "You're like, 'Oh shit. I'm doing something great. This is funny. This is good!'"

Grande then claimed that "so many adults" had to approve all the scenes in the show, which chimes with the wider issues Nickelodeon at the time that were explored in "Quiet on Set."

The singer also said that there's been a "cultural shift" in society in the last decade toward people feeling more able and empowered to come forward about negative workplace experiences, not just in the film and television industry.

Nickelodeon did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Europe is cracking down on EVs coming from China, imposing new tariffs on imports. 
• Tesla is reportedly lobbying for a lower rate of tariffs.  
• The European Commission has confirmed it is exploring Tesla's request.

Elon Musk might be about to outmaneuver Tesla's Chinese EV rivals in Europe.

The European Commission confirmed Wednesday that Tesla — which manufactures EVs for the European market at its Shanghai gigafactory — may receive its own special rate of tariffs.

The Musk-run automaker had lobbied for a lower tariff rate than its Chinese rivals, according to Bloomberg, pointing out that it had received fewer state subsidies from the Chinese government than companies like BYD and Geely.

A spokesperson for the European Commission told CNBC looking at the subsidies Tesla has received in China "may lead indeed to different level of countervailing duties." It's unclear if Tesla would benefit overall as the tariffs will likely be relative to the subsidies it has received.

Business Insider contacted Tesla and the European Commission for further comment but didn't immediately hear back.

The EV giant does have a gigafactory in Germany, where it builds Model Ys, but it imports its Model 3 sedan into the EU from China.

Tesla imported more EVs into Europe than anyone else last year, shipping in 171,000 cars compared to Chinese rival SAIC Motor's 118,000, according to HSBC data reported by Bloomberg.

The EU announced a new barrage of taxes on China-made electric vehicles on Wednesday, after provisionally concluding that the amount of money China has poured into its EV industry gave China-based companies an unfair advantage.

Warren Buffett-backed BYD, which briefly overtook Tesla as the world's largest EV producer earlier this year, was hit with a 17.4% import tax, while Geely and SAIC Motor were hit with rates of 20% and 38.1%, respectively.

Other China-based firms cooperating with the EU's investigation will face a 21% duty, while those that refused, will be hit with a 38% tariff. These new tariffs are on top of the EU's existing 10% duty on imported EVs.

Tesla has been manufacturing in its Shanghai gigafactory since 2019, and has benefited from Chinese government subsidies meant to boost the country's EV market.

In 2022, it received the second highest amount of subsidies for the production of its EVs behind BYD, according to Bloomberg analysis of industry data.

• A South African policy proposal is being hailed as the first national universal basic income plan.
• However, experts say it's promising but would pay too little to too few people to be a true UBI program.
• UBI champions say that only helping the poor can lead to payments being seen as welfare checks.

South Africa's top political party has proposed a social safety net that's been called the first national universal basic income (UBI) program. Experts say that's a gross exaggeration.

The African National Congress, led by Nelson Mandela in the 1990s, recently outlined its plan to expand South Africa's Social Relief of Distress program. The temporary grants were rolled out during the pandemic to help struggling citizens meet basic needs.

The ANC, now in coalition talks after winning just 40% of the vote in recent national elections, said it would boost the value of payouts and expand the program to more vulnerable people including caregivers, the unemployed, and the precariously employed. It promised to finalize the policy within two years of being elected.

The party also suggested it could fund the program by introducing progressive taxes such as a social security tax, and emphasized it wouldn't replace existing welfare programs or public services. It also signaled it would increase payments and expand eligibility over time.

Cleo Goodman, the basic income lead at think tank Autonomy, told Business Insider that the ANC's proposal followed years of basic income advocates making their case through "pilots, research and widespread campaigning."

South Africa's civil society is also eager to expand the Social Relief of Distress grants to redistribute wealth, reduce poverty, stimulate the job market, and help people cover the costs of finding work, she said.

