Jobs by JobLookup

Ford Pulls Back Its Electric Vehicle Push


Move over Netflix, Chick-fil-A is allegedly coming for your brand. And the internet can't stop talking about it.

The chain is reportedly "moving aggressively" into the entertainment space, working to launch a slate of originals to run on its very own streaming platform, Deadline reported.

Chick-fil-A is currently in talks with major production companies, including studios, "to create family-friendly shows, particularly in the unscripted space," according to Deadline. They also are planning to license and acquire content shortly, Deadline reported.

Multiple outlets have cited Deadline's report, with the news eventually making its way on social media platforms like X, where users have taken the opportunity to poke fun at the possibility of Chick-fil-A following through with the rumored venture.

The conversation on the platform has only just started, with users sharing reactions and creating memes about the rumor.

USA TODAY has reached out to Chick-fil-A for comment.

Here's what we're seeing online.

Internet reacts, shares memes about a Chick-fil-A streaming service

A lot of people were surprised when rumors about the chain's latest venture hit social media, using the opportunity to react, crack jokes, and even make predictions about the hypothetical streaming platform.

Others mocked the headlines while others called the news weird or crazy. Some questioned the fast-food chain's financial choices. And one clever user said what would it even be called? "Flick-fil-a?"

 Facing competition from automakers with lower costs, Ford Motor Co. is shifting its electric vehicle strategy and now will focus on making two new electric pickup trucks and a new commercial van. The company says all will cost less, have a longer range, and be profitable before taxes within a year of reaching showrooms.

Ford, which is losing millions on its current EVs, gave few details about the new products. But it said production of its next-generation full-size electric pickup truck in Tennessee will be delayed 18 months, until 2027.

The company also says it won’t build fully electric three-row SUVs due to high battery costs, but instead will focus on making those vehicles as gas-electric hybrids.

The other new pickup will be mid-sized, based on new underpinnings developed by a small team in California. It also will go on sale in 2027. Production of the unspecified van will start at an assembly plant west of Cleveland in 2026.

The changes will force Ford to write down $400 million of its current assets for big electric SUVs, and it also expects to have additional expenses of up to $1.5 billion.

“We’re committed to creating long-term value by building a competitive and profitable business,” Chief Financial Officer John Lawler said in a statement.

The company also said it will cut capital spending on EVs. It now will spend 30% of its annual capital budget to develop them rather than the current 40%.

Ford, which has long been talking about making profitable EVs, lost $2.46 billion on them in the first half of the year, dragging down profits from its gas-powered and commercial units.

The company said in a prepared statement that the global EV market is changing rapidly, and it must evolve to compete with Chinese automakers that have lower production and engineering costs. At the same time, current buyers are more cost-conscious than early adopters, and automakers are introducing more EVs.

“These dynamics underscore the necessity of a globally competitive cost structure while being selective about customer and product segments to ensure profitable growth and capital efficiency,” the company said.

Ford also said it will build more commercial and consumer vehicles off of new, more affordable EV underpinnings. More details will be released at an event in the first half of next year.

Electric vehicle sales in the U.S., Ford’s most profitable market, are still growing but have slowed as more practical consumers worry about range and the ability to recharge while traveling. Market leader Tesla Inc. has cut prices, forcing others to follow.

U.S. electric vehicle sales overall rose about 7% during the first half of the year to 599,134, Motorintelligence.com reported. EVs accounted for 7.6% of the U.S. new vehicle market, about the same as it was for all of last year. Lease deals, which include federal tax credits, helped to boost sales.

Sales of gas-electric hybrids skyrocketed 35.3% from January through June to 715,768, eclipsing electric vehicle sales.

That was part of the reason Ford changed its strategy to go with hybrids on the big SUVs. Hybrids, the company said, have profitability that is similar to gas vehicles, which Ford will continue building.

Shares of Ford rose 2.1% in trading Wednesday.

 Chick-fil-A is opening its first elevated drive-thru restaurant in the chain, the company announced Wednesday.

The restaurant, located at 2155 Jodeco Road in McDonough, Georgia, just south of Metro Atlanta, will begin serving customers on Thursday, Aug. 22, and is a first-of-its-kind restaurant for the popular fast food chain.

