Tag: News

• Rebecca Cafiero felt that staying connected to her business meant being on her phone constantly. 
• After deleting Gmail, Slack, and Voxer from her phone, she noticed positive changes in her life. 
• Deleting the apps has helped her spend more time with her kids and improved her focus.

This as-told-to essay is based on a transcribed conversation with Rebecca Cafiero, 44, from Palo Alto, California, about deleting work-related communication apps from her phone. The following has been edited for length and clarity.

Living in Silicon Valley, I see people who are crazily connected to their phones, especially people in startup mode who feel they need to be all-in with their businesses.

I'm a serial entrepreneur. My current focus is a business growth accelerator called "The Pitch Club," which I launched in September 2020. I coach female entrepreneurs on getting more visibility. At the moment, I have three part-time staff.

My team uses Slack to communicate. I use Voxer and text to message clients. Back in 2020, I noticed I would pick up my phone dozens of times during the day to check Slack or emails, feeling like I needed to stay connected to my business. Sometimes, I resented my business because I couldn't get away from it.

What really got me to change things was a moment from two years ago. I was on my phone, and my son, who was six then, wanted me to play a game with him. I kept telling him to wait a minute, and eventually he started crying. I felt terrible. My child needed connection, but I was showing him that my device was more important. I knew it was time to do better.

I started by setting screen limits and eventually deleted work-related communication apps from my phone. It's made me feel better about my parenting and more focused on my work.

I decided to delete work-related communication apps from my phone after experimenting with it at a retreat

I initially set screen time limits on my iPhone so that I couldn't use my communication apps during certain hours of the day. The issue was I could still pick up my phone and press "ignore limit," so it didn't bring significant change.

In October 2023, I attended a fully immersive retreat for entrepreneurs. I usually don't schedule calls during retreats and consider myself out of the office. However, I was in the middle of a situation where I needed to fire one of my clients.

I decided to email her about parting ways, but I knew that if I had Gmail on my phone, I'd be constantly refreshing it under the table, waiting for a response. I wanted to be present at the retreat, so I deleted the app and didn't check my emails until I was back in my hotel room that night.

I noticed I was really present throughout the day because I couldn't check my email. I kept the app off my phone for the rest of the retreat and felt more connected than usual.

When I got home, I deleted Slack and Voxer from my phone. I told my clients I'd be checking emails less frequently and to text me if anything was urgent.

I spend more quality time with my kids

Within the first few days, I felt I had more mental peace and thinking space. I hadn't realized how much space these apps were taking up, but now I had time to listen to podcasts and audiobooks in the time I would have spent scrolling; I got through two or three books in the first 10 days. This productivity has plateaued a bit since then, but I'm still listening to more audiobooks and podcasts than I was before.

I started to feel more present as a mom. Instead of checking my phone while making breakfast, I get stuff done faster, which has created a more enjoyable morning routine for us.

I'm getting my kids out the door earlier and can walk my daughter to school instead of driving her because we aren't rushing as much. The quality time has really strengthened our relationship.

My son and I play a board game almost every morning, and my husband and daughter join sometimes. I didn't think I had time for that previously because my time was getting sucked up with checking my phone.

I reply to work messages on my desktop and feel much more focused

I haven't really experienced any downsides to my decision. My team and clients all think it's been a great move for me, and several have been inspired to follow suit.

I used to wake up and check my emails immediately, but I no longer let communication apps control my day.

I've adjusted by setting dedicated time slots in my calendar for when I'm going to reply to people using my desktop. Usually, it's 30 minutes during the day and 30 minutes at the end of the day for responding to emails and planning the next day's priorities. I don't often check my apps outside those times. Instead of checking my emails multiple times an hour like I used to, I probably check it four or five times a day.

I used to think I was great at multitasking, but I've realized all I was doing was switching my focus between tasks, so I was always in a state of shallow focus. Now that I can have a set block solely for replying to emails, I feel more intentional about what I'm doing.

I used to reply to messages on my phone or computer during calls with my team members, which was rude — I'm much more present now.

As business owners, we often tell ourselves we need to be constantly available to solve things, but it's not helping our happiness, and it's disconnecting us from the reasons we work in the first place.

I've since deleted about a third of the apps I used to have on my phone, as I felt I wasn't even using them. I still have some apps I use for work purposes, like ChatGPT, Google Drive, and Calendly.

This is now how I run my business and I have no desire to go back to being on my phone 24/7.

• Cities remain at the forefront of economic growth. 
• Six US cities have been ranked as having world-leading economic vitality by the Oxford Economics Global Cities Index.
• But while they perform well on economic factors, the cities fall down on governance and quality of life. 

News of the housing crises, worker exoduses, and budget slashing tells a tale of the slow decline of US cities.

However, according to the latest Global Cities Index from research group Oxford Economics, six US cities are still the leading "engines of the global economy."

New York, Los Angeles, San Jose, Seattle, San Francisco, and Dallas topped the index's economics category.

The index, produced annually by the economic advisory firm Oxford Economics, ranks the largest 1,000 cities by five categories: economics, human capital, quality of life, environment, and governance.

The prosperity of cities is often viewed through the lens of their busy financial centers, with New York, London, Singapore, and Hong Kong typically leading global rankings.