Goodman said that what began as an emergency pandemic response has "instigated a serious move towards providing genuine economic security, through an unconditional cash transfer system that approaches universality."

Too little money for too few people

Yet the ANC's plan doesn't truly qualify as a UBI program, which usually provides recurring cash payments to all adults in a population regardless of their wealth or employment status, and with no restrictions on how the money is spent.

"Despite the name, this proposal falls far short of a basic income," Karl Widerquist, a philosophy professor at Georgetown University-Qatar and the author of several books about UBI, told BI.

"The payments are too small; they are means-tested; and they are means-tested in a way that makes it hard for some of the neediest, eligible people to get the funds they are entitled to," he continued.

Widerquist also flagged the potential for a "poverty trap" where people could lose the entire grant once their income rises above a certain threshold, discouraging them from earning too much and knocking them back when their earnings improve.

The writer and academic said the ANC's plans to extend the program are promising, but the initial proposal is only a "small step in the right direction."

He added that the timing "could be good or bad," as the ANC's coalition partners could hold it accountable for passing the policy if they support it, but if they oppose it then it "could easily fall by the wayside over the next few years."

It's not surprising to see the ANC propose a targeted poverty-alleviation program instead of a full UBI scheme. The former is cheaper, less radical, and likely to be more palatable to voters than handing cash to the wealthy — even if new taxes would make them net contributors.

But UBI proponents say that giving too little money to too few people doesn't effectively combat poverty, and can stigmatize the grants as welfare checks. A compromise scheme also fails to provide a safety net that allows people to take time to find the right job if they get laid off, and may not fully recognize the value of domestic labor such as child and elderly care either.

• People who watch lots of TV are more likely to be unhealthy as they age, a study found. 
• But swapping just an hour of TV for a walk could help you age better, the scientists said.
• By 2050, 20% of the world's population is projected to be over 65, making healthy aging particularly important.

Watching less TV might help you live longer, new research suggests.

Researchers from the Harvard T. Chan School of Public Health investigated how sedentary behavior and light physical activity affected people's chances of aging healthily.

By 2050, 20% of the world's population is projected to be aged over 65, the researchers said. With this in mind, they wanted to identify lifestyle factors that could help people avoid problems associated with aging, such as chronic illnesses, cognitive decline, and physical limitations. The researchers defined healthy aging as being free of chronic diseases and problems with physical function, memory, or mental health at age 70.

The study was published in the journal JAMA Network Open on Tuesday. It used data collected across 20 years on 45,176 female participants of the Nurses' Health Study, an investigation into the risk factors of chronic diseases in women. Researchers compared the time participants spent watching TV and doing physical activity in an average week.

The team found that those who spent more time watching TV were less likely to age healthily. For every two hours participants spent watching TV, their odds of healthy aging decreased by 12%.

But the more time participants spent doing physical activity, the higher their odds of aging healthily. Every two hours of walking or standing they did each day was linked to a 12% higher chance of aging healthily. And the more intense the physical activity, the more their odds increased.

Even just replacing one hour of being sedentary while watching TV with one hour of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity — such as walking at a normal pace — each day was associated with 28% higher odds of healthy aging.

Watching less TV and walking more could help you live longer

From the study's findings, researchers identified four lifestyle factors that could help people become healthy: watching less than three hours of TV per day, walking or standing for at least three hours a day, doing at least 30 minutes a day of more intense activity like walking at a normal pace, and not being overweight.

They also found that participants who slept for fewer than seven hours each night could improve their odds of healthy aging by replacing TV time with sleep.

It's important to note that the findings of this study are not causal, meaning that researchers can't say for sure that watching TV causes unhealthy aging. But, the researchers pointed out that sitting for long periods has been linked to reduced insulin sensitivity, increased inflammation, and reduced blood flow to the brain, while sitting in front of the TV specifically has been associated with unhealthy eating patterns, including overeating, which increases risks of disease.

The study was also done on a cohort of US nurses, so the findings may not be relatable to other populations, they said.