According to the company, the drive-thru-only restaurant features four drive-thru lanes and an elevated kitchen with a "unique meal transport system" described by the company as a "sophisticated conveyer belt" that streamlines food delivery by "quickly moving the meal from the elevated kitchen above to a Team Member on the ground below."

The kitchen is double the size of a typical Chick-fil-A restaurant kitchen and the conveyor belt allows for a meal to be delivered to a Team Member every six seconds, according to Chick-fil-A. There is no dining room or dine-in services at this restaurant, Chick-fil-A noted, but the four-lane drive-thru can support "two to three times more vehicles" than a standard Chick-fil-A restaurant drive-thru.

Chick-fil-A is opening its first elevated drive-thru restaurant in the chain, the company announced Wednesday.
Chick-fil-A is opening its first elevated drive-thru restaurant in the chain, the company announced Wednesday.

Chick-fil-A says the restaurant will provide two options for customers to get their meal:

  • They can order ahead on the Chick-fil-A app and pick up using the dedicated Mobile Thru lines

  • They can place their order with a Team Member in the traditional drive-thru lanes

"Our Guests lead busy lives, and we’re focused on designing our restaurants to best serve their needs,” said Jonathan Reed, Executive Director of Design for Chick-fil-A, Inc., in the news release.

"With the new Elevated Drive-Thru design, featuring our first four-lane drive-thru, we're aiming to deliver quality food and genuine hospitality in a way that’s uniquely Chick-fil-A, and gives our Guests time back in their day,” Reed added.

Chick-fil-A is opening its first elevated drive-thru restaurant in the chain, the company announced Wednesday.
Chick-fil-A is opening its first elevated drive-thru restaurant in the chain, the company announced Wednesday.

The new drive-thru restaurant concept comes just a few months after Chick-fil-A opened its first-ever mobile pickup restaurant in New York City in March.

The mobile pickup restaurant, according to the company, aims to "cater to busy New Yorkers by focusing solely on delivery and mobile app ordering for a quick and easy pickup experience." It is located at 79th Street and 2nd Ave on the Upper East Side.

According to Chick-fil-A, the new restaurant concept begins when customers order ahead for delivery or carryout via the Chick-fil-A app or online. The restaurant will be alerted by geofencing when customers are on their way to expedite the process and ensure each meal is timed with the customer's arrival.

Inside the restaurant, there are active status board screens designated for delivery or mobile pickup, so customers and delivery drivers can see when their orders are ready in real-time.

Once the orders are ready, guests and delivery drivers receive their orders. While the restaurant will not offer a seating area or dine-in services, Chick-fil-A says the company's "signature hospitality is prominent in every step of this digital-focused experience."

In the first few days of Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign, experts told MarketWatch that her stances on taxes probably would closely resemble those of President Joe Biden.

One month into her campaign, it looks like that is indeed the case. Multiple published reports this week have said the Democratic presidential nominee supports the tax increases put forth in Biden’s most recent budget proposal, which came out in March.

The Biden budget called for new taxes on wealthy Americans, corporations, and business owners — including a controversial idea to tax unrealized capital gains as income for those with more than $100 million. An unrealized capital gain, also called a paper profit, refers to an increase in value for an asset that a person hasn’t sold yet, whether it’s a share in a business or a property.

Biden’s Treasury Department said it’s proposing “a minimum tax of 25 percent on total income, generally inclusive of unrealized capital gains, for all taxpayers with wealth (that is, the difference obtained by subtracting liabilities from assets) greater than $100 million.”

Treasury officials offered their rationale for the proposed change, saying the country’s current approach with unrealized capital gains “disproportionately benefits high-wealth taxpayers and provides many high-wealth taxpayers with a lower effective tax rate than many low- and middle-income taxpayers.” They also said the current approach “exacerbates income and wealth disparities” and “produces an incentive for taxpayers to inefficiently lock in portfolios of assets and hold them primarily to avoid capital gains tax on the appreciation, rather than reinvest the capital in more economically productive investments.”

However, the proposed change that targets unrealized capital gains has drawn considerable criticism.

It’s “among the worst ideas in the Biden administration’s proposed budget,” said Siri Terjesen, a professor and associate dean at Florida Atlantic University’s College of Business.