However, Oxford Economics' index purposefully assesses cities by a range of factors contributing to overall economic vitality and the potential for sustained growth and development.

GDP growth, employment growth, economic stability, GDP per person, and economic diversity were all measured in addition to overall GDP size.

"The cities topping the Economics category are the engines of the global economy. In this category, American cities dominate," the report states.

New York excelled in the economics category with a perfect score of 100, followed closely by Los Angeles. San Jose, the largest city in Silicon Valley, came in third place and was highlighted as having the highest GDP per person globally.

A less expected entrant in the top 10 was Dallas, which ranked sixth globally for economic vitality.

The Texan city has experienced the largest numerical population increase of any US metro area in recent years, and more than 175 companies have moved their headquarters there since 2010, setting it up as one of the economic powerhouses of the South.

London, Paris, and Tokyo are the only three non-American cities to crack the top 10. They trail the US cities due to lower levels of GDP per person, according to the report.

Chicago also made it onto the list for its economic vitality, coming in eighth after London.

However, while the six US cities may score high in economics, they barely appear in the top rankings across the other four categories: human capital, quality of life, governance, and environment. 

Cities in Europe, New Zealand, and Brazil bettered them on factors like income equality, life expectancy, air quality, civil liberties, and business environment.

Nonetheless, the report noted that "cities in North America are all clumped at the higher end of the rankings."

New York, San Jose, Seattle, Los Angeles, and San Francisco ranked in the top 10 of Oxford Economics' overall list of top global cities, with New York coming out on top.

• Saudi Arabia's Neom project is one of the world's most ambitious ventures.
• Designs for the megaproject include a city between twin mirrored skyscrapers and a desert ski resort.
• Some experts have expressed doubts that Neom will live up to its promises.

Saudi Arabia has grand plans for its Neom megaproject.

It's been touted as one of the most ambitious in the world and is expected to cost the Kingdom at least $500 billion — with some estimates reaching up to $1.5 trillion.

The city is part of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's Vision 2030 project, which plans to revolutionize the country's oil-dependent economy for a post-fossil fuel future. However, some critics have cast doubt on whether the project will be completed as planned.

Recent reports indicate Saudi Arabia may be facing difficult questions about the megaproject's financial, environmental, and humanitarian impacts.

From a year-round ski resort in the desert to a network of futuristic robots, here are the some of the most ambitious aspects of Neom.

1. A city inside twin mirrored skyscrapers

The Line is perhaps the best-known element of Neom thus far.

Designs for the city include twin 1,640-foot-high mirrored skyscrapers positioned 656 feet apart.

According to Neom's website, the city will have no roads, cars, or emissions and run only on renewable energy.

The first stage of the project was due to be finished by 2030, but recent reports suggest developers may be facing financial difficulties.

Planners have also raised environmental and design concerns, including the risk the mirrored skyscrapers pose to migrating birds.

2. Swim lanes for commuters

The megacity is also considering including swim lanes for commuters, according to a Neom "style catalog" seen by Bloomberg.

Neom planners are reportedly considering including canals with swimmable water, which would allow residents to swim to work or school.

Jan Paterson, Neom's managing director for sport, described the idea to Bloomberg in 2022, claiming a sixth grader living in Neom could carry a waterproof backpack and swim all the way to school.

3. A year-round ski resort

The desert city is also set to have a year-round ski and adventure resort called Trojena. Located in the mountains of the Tabuk region, it will host more than 100,00 feet of ski slopes, according to Neom's website.

Planners say they will use "a combination of real and artificial snow to create a truly magical place for alpine sports all year round."

4. A robot and AI network

Neom has grand plans to be the most high-tech city in the world.

CEO Nadhmi Al-Nasr claimed in 2017 that the project would host more robots than people.

High-tech plans for the megacity range from "digital twins" that will mirror residents' biometrics and health data, to humanoids at hotel check-in desks.

Neom will also feature an "immersive, mixed-reality metaverse," according to its website.

5. A suspended infinity pool

Neom is planning to host the world's longest infinity pool.

Stretching some 1,500 feet, the pool would be suspended 220 feet above the sea on the southern end of the Gulf of Aqaba in Treyam — one of Neom's recently-announced regions.

Planners have described it as a "premier resort" designed for "adventure and endeavor." The region will also offer other activities such as sailing, diving, and other water sports.

6. Mixed-reality theme park

Neom also plans to build theme parks that integrate virtual and physical experiences.

The planned attractions are aimed at offering a personalized, immersive gaming experience that blends with real-world interactions.

Neom's managing director of media, entertainment, culture, and fashion, Wayne Borg, told Wired in April 2021: "For gamers, it's taking their online experience and extending seamlessly into a mixed-reality theme park experience. These will be hyper-personalized, transformative experiences that don't exist today."

7. Rewilding projects

Neom officials plan to protect 95% of the sites' land and sea as nature reserves.

This means embarking on an extensive rewilding program, including restoring natural water flows to the area.

Paul Marshall, Neom's chief environment officer, told Wired the land in question has a long history of use — and overuse.

"Large parts of the landscape are quite heavily over-grazed by camels and goats, and the marine waters are quite over-fished. And so we don't want to preserve — we want to actively restore," he said.

Saudi Arabia has been under further scrutiny after a BBC News investigation found that forces had been authorized to kill residents to clear the way for the megacity.