Professor Dan Belsky, an epidemiologist at the Robert N. Butler Columbia Aging Center, told Business Insider that this study "contributes additional data" to findings that have been known for a long time, that "people who report being more active also report better health outcomes."

He said: "What is needed now are studies to identify community and society-level strategies that enable more people to be more active."

• Harriet Kelsall spent her 20s and early 30s focused on building a successful jewellery business. 
• She  started trying for kids at 34 after overcoming her fears about childcare options. 
• Kelsall has two healthy children, but experienced miscarriages and exhaustion as an older parent. 

I've never been someone who was always thinking about kids, but I assumed I might want them someday.

I got married at 28. By 30, I was ready for kids, but I was also running my own business, Harriet Kelsall Bespoke Jewellery, which I started at 27 in 1998.

My business grew quickly, and I had staff relying on me to pay their wages. When I thought about having kids in my late 20s, it didn't seem possible while running a business.

My mom was a stay-at-home mom until I was 12. My friends and family with young kids were all stay-at-home moms and had the kind of jobs you could put down for a year and come back to.

I would need childcare from day one and couldn't understand what that would look like, so I kept putting kids off. I wondered if eventually I'd have to choose between my career and children.

We started trying for kids in our mid-30s

When I was 34, my husband and I decided to try for a baby. I was getting older. Speaking to a work friend who had juggled having kids and her full-on job made me realize I could handle it, too. I also started researching nannies and realized that was a feasible option.

I got pregnant quickly, but I had a miscarriage at four months. I thought maybe I'd left it too late and that I wouldn't be a mom. But I got pregnant again a few months later and had my first child when I was nearly 35.

I started working a week after my son was born

I started working again about a week after my son was born. At that point, there were certain things that only I could do for the business. I remember people coming to my house so that I could price gemstones and work on commissions. I had a screaming baby in one ear, and I was trying to hold it together while I worked. It was difficult, but I managed.

18 months after our son was born, we tried for another baby. We needed start trying before I got too much older, especially already experiencing one miscarriage. I also didn't want a huge age gap between my kids.

When I had my son, two colleagues stepped up in a way I hadn't anticipated. That made me feel more confident that my business could would work when I had a second child.

I started trying for a second child within two years

I kept getting pregnant and then losing the baby. I had eight miscarriages over three years. It was really hard and physically draining. Each time, I lost a lot of blood. Once, I had to have a transfusion of four units of blood.

It was tough juggling my business while going through a lot of emotional and physical pain. I didn't feel I could tell my staff about my miscarriages or lean on them for help. I had this false notion that as a female leader, I couldn't show weakness. I felt very lonely.

During that time, I had to find a lot of strength inside myself carry on. Even though I wanted my son to have a sibling, I remember thinking: "I have this amazing baby, and some people don't even have one, so I'm very lucky."

I didn't have time to wallow in the reality of what I was going through. My sister was also very supportive.

Having so many miscarriages meant that trying for a baby was getting scarier and scarier. At one point I thought "This is the last time we should try."

Thankfully, I then got pregnant with my second child, and she was born when I was 39.

It's physically more draining to have kids in your 30s

Getting pregnant and having two healthy kids when you're over the age of 35 is hard. Many people manage it, so it doesn't sound difficult, but unfortunately, not everybody can have kids later. You don't know if that will be you until you try.

I've also found that having kids in your mid- and late 30s is a real physical challenge. Even if you keep fit, the reality can be quite different.

Childbirth is draining on your body, and it takes a while to recover. Once you have a baby, you're tired all the time. In those early days, I felt like I'd done four hours of exercise each day.

My business might be bigger if I didn't have kids, but it's made me a better leader

If I hadn't had kids or so many miscarriages, it's possible my business might be further on. But I think parenthood can bring a lot to your work. It makes you a better leader and better at juggling things.

It bugs me people think when a woman goes on maternity leave, they're going to fall behind. Every woman I know who is brilliant comes back to work even more brilliant.