It would serve as a “kill switch” for entrepreneurship because it would end up “discouraging investment & draining capital,” she wrote. Terjesen’s comments came in social media posts last month and in an opinion column for the Daily Signal, a conservative website.

Republican politicians have blasted taxing unrealized capital gains, with Arizona GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake saying in a social-media post that it “would cripple innovation & economic growth.” Lake is a prominent ally of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank, is among the organizations that support taxing paper profits.“By not taxing unrealized capital gains, our tax code is more lenient on extremely wealthy people who are more likely to have this type of income than most of us who pay taxes on income from work as we earn it,” ITEP said in a blog post last year.

Biden’s most recent budget proposal features other ideas related to capital gains. Other plans would “increase the top marginal rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends to 44.6 percent,” the Treasury Department said.

The Harris campaign didn’t immediately respond Wednesday to MarketWatch’s request for comment.

But a Harris campaign official told MarketWatch earlier this month that investors should look to the recent budget, and not stances taken by Harris before her time as vice president, as a guide for her policy preferences.

Harris is due to give her much-anticipated acceptance speech at her party’s convention in Chicago on Thursday night. Biden withdrew from the White House race on July 21 and quickly endorsed his vice president, who then formally secured the Democratic nomination in early August.

Biden’s various budget proposals, released in March, were not expected to find much traction in the Republican-run House of Representatives.

Similarly, if Harris is elected president but Republicans control one or both chambers of Congress, many of her proposals would face a tough path to becoming law. And even with Democratic control of both chambers in 2021 and 2022, the Biden-Harris administration struggled to get sufficient support for some of its priorities.

In the first few days of Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign, experts told MarketWatch that her stances on taxes probably would closely resemble those of President Joe Biden.

One month into her campaign, it looks like that is indeed the case. Multiple published reports this week have said the Democratic presidential nominee supports the tax increases put forth in Biden’s most recent budget proposal, which came out in March.

The Biden budget called for new taxes on wealthy Americans, corporations and business owners — including a controversial idea to tax unrealized capital gains as income for those with more than $100 million. An unrealized capital gain, also called a paper profit, refers to an increase in value for an asset that a person hasn’t sold yet, whether it’s a share in a business or a property.

Biden’s Treasury Department said it’s proposing “a minimum tax of 25 percent on total income, generally inclusive of unrealized capital gains, for all taxpayers with wealth (that is, the difference obtained by subtracting liabilities from assets) greater than $100 million.”

Treasury officials offered their rationale for the proposed change, saying the country’s current approach with unrealized capital gains “disproportionately benefits high-wealth taxpayers and provides many high-wealth taxpayers with a lower effective tax rate than many low- and middle-income taxpayers.” They also said the current approach “exacerbates income and wealth disparities” and “produces an incentive for taxpayers to inefficiently lock in portfolios of assets and hold them primarily to avoid capital gains tax on the appreciation, rather than reinvest the capital in more economically productive investments.”

However, the proposed change that targets unrealized capital gains has drawn considerable criticism.

It’s “among the worst ideas in the Biden administration’s proposed budget,” said Siri Terjesen, a professor and associate dean at Florida Atlantic University’s College of Business.

It would serve as a “kill switch” for entrepreneurship because it would end up “discouraging investment & draining capital,” she wrote. Terjesen’s comments came in social media posts last month and in an opinion column for the Daily Signal, a conservative website.

Republican politicians have blasted taxing unrealized capital gains, with Arizona GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake saying in a social-media post that it “would cripple innovation & economic growth.” Lake is a prominent ally of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank, is among the organizations that support taxing paper profits.“By not taxing unrealized capital gains, our tax code is more lenient on extremely wealthy people who are more likely to have this type of income than most of us who pay taxes on income from work as we earn it,” ITEP said in a blog post last year.

Biden’s most recent budget proposal features other ideas related to capital gains. Other plans would “increase the top marginal rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends to 44.6 percent,” the Treasury Department said.

The Harris campaign didn’t immediately respond Wednesday to MarketWatch’s request for comment.

But a Harris campaign official told MarketWatch earlier this month that investors should look to the recent budget, and not stances taken by Harris before her time as vice president, as a guide for her policy preferences.

Harris is due to give her much-anticipated acceptance speech at her party’s convention in Chicago on Thursday night. Biden withdrew from