• A Singapore Airlines passenger died Tuesday after a flight was hit by turbulence.
• Serious injuries due to turbulence are extremely rare, per FAA data.
• The incident also serves as a reminder for passengers to wear their seatbelts whenever possible.

The dangers of turbulence were made apparent on Tuesday when Singapore Airlines announced a passenger died on board a flight.

Geoff Kitchen, 73, had a heart condition, according to officials at Bangkok Airport, where the flight was diverted. 71 others were injured on the flight, six of whom are in critical condition.

It marks one of the worst turbulence incidents in recent years. It is also the first death on a Singapore Airlines flight since 2000. The carrier is regarded as one of the world's best, one of just 10 worldwide to be ranked five stars by Skytrax.

The National Transportation Safety Board announced it would send five people to support the Singaporean investigation. It has jurisdiction because an American plane, a Boeing 777, was involved.

"NTSB has long been concerned about turbulence-related accidents and incidents," it said in a post on X.

Serious injuries due to turbulence are very rare.

According to data from the Federal Aviation Administration, just 163 people were seriously injured by turbulence between 2009 and 2022 — an average of less than 12 people a year.

The majority, 129, were crew members. In 2022, only four passengers were seriously injured by turbulence.

For context, the FAA oversees more than 16 million flights in US airspace every year.

Not wearing a seatbelt is the biggest risk factor. That's why crew members are more susceptible because they could be in the middle of service when turbulence strikes. Alongside its data, the FAA pointed out that its regulations require passengers to fasten their seatbelts when the sign is illuminated.

However, sometimes, there isn't enough time between the sign turning on and the onset of turbulence.

Andrew, a passenger on the Singapore Airlines flight, told the BBC that the plane "suddenly dropped" just moments after the seatbelt sign came on. It's a reminder that passengers should wear a seatbelt whenever possible.

While severe injuries due to turbulence remain incredibly rare, the number of incidents involving turbulence has increased over the past several decades, largely due to alterations in wind dynamics linked to the climate crisis.

According to a 2023 study by researchers at the UK's University of Reading, there were around 17.7 hours of severe turbulence over an average point above the Atlantic Ocean in 1979. By 2020, this had jumped to 27.4 hours, an increase of 55%.

• Massachusetts' new tax on the wealthy generated $1.8 billion, exceeding expectations.
• Approved in 2022, the tax added 4% on incomes over $1 million.
• The increased revenue comes amid high-income earners leaving the state.

Massachusetts' new tax on the wealthy has become a bigger boon for the state than expected. It could help make up for the loss of high-income earners in recent years.

The state announced on Monday that the tax brought in $1.8 billion in the first three quarters of the fiscal year, blowing away predictions for the entire year, according to the Boston Globe. The additional income for the state is already $800 million more than what lawmakers had budgeted to spend from the new tax.

The new tax on the wealthy, dubbed the "millionaires tax," was approved by voters in 2022 and added an additional 4% tax on those earning more than $1 million.

According to the Boston Globe, after the tax was approved, the state initially estimated it would generate $1.4 to $1.7 billion in the first year. However, the state budgeted just $1 billion for the first year out of concerns that the impact of the new tax could be unreliable in the first year.

This new windfall for the state comes despite concerns that high-income earners would leave the state, exacerbating a problem seen in Massachusetts even before the new tax.

A study by the Pioneer Institute published in 2023 showed that Massachusetts saw a net loss of 25,200 tax filers in 2021. Those who left the state had an adjusted gross income of $4.3 billion greater than those who moved in. The change in the number of tax filers increased from the net loss of 20,400 tax filers in 2020 and an adjusted gross income of $2.4 billion.

Those who left tended to be middle- to high-income earners, per a study by Boston Indicators published in April. Most were on the high end, defined "as a family of four with an income of at least $140,000 — five times the poverty level in 2022.

However, a closer look at the data shows Massachusetts' retention of millionaires is doing just fine. According to the IRS, Massachusetts tax filers with an adjusted gross income of at least $1,000,000 grew by nearly 10,000 in 2021, the year before the new tax was approved.

The real test for Massachusetts comes now as we wait and see if the highest earners start to dwindle moving forward and how much that might impact the revenue generated by the "millionaires tax."

• San Antonio's basic-income pilot helped low-income families afford housing and other necessities.
• Participants received a total of $5,108 in no-strings payments over 25 months. 
• Texas is a key state for income pilots, with programs also launching in Austin and Harris County. 

When Monique Gonzalez received her money from the San Antonio guaranteed basic-income pilot, she bought school supplies, shoes, and Christmas gifts for her children.

The mother of six said the program allowed her to afford things her family had "put on the back burner" because they didn't have the money. Gonzalez told UpTogether — a national nonprofit that has sponsored a series of GBI programs — that basic income was what she needed to invest in her children's future.

San Antonio is one of several cities nationwide piloting guaranteed basic-income programs. For the most part, the programs offer no-strings-attached cash payments to low-income individuals over a set time period. Participants in cities such as Denver, Austin, Boston, Minneapolis, and Durham, North Carolina, have reported using the money to secure housing, afford transportation, buy groceries, pay off credit-card debt, and drop second jobs. Some programs, like the one in Denver, have been so successful that their funding was extended.