Making the leap

The unknown is scary so make a plan for how you're going to juggle your work when you have kids. Talk to your partner and research childcare options – finding a nanny, looking into costs to see if I could afford it, and finding out what hours they could do helped to reassure me.

My advice to others who are thinking about having children would be to make sure that your work is in a sustainable position. Think through all the ideal scenarios and what you'd want to avoid as a working parent — things like your location and working hours, and if what you need is possible.

I don't regret my choices. I love my amazing children and running my business.

• The average American household spends at least $475 a month on groceries.
• 40 million Americans are food insecure and SNAP benefits often don't provide enough financial help.
• With only $23 a month from SNAP,  Mary Dacus is often reliant on food pantries. 

Mary Dacus, 69, fills her basket at Ruler Foods with the essentials.

Three cans of SpaghettiOs for $1 each, a dozen eggs for $2.99, a half gallon of milk for $2.59. She adds bread, soup, potatoes, chili mix, graham crackers, cereal bars, clementines, toilet paper, some frozen vegetables, and canned chicken — the fresh stuff is expensive.

It comes to $83.02.

Dacus goes shopping near her home in Robinson, Illinois — a city 200 miles south of Chicago — on the fourth Wednesday of every month after her husband Stephen cashes his Social Security check. She hopes the food will last them a full 30 days, but she inevitably has to stop at Walmart a few times to fill in the gaps.

Granola for $5.34, bell peppers for $2.88, two bottles of butter pecan coffee creamer for $7.94, and a new vacuum bag for $8.77. That's an additional $53.39.

Dacus and her husband have to stick to a tight budget: their household only receives $23 a month from SNAP. They must rely on their combined $2,140 Social Security income for the rest and any other expenses they have since they're both retired. The average American household spends $475 a month on groceries plus $303 on restaurants and takeout, according to the latest available US Bureau of Labor Statistics report on consumer expenditures in 2022.

There are over 40 million Americans experiencing food insecurity. SNAP provides relief for many households living paycheck to paycheck. But some struggling families, like Dacus', don't receive enough help, or their income is considered too high to receive any help at all. ALICEs — people who are asset-limited, income-constrained, employed — feel especially left behind by food assistance programs.

According to the Pew Research Center, about 13% of Americans, or 22 million households, are enrolled in government food benefits.

Anything helps, Dacus said, but her SNAP allocation "barely covers one meal."

"The man called me and told me, 'Oh, we're going to get you $23 a month.' And I laughed," she said. "That's pitiful. That's really pitiful."

With limited SNAP dollars, Dacus relies on food pantries

Dacus is a good cook — she used to love making pot roast when she could afford it — and can usually make a meal out of whatever miscellaneous ingredients she and Stephen have in their cupboard. She typically makes crockpot meals, casseroles, or other dishes that she can stretch for more than one meal. But $23 a month in food benefits isn't even close to affording what they need to eat.

Often, Dacus said a full month of food and household products can run them about $200, plus an additional $30 to $50 a week when they run out of things. They struggle with their other household bills, are in nearly $10,000 in credit card debt, and have drained their savings in order to pay for food and healthcare.

"We've used our credit cards within the last three and a half years to buy groceries and things that we needed," she said, adding that she and Stephen's low credit score has now made it difficult to qualify for housing and car payments.

To avoid going hungry, Dacus said she has to rely on local food pantries. They pick up canned goods and packaged food. But there aren't many food pantries near her house, and the ones in driving distance are open for limited hours. Even when they can go to the pantry, Dacus said the food is unhealthy and sometimes spoiled.

SNAP benefits don't always align with household needs

America's SNAP program provides low-income households with money to grocery shop, and the qualifying criteria is based on the federal poverty line. The allocation can also be affected by earned-income taxes, and the number of children or older adults in a household. What's more, the costs of groceries can vary widely based on a person's location.

An individual with a monthly gross income lower than $1,580 can receive a maximum of $291 monthly from SNAP, and a couple with a monthly income lower than $2,137 can receive a maximum of $535, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Yet, many households like Dacus' don't receive the maximum because their income isn't low enough.

There are also limitations on how SNAP dollars can be used. The money covers basic food products like milk and bread, but it cannot be used to purchase dish soap, toilet paper, laundry detergent, vitamins, feminine products, over-the-counter medicine, or pet food.

Groceries are just part of the $38,268 the average couple in Robinson, Illinois needs to survive every year, which includes the cost of housing, utilities, healthcare, transportation, and unexpected expenses, according to United Way. For a family with two school-age children, that number becomes $61,632. This budget doesn't leave any room to build savings or prepare for retirement.

It's also more difficult for childfree adults, or adults whose children are no longer minors, to qualify for food assistance. Dacus said she and her husband have to rely on SNAP and food pantries because she can't access other programs like WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children), the child tax credit, and parts of the earned-income tax credit.

"We don't get ahead at all," Dacus said. "We take two steps forward and three back."

Are you experiencing food insecurity? Are you open to sharing your experience with SNAP or grocery shopping? If so, reach out to this reporter at allisonkelly@businessinsider.com.

• The US dollar's share in global forex reserves dropped to 55% from over 70% in 2000, per IMF data.
• Non-traditional reserve currencies such as the Australian dollar and Canadian dollar are gaining ground.
• The world's central banks have been cutting the share of US dollars in their foreign reserves for the last two decades.

The US dollar is in a state of "stealth erosion," the International Monetary Fund, or IMF, wrote in a report on Tuesday.

While the dollar is still by far the most dominant currency in the forex reserves of the world's central banks, the greenback's share in these reserves — after exchange-rate and interest-rate adjustments — declined from over 70% in 2000 to about 55% in the last quarter of 2023, according to IMF's data.

The dollar has been strengthening against most currencies in recent years — indicating that private investors have moved into dollar-based assets. This effect masked the shift of central banks and governments out of dollar reserves.

The Dollar Index, which measures the value of the greenback against a basket of foreign currencies, has gained 4% this year to date and about 7% since March 2022, when the US Federal Reserve started its last interest-rate hike cycle.

Central banks have been 'shifting gradually' away from the USD

The dollar's share hasn't been overtaken by the world's other three major currencies — the euro, the Japanese yen, or the UK pound sterling.

Instead, the shares of "non-traditional reserve currencies" have risen, according to the IMF. These include the Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Chinese renminbi, South Korean won, Singaporean dollar, and Nordic currencies.

The IMF's findings are consistent with its previous report in 2022 when it found that the dollar's dominance was waning and getting replaced with alternative currencies.

"These nontraditional reserve currencies are attractive to reserve managers because they provide diversification and relatively attractive yields, and because they have become increasingly easy to buy, sell and hold with the development of new digital financial technologies," wrote IMF's economists in their latest report, which is based on data from 149 reporting economies that collectively account for 93% of global forex reserves.

The dollar's decline in FX reserves doesn't appear to be about sanctions

The IMF's report comes amid ongoing discussions about de-dollarization.

With the use of sanctions, the West effectively shut Russia out of the global, greenback-based financial system after Moscow started the war in Ukraine.

Other countries are now concerned that they, too, could be locked out of the US dollar-based financial system.

However, the slow waning of the dollar's dominance in global forex reserves appears to be less about trade restrictions than diversification — because its decline has not accelerated in recent years despite the US' intensifying use of financial sanctions.

Even so, there are other concerns that may erode confidence in the greenback, analysts have said recently.

On Monday, two American think tank analysts wrote in the Financial Times that "American dysfunction" — political and fiscal — is the real threat to dollar dominance. This sentiment was also echoed by Jared Cohen, the president of global affairs at Goldman Sachs, in Foreign Policy.

• I'm a mom of two girls ages 4 and 1. 
• My oldest is an introvert, while my youngest is an extrovert. 
• I can related to both and give them space to be who they are. 