UpTogether oversaw San Antonio's pilot, investing $5,108 in each of the 1,000 individuals participating over a 25-month period. Program participants received an initial $1,908 payment in December 2020, followed by eight quarterly payments of $400 between April 2021 and January 2023. Participants had household incomes that fell below 150% of the federal poverty line — which is $46,800 for a family of four — and many were facing financial hardship because of the pandemic.

Funding for the program came from the city, foundations, and private funders.

UpTogether is running an additional income pilot that will end in December 2024. Twenty-five UpTogether participants, including Gonzalez, are receiving $500 a month for 18 months.

"We have more opportunities to be happy, content, and healthy," Gonzalez said."This helped to eliminate a lot of the stressors we have."

Shafeka Hashash, associate director of Guaranteed Income at the Economic Security Project, told Business Insider in May that pilot programs across the US show guaranteed income is an effective poverty solution.

GBI has been piloted over 100 times since 2019. In contrast to traditional social services like SNAP and rental assistance, basic income allows participants to choose to spend money where they need it most. And, Hashash said trusting families with no-strings cash assistance has far-reaching impacts.

"When you don't have this group of mothers whose babies are born into economic backslide, you inherently have a stronger community," she said. "When families receive a guaranteed income that improves their children's stability in the school system, you inherently have a stronger community."

San Antonio participants felt happier and more supported by basic income

Program leaders in San Antonio surveyed participants throughout their time in the program. Of the 182 participants who responded to a question asking them whether the cash payments had an overall positive impact on their lives, 161 answered affirmatively. Many said the money was critical for their daily survival and allowed them to cover expenses they otherwise couldn't afford.

Ingrid Sullivan, a participant with four children and three grandchildren, told UpTogether that basic income allowed her to secure housing and reliable transportation. She said the program allowed her to gain financial security with dignity and help pay for her family's needs.

"I felt supported for the first time ever," Sullivan said. "I didn't know what it felt like before this."

San Antonio participants also told UpTogether that the GBI payments significantly improved their mental health. Many survey respondents said they experienced chronic stress about money. With some of that financial worry alleviated, participants reported being able to spend more time with their families or in their communities and said they generally enjoyed life more.

For participants with families, many said their extra income went to enrolling their children in after-school and extracurricular activities and supporting their educations.

"I was able to do more at times because I was able to get my bills met," one survey respondent said. "In turn, I had extra money to be able to spend on my children to take them out or get them what they needed or wanted."

The San Antonio pilot also provided program leaders with feedback. In the survey, some participants said future income programs should provide payments monthly instead of quarterly and provide more opportunities for in-person connection with other participants and the community.

Texas is a national leader for income programs, but GBI continues to face opposition

Texas has been a major state for GBI pilots. Austin and Harris County — which includes Houston — have also launched pilot programs that distribute cash payments monthly.

In May 2022, the Austin Guaranteed Income Pilot began distributing $1,000 a month for one year to 135 low-income households using funding from the city and philanthropic donations. Austin was the first Texas city to launch a taxpayer-funded guaranteed-income program.

A report from the Urban Institute, a think tank based in Washington, DC, found that Austin GBI participants spent more than half of the money on housing, allowing some to purchase their first homes or more easily afford rent. After the yearlong program, participants also reported being more food secure: From a survey of 51 responses, the number of those unable to afford a balanced meal fell by 17 percent.

Stephanie Hendon was living in a shelter with her four kids while working long hours, but within a year of the program, she was able to rent a three-bedroom apartment, purchase a new car, buy clothes for her children, and get a new job. She said she's become more financially savvy and believes she's on the right path to financial stability while also being able to spend more time with her kids.

However, the program wasn't a major success for every participant. Jessica Nairns said the program helped her advance her career and buy essentials, though she was still unhoused a few months after the program. She said she's grateful for the temporary assistance she received, though she couldn't invest money for the long term or find more secure housing.

Harris County, where about 16% of residents live below the poverty line, will provide participants in its pilot program — which is set to start payments in April — with $500 a month for up to 18 months. Officials are pulling from over $20 million of federal COVID-19 relief to fund the Uplift Harris project, which has been met with some Republican opposition.

Uplift Harris participants were set to receive their first payments on April 24, but the program is under a temporary block after a lawsuit filed by state Attorney General Ken Paxton called the program "unconstitutional." The block will remain while the Texas Supreme Court decides if the program can proceed.

South Dakota lawmakers recently introduced a bill to preemptively ban all state and local income programs, which a bill sponsor called a "socialist idea" and "one-way ticket to government dependency." A similar ban has been proposed in Iowa.

In Arizona, GOP leaders are trying to pass another statewide ban. The Republican-led state House approved the GBI ban, and it will soon be taken up by the state Senate. Republicans say they are worried income programs will raise taxes and make people overly dependent on government assistance.

"Is money a birthright now? Do we just get born and get money from the government? Because I think the Founding Fathers would say that is very contrary to our capitalist system and encouraging people to work," John Gillette, a Republican state representative from Arizona, told Business Insider.

Despite legislative resistance, GBI programs continue to be launched in new cities — one focused on new moms in Flint, Michigan began enrolling participants on January 10. Chicago also announced in April that it will relaunch its basic income program.

Even so, program leaders in San Antonio said GBI cash payments are only a step toward combating poverty.

Basic income helped participants in Texas and other states to meet their basic needs, the UpTogether survey report said, but they often can't fix long-term financial challenges. For participants to thrive over time, people also need access to educational opportunities, stable employment, and healthcare.

And, as more cities experiment with GBI, Hashash said the programs provide insight into long-term policy. States like New Mexico and California are already expanding the scope of basic income to the state level. She said flexible funding programs like the American Rescue Plan Act have let states continue testing basic income, and the model has "spread like wildfire."

"It opened the door for states to be able to demonstrate guaranteed income's effectiveness, and for the federal government to take notice," Hashash said.

Have you benefited from a guaranteed basic-income program in San Antonio or elsewhere? Are you willing to share how you're spending your money? Reach out to these reporters at allisonkelly@insider.com and nsheidlower@insider.com.

• A growing share of Americans are struggling to get by despite holding down jobs.
• They're ALICE: asset-limited, income-constrained, and employed. They can't always afford necessities.
• ALICE household survival budgets are in the six-figures in some parts of the country.

If you feel you need to make more money than ever just to get by, you're not alone.

Salaries needed to afford essentials have been ticking up, pointing to an increasingly large hole in the country's safety net. That comes as more Americans have been joining the ranks of ALICE: They're asset-limited, income-constrained, but employed. In practical terms, nearly a third of Americans are working and making enough money not to be eligible for public assistance but are still struggling to get by.

New data from research organization United For ALICE, shared exclusively with Business Insider, looks at the ALICE household survival budget, which varies county by county and measures how much a family needs to make to afford necessities. The survival budget considers expenses such as food, housing, childcare, transportation, and healthcare, in addition to taxes and an emergency fund.

Here's what ALICE household survival budgets for a typical family of four look like across the country. These budgets are the highest in coastal states, and some budgets are well into six figures. Some states, such as California and Virginia, are entirely dark blue, meaning budgets of over $85,000 in each county, while others are almost entirely lighter blue, where budgets are in the $60,000s.

In most cases, ALICE household survival budgets are well above the federal poverty level — showcasing a fundamental disconnect between how many government and private aid programs assess who needs help and who's still struggling. It's leaving many workers in a precarious spot.

"Folks are budgeting and planning and trying to work more hours — and yet, inflation is happening, and their hours are increasing one week, and then the kid gets sick, and they can't go, and they don't get paid that week," Stephanie Hoopes, national director at United For ALICE, told BI.

In some areas, ALICE household survival budgets top six figures; even in Stanton, Kansas — the county with the lowest household survival budget for a family of four that includes a preschooler and an infant — families must bring in nearly $61,000 to get by. That's nearly twice as much as the federal poverty guideline of $31,200 for a family of four. In El Paso, Texas — a larger county with a lower cost of living — that budget is $68,784.

According to the new report, between 2021 and 2022, the number of ALICE households rose by nearly 1.6 million, while the number of households in poverty increased by 208,000. The total number of ALICE households jumped 12% between 2010 and 2022, particularly impacting single parents and people of color. During these 12 years, the percent change in single-male-headed ALICE households grew 35%. As many as 54 million American families, or 42%, are below the ALICE threshold.

Childcare costs have also skyrocketed recently. A BI analysis found the cost to care for one child this year is at least $25,714. According to United Way, over a third of parents said they cut work hours or took unpaid leave when childcare facilities were unaffordable or closed.

Since the start of the pandemic, wages have increased across the board for many lower-wage jobs — in some cases faster than inflation. From 2019 to 2022, for instance, wages for cashiers grew 19%, for fast food and counter workers 23%, and for waiters 27%. However, it's becoming increasingly difficult to find higher-paying work.

Those tight survival budget margins are also contributing to another looming economic crisis. Many workers in America are wholly unprepared for retirement, instead working just to get by; that's particularly true for workers who are ALICE. In 2022, over half of US households 65 or older were below the ALICE threshold, as millions of Americans are unable to survive solely off of Social Security benefits or their retirement funds.

"Part of the survival budget is there's no savings in there," Hoopes said. "So even if those folks in their working years are just getting by and just over that ALICE threshold, they're not saving — and then they're going to roll into retirement with no savings; Social Security is not going to be enough."

Are you an ALICE or are struggling to make ends meet? Reach out to these reporters at jkaplan@businessinsider.com and nsheidlower@businessinsider.com.

About a month before I moved to Denver in 2018, I texted another recent transplant to ask for neighborhood suggestions. Her reply might as well have been in another language: Among the options she rattled off were RiNo, SoBo, LoDo, and the head-scratching LoHi. I couldn't find those names anywhere on the city's official maps, but the shorthand flowed freely among the youngish crowd I met there. The older real-estate types I encountered while reporting on the city's housing market were fond of the nicknames, too. Soon I was parroting them all.

If you've relocated to an up-and-coming American city in the past decade, you've likely had to decipher a similar code. Developers and business associations have long slapped pithy names on fast-growing parts of town, and tenured residents have long rolled their eyes at them. But with the growing adoption of these new abbreviations, I think I'm ready to say enough is enough. Charlotte, North Carolina, has MoRA and LoSo; Nashville's got SoBro; Boston has SoWa. In Louisville, Kentucky (which also has a SoBro), you may find yourself sipping a craft beer in NuLu. My hometown of Austin already has SoCo, and the powers that be are trying to make "SoLa" happen. The path of progress is paved with nonsense nomenclature — or, as my editor calls them, "'Sound of Music'-ass names."