"I want to go home!" my 4-year-old screamed as I held her in my lap.

We were at a birthday party for her best friend. To be more specific, this little girl is also our next-door neighbor, and we were in their backyard — the one she plays in almost every day. In contrast, my 1-year-old laughed and clapped as she sat with a group of kids playing with bubbles.

This isn't a new situation for me — my older daughter wilts around big groups of people while my younger daughter lights up in the presence of others. I'm sure I'm not the only parent with one introverted child and another extroverted one, but in those panicky moments where I have to cater to both of their social needs, it feels like taking one wrong step will end in disaster — also known as an epic tantrum.

Fortunately, I relate to my daughters. I'm what they call an extroverted introvert — someone who enjoys socializing but still needs time to recharge afterward. And because I understand both sides of the extrovert/introvert personality, I've developed ways to embrace their specific needs.

We build in introvert and extrovert time during the week

Weekdays are easier for us to schedule activities catered to each of our kids. While my introvert is at preschool, my extrovert is signed up for a gym and music class. If we have a day without a class, I take her to the playground or another busy spot to fuel her up.

For my introvert, after her day at school, I know she has to reset. So we opt for 1:1 playdates, art projects at home, or activities that don't have too much stimulation, like going for a bike ride or gardening.

Weekends are family time

On the weekends, we make an effort to spend time together as a family. Instead of running them to extracurriculars or playdates, we try to prioritize the importance of our family unit.

This can definitely include parts of the day spent with their friends or ours, but ultimately, we all recharge on the weekend. Part of this is so that we instill in them that time with us is important, and another is so that my husband (total introvert) and I (extroverted introvert) don't get burned out either.

When we're going to be somewhere new, we have options

Of course I'd love to be able to control every situation so my kids feel nothing but bliss but, well, that's not realistic.

There are weekends where we all have to go to a big event — like the neighbor's birthday party — or where it's pouring rain (the LA equivalent of the end of days) and we're stuck indoors. We've learned that when possible, having options for each kid makes a huge difference.

So when my introvert needed to leave the birthday party, I took her back to the house while my husband stayed at the party with my extrovert. When my extrovert needs some stimulation, I'll take her out for an adventure at the zoo while my husband has a 1:1 movie date with our introvert.

My hope is that my daughters know they are loved and respected for their personalities and don't feel forced to try to be something they aren't. And sometimes the girls surprise us — my introvert will rally and want to do a big activity, or my extrovert will hang back and just want to cuddle up close with us. But knowing we can pull them out of a situation that doesn't serve them well eases the pressure on us as their parents.

Erin La Rosa is the author of "The Backtrack, Plot Twist," and "For Butter or Worse." She lives in Los Angeles with her husband and four daughters (two humans, two felines).

• Sam Dogen retired at 34 in San Francisco with over $3 million after 13 years of saving and investing.
• His wife retired at 35, and both haven't held a 9-to-5 job since the mid-2010s.
• He and his wife followed the FIRE movement, focusing on passive income and minimal expenses.

Sam Dogen went from starting his career 25 years ago making $40,000 a year in New York City to retiring in San Francisco 13 years later with a net worth of over $3 million. His wife retired three years after him at age 35.

For years, the two saved most of their income, poured money into passive investments, and worked long hours to achieve financial independence — the point at which they wouldn't need to work to cover their long-term expenses.

"It's really a journey of balancing your finances, figuring out passive incomes, covering your expenses, buying the things that you want that'll improve quality life like a house, and then also being willing to go back to work in either part-time or full-time capacity once you have that void to fill," Dogen said.

Dogen and his wife are FIREs — financial independence, retire early — who make it work with two kids in one of the US's most expensive cities. He said it's uncommon for both people in a couple to reach FIRE at around the same time. Raising their kids has been a full-time job for both of them, but both have found peace in pursuing — and monetizing — their passions while relying on passive income to fund their vacations and entertainment.