These unholy mashups would be fine, I guess, if they were dumb yet harmless inventions. But they're not just silly nicknames or low-lift marketing ploys. They're the calling cards of developers and new arrivals as they try to wipe the slate clean on existing neighborhoods and remake them in their image. I'm all for building more housing — it's the only way out of our affordability crisis, after all. If a goofy new name is all that's needed to convince well-off transplants to flock to glass towers in a once deserted part of town, then great! But often it's more about renaming a place where people already live in hopes that whitewashing its history will make it easier to attract wealthy people and drive up the property values — inevitably sending longtime residents packing.

I worry that the pandemic reshuffling, which scattered white-collar workers across the country in search of wide open spaces, will only encourage more of this kind of behavior. As cities bend over backward to attract a certain type of middle- and high-income worker, they often end up looking the same. Now they're sounding the same, too. Let's at least call these two-syllable monikers what they are: cookie-cutter attempts to herd HENRYs and DINKs toward new coffee shops and studio apartments in areas they would have avoided a decade ago.

It seems like every undervalued neighborhood in America is at risk of this kind of rebrand. But the SoBros and SoWas of the world are just the tip of the iceberg — the most egregious outcomes of contentious battles over neighborhoods' names and boundaries. And unless we put our collective foot down, we're bound to get a lot more of them.

Gill Holland moved from New York City to Louisville in 2005. Holland, a serial entrepreneur and real-estate developer, is a country boy at heart — he was born and raised in a small town in North Carolina — but he yearned for the kind of vibrant, walkable streets he'd come to love as a resident of Manhattan's Greenwich Village neighborhood. He began renting office space at the edge of Louisville's downtown, in a run-down area that was home to, in his words, "lots of great, old buildings." Holland saw potential. But there was another issue. All the surrounding areas had "great brands": strong names with history behind them, like Butchertown, Smoketown, and Phoenix Hill. Holland's chosen zone, meanwhile, had no such calling card.

"I kept thinking, like, this part of town needs a brand," Holland told me.

The local business association tried out "East Market District," which stuck for a little bit. But Holland was quietly floating another name, one that represented the "New-York-to-Louisville bridge" he was already building in his mind. When he opened an art gallery in the area, he lopped off the first syllable of each city and stitched them together. The result was NuLu.

While some cities have processes for naming neighborhoods and defining their limits, most often things are more informal. Neighborhood names, as the law professors Nestor Davidson and David Fagundes noted in a 2019 paper, have long been a neat little trick of advertising devised by "real estate agents and developers, or community groups like neighborhood associations." An apartment owner might come up with a catchy name in a bid to draw new tenants, new arrivals might will a neighborhood into existence merely by saying it a lot, or some communities might band together to intentionally reclaim an area.

These enterprising groups understand that neighborhood "brands" play an essential role in attracting new arrivals and helping them establish their place in a city (while also luring them to spend their dollars at the shops, art galleries, and restaurants in burgeoning areas). Neighborhood names are proxies for the kind of person you are or hope to become. We choose a neighborhood that matches our sense of self, the kind of place where we can find our people. Or we latch on to a neighborhood to craft a new identity, taking on the qualities of the area in which we live.

Neighborhood names are also shorthand for your rent or mortgage payments. A 2018 study from the online home-improvement platform Porch found that areas with "Hills," "Island," "Village," and "Oaks" tended to have the highest household incomes across the US. Areas with the Spanish words "Los" or "Las" in their names, on the other hand, were among the neighborhoods with the lowest incomes. In another 2018 study, researchers from McGill University and the University of Maryland noted that real-estate companies relied on neighborhood boundaries to compare prices across properties and that being associated with a desirable neighborhood could improve access to things like healthcare or lower mortgage rates.

Neighborhood nicknames have a rich tradition in New York: There's SoHo, an abbreviation for South of Houston Street (which also appears to be the inspiration for the wave of two-syllable monikers that has followed), Dumbo (Down Under the Manhattan Bridge Overpass), FiDi (the Financial District), and Tribeca (the Triangle Below Canal Street). Landlords in the city often try to stretch the boundaries of desirable neighborhoods when advertising their properties — I've rolled my eyes at listings that claimed to be in high-demand neighborhoods like the Lower East Side or Chelsea when no reasonable local would agree. This practice isn't unique to New York. The researchers from McGill and Maryland found that affluent or otherwise desirable neighborhoods around the country appeared to be much larger in the eyes of landlords advertising their properties on Craigslist than they were according to less biased third parties like Google Maps or city planning departments. Meanwhile, landlords who advertised rental properties in areas with lower-income, nonwhite communities were less likely to include the neighborhood's name in their listings.

"A single neighborhood name invokes a whole lot of different connotations or feelings for people," Grant McKenzie, a geography professor at McGill who was a member of the research team, told me. Landlords are all too aware of this effect — mention a neighborhood that has a negative connotation, and "it immediately jumps out in the listing," McKenzie said. The solution? Spin up new shorthand to drum up interest in an old neighborhood.

For better or worse, and I think often worse, it is a way of signaling exclusion

But here's where things get cringey. In 2017, real-estate brokers in the historically Black New York neighborhood of Harlem sparked backlash when they tried to rebrand its south end as SoHa. Years earlier, Hakeem Jeffries, then a Democratic lawmaker in the New York State Assembly, had proposed legislation to ban neighborhood renaming, claiming the practice artificially inflated housing prices.

"Neighborhoods have a history, culture, and character that should not be tossed overboard whenever a Realtor decides it would be easier to market under another name," Jeffries told The New York Times in 2011.

In some cases, a new neighborhood name might signal it's already too late. Davidson told me that once a neighborhood has a lot of cachet, shortening its name, á la SoHo, can be a way of formally announcing its arrival.

"For better or worse, and I think often worse, it is a way of signaling exclusion and signaling that a certain kind of people are living in that neighborhood," Davidson said. "That can have consequences for gentrification or displacement."

The SoHa controversy isn't unique to the Big Apple — in Denver, many developers proudly tout their buildings' locations in the River North Arts District, or RiNo, without mentioning that the district is a relatively new creation overlaid on part of the historically Black neighborhood of Five Points. The South Congress strip in Austin used to be home to a brothel and porn theater; today, a visit to SoCo might include a splurge at the Hermès store or a stroll past the members-only Soho House. For developers, brokers, or whoever else is behind these rebrands, the abbreviations are a kind of compromise, McKenzie said. They're not total erasures, but they're clearly designed with a fresh start in mind.

"It's an attempt to adjust things without blatantly coming in and putting a brand-new name that has nothing to do with the region," McKenzie said. "By shortening it to this sexy acronym, you're able to sort of mask a bit of the historical name that maybe has some negative connotation."

Whatever the rationale behind some of these rebrands, it's hard to argue with the results. In the case of SoCo, a thriving retail district is certainly preferable to its seedy past. Louisville's NuLu neighborhood, which eventually caught on among other residents, has received more than half a billion dollars in investment since Holland coined the term around 2006, he told me. Bob Dylan's whiskey company is opening a restaurant, bar, and live-music venue there. The times are indeed a-changin'.

I'm not a NIMBY. We need to build a lot more homes across all price points, and we need developers to move mountains of red tape in order to make it all happen. At their best, new neighborhood names bring people together over a shared sense of pride in their little corner of the world. But at their worst, they're cynical chess moves designed to grease the wheels of gentrification.

Along the way, these neighborhood names have veered into parody territory. In "How I Met Your Mother," Marshall and Lily buy an apartment in the fictional neighborhood of Dowisetrepla before realizing its name stands for Downwind of the Sewage Treatment Plant. When a "South Park" character urges his fellow citizens to revamp their town, the result is a new shopping district called SoDoSoPa. Like any good piece of satire, these names aren't too far off from their real-life inspiration. When a Redditor posts a map of Charlotte with a reference to WeLoSo (West of Lower South End), it can be hard to tell if they're kidding.

But while jokes at the expense of Scrabble-tile neighborhood names have been around for years, I think we're destined to see a groundswell of new targets as pandemic-era transplants settle into their chosen Zoomtowns. I'm not saying that neighborhood names should be set in stone — in fact, I think it's natural for them to evolve alongside their populations. But I think our cities, and their residents, deserve better than the lazy rebrands we've seen of late.

Recently, one X user wondered aloud whether a section of Brooklyn's East Williamsburg neighborhood, outlined on a map in a yellow box, was worthy of a new name given its appeal to a specific kind of tech professional. The post drew some earnest comments ("East Willy!") and plenty of backlash ("i'm begging u pls don't make this a thing"). But one reaction, from the downtown gadfly known as Nolita Dirtbag — his own moniker a reference to the neighborhood that gets its name from a mashup of North of Little Italy — asked simply for a little introspection.

"Listen to yourself, man."

James Rodriguez is a senior reporter on Business Insider's Discourse team.

• Emory University suspended students who created a celebrated AI-driven study tool.
• The students won $10,000 from a school pitch competition for the product last year.
• One of the students just sued the school, saying there's no evidence anyone used his product to cheat.

Emory University students created an artificial intelligence-driven study tool last year.

Professors and students praised the program, called Eightball. The student newspaper wrote about it. The founders won a pitch competition sponsored by the school and took home $10,000. The business school highlighted them on social media.

Then at least two of the students were suspended for Eightball, which they'd already scrapped. Emory said the duo violated the school's honor code, because students could use Eightball in ways that would breach it.

Junior history major Benjamin Craver, who led marketing for the platform, sued the university on Friday. His complaint said there is no evidence any students used Eightball improperly, including to cheat.

The case highlights the tensions between universities eager to foster young entrepreneurs and administrative rules that haven't caught up to new tech.

Emory did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider, sent outside normal working hours.

Expulsion, suspension

Craver, who said he had never been in trouble at Emory, partnered with a student developer last year to promote Eightball. The premise was simple: students could upload materials to a private server not accessible to other users, then use AI to generate study materials.

Craver and his cofounders won a business school pitch competition last year, and the business school's website spotlighted them — until this week, when the page was removed, per a comparison of the archived page.

Eightball's founders marketed the program as a study tool — "not to do their homework or be a cheat sheet," said one founder on the now-defunct business school page.

But in October, Emory told the developer that he may have violated the honor code, per Craver's lawsuit. In November, Emory told Craver that it was weighing five honor code violations for him. Craver said he asked the developer to immediately shut Eightball down, which the developer did.

Craver was put on disciplinary probation for a semester by the Office of Student Conduct and he submitted a formal written apology. At a January honor council hearing, a Spanish professor and four undergraduates weighed a bigger punishment for Craver.

Writing that the founders built Eightball with the intent to cheat, they recommended a one-year suspension for Craver and expulsion for the developer, per the lawsuit.

They heard no evidence Eightball was used for cheating, Craver said in the lawsuit.

Craver was ultimately suspended for a semester and summer, while the developer's yearlong suspension was later reduced to a semester, he said in the lawsuit.

While Craver was preparing an appeal, Emory's venture program reached out, asking if he'd like to participate in an accelerator for Eightball.

Craver lost his appeal last week. His lawsuit said the disciplinary record could stymie his plans to apply to law school: "Emory willfully and self-servingly deviated from proper Honor Code procedures to make a public example out of Ben."

Craver is seeking a jury trial and damages of at least $75,000, per the complaint.

• Oliur Rahman leveraged smartphone customization to start making money online after high school.
• He sold designs on Tumblr before a stint at a startup and expanding into an online store and YouTube.
• His passive income streams carried him through a cancer diagnosis and now he earns $600,000 a year.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Oliur Rahman, a 31-year-old YouTuber and entrepreneur in the UK. It has been edited for length and clarity.

I come from a South Asian background but was born and raised in the UK. We weren't wealthy — I grew up on benefits in social housing. None of my family members were formally educated or owned property.

I never expected to become the first person in my family to buy a house or to become a millionaire, but I did.

Buying my first smartphone opened a new door for me

We didn't have internet at home until I was around 15 because my parents didn't see its value. When I finally got it, it fascinated me.

I bought my first smartphone with money saved from working as a waiter. I customized it and shared my customizations on XDA Developers, a mobile software development community. This led to me making and selling icons and wallpapers, which was my first experience making money online.

I used the money from selling these digital products to buy my first computer, a used iMac. Until then, I had to share a family computer. Buying that iMac was necessary for me to start making and learning things independently.

I decided not to go to university and instead make money online

Despite my parents' typical concerns about formal education, I convinced them to give me a year to try making money online before considering university. I made enough money to support myself that year — I paid them rent and helped with household bills.

I shared my design work on Dribbble, where clients started to notice me. This exposure led to making website templates, particularly for Tumblr. I learned to make and design websites by watching tutorials on YouTube and replicating other work I'd seen online. I have no formal training.

My themes became popular, and in 2014, I was approved to sell them on Tumblr's official online store, which significantly increased my income.

My income had been around $20,000 to $30,000 a year, sometimes even less. Once I started selling on Tumblr, my income grew to six figures.

I was still living with my parents when this financial success happened. They were still skeptical. I stayed with them for a few more years, saving as much as possible until I was ready to move out and find my first house.

I'm the first person in my family to purchase my own home

I was around 23 when I started to see significant money from Tumblr. Knowing that success wouldn't last forever, I focused on learning new web design and development skills. This strategic move and saving most of my earnings allowed me to buy my first house.

Now living on my own, I became a founding designer at a company called Plasso, where I worked for a year. I had always wanted to be part of a startup. Plasso paid well and I was given shares in the company for being an early employee.

This venture paid off when Plasso was bought by GoDaddy, resulting in a significant payout for me.

I expanded my income streams after leaving the startup

I started an online store called ULX Store in 2018 to sell my designs and other products.

I started a YouTube channel in 2015 to provide insights I wish were available to me at a younger age, demonstrating that success is attainable without a privileged background or formal education.

I began taking it seriously around 2020 when I realized its potential for scalable income through sponsorships and Adsense revenue. My channel grew to around 100,000 subscribers, which attracted sponsorships and enabled me to charge significantly for sponsored content.

Then, also in 2020, I was diagnosed with cancer. It was a very challenging period personally. At the same time, ULX Store became very successful. Our desk accessories were in high demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

That year, the store generated around $1M in revenue, contributing to my most profitable year yet.

It's essential to diversify income streams and learn new skills

After my diagnosis, I worked to ensure my business could operate without my direct involvement as I took time to care for myself. I was still earning a significant amount in passive income from YouTube Adsense, digital product sales, and sponsorships arranged earlier in the year, which was astonishing to me.

Once I recovered, I gradually returned to work in early 2021, focusing more on YouTube as it had grown significantly. In 2023, I earned around $600,000 a year from all my income streams.

My approach to online business emphasizes starting with one main income stream and then using the earnings from that to diversify into other areas. I've always saved a large portion of my income, which has been crucial for building my wealth and investing in new ventures.

I have a few long-term goals

Since turning 30 and considering future family planning, I'm focused on securing a financial foundation for myself and my potential children. I don't see myself retiring because I enjoy what I do too much and find it fulfilling. I envision creating a substantial investment portfolio that allows me to live comfortably off its returns.

I recently moved to Dubai but kept my house in the UK, so I can come back when I please. Even though my living expenses went up, my income also increased because I'm not paying as much in taxes. I'm excited for this new chapter.