In a way, both have rejected the "RE" in the FIRE acronym, though neither plans to return to an office job.

Discovering FIRE

In 1999, Dogen got his first job in investment banking in New York City, making $40,000 and splitting a studio apartment with a roommate to save money. He said he would work late to get free cafeteria food, which he saved for the next day, meaning he rarely spent on groceries.

"I figured if I could save 100% of every other paycheck, that would be saving 50% of my salary, and every year I saved 50% of my salary was one year of living," Dogen said. "I took it a step further: I saved every other paycheck, and I saved and invested 90% of any discretionary year-end bonus. I did that essentially for 13 years in a row."

He moved to San Francisco for another position and rose through the ranks throughout the 2000s. In 2003, he bought a two-bedroom condominium, which allowed him to fix his living expenses for the next few years. He said this was one of the keys to achieving financial independence.

However, in 2009, he estimates he lost 35% to 40% of his net worth in six months. That year, he started his blog, Financial Samurai, chronicling his journey to financial independence while continuing at his company and rebuilding some of his net worth. But, after surviving seven rounds of layoffs, he realized he had enough in the bank to quit his $250,000-a-year job without rushing to another job.

"I realized that after 10 years, I wasn't having any fun anymore," Dogen said. "It's very stressful, and I wanted out, but I didn't know how to get out because I just didn't plan that far."

He negotiated a severance package in 2012, which allowed him to keep his deferred stock and cash compensation. At the time, his net worth was $3 million, and he had saved between 75% and 80% of his income over the previous few years.

"I never let lifestyle inflation get to me, and I was driving old cars, living in very humble homes," he said.

Transitioning into early retirement

Though he had a large nest egg and passive investments, he wondered for a few years if he had made the right choice. His wife made $120,000 a year, but he was unsure if his retirement would only be temporary. Still, his health improved shortly after quitting, and he realized how much pressure he had been under that was lifted off his shoulders.

"I was like, what am I doing? I'm only 35 years old, leaving a well-paid job behind, losing so much money," Dogen said. "But as the months went by, I felt more calm because I had way more freedom, and I was happier. The chronic back pain and sciatica and teeth grinding went away within six months."

Early in his career, he knew he wanted to achieve financial independence and retire early, but he didn't want to leave the city. He said it's rare for people who reach FIRE to live in expensive coastal cities, noting many move to suburbs or more rural areas where the cost of living is lower. He knows couples making well into the six figures who struggle to save between housing and raising children.

"If you plan to stay in a high-cost-of-living area and you want to FIRE, you have to focus on ways to build wealth that outstrip the cost of living," Dogen said.

In addition to the income he earned from his blog, he poured money into stocks and real estate. He also followed various budgeting guidelines like spending no more than 10% of gross income on cars. He follows a 30% rule for homebuying as well.

"I feel like there's this whole world out there who just kind of wing it when it comes to their personal finances, and then they wake up 10 years later and wonder where all their money went because there aren't disciplines or ratios or guidelines that they follow," Dogen said.

When he retired, he told his wife that if she could stay in her job for three more years until she turned 35, both could retire early and still make enough in passive income to live comfortably. They upped their savings rate and tried to maximize passive income during those years.

"One of the interesting phenomena you'll see in the FIRE space is how a man will proclaim he's retired early, but he'll have a working wife," Dogen said. "It's a head-scratcher because I don't know a single stay-at-home mom who says she's retired early. She just says she's a stay-at-home mom because it's a full-time job. It's crazy how much work it is."

In 2015, his wife also negotiated a generous severance package after her company tried to keep her working part-time. She returned to the company after a few months, making more in a part-time position than she did working full-time. She stopped in 2016, shortly before having their first child.

"It's really methodically saving and investing as much as possible for as long as possible," Dogen said. "Too many people get in credit card debt, buying things they don't need, expensive vacations."

Are you part of the FIRE movement or living by some of its principles? Reach out to this reporter at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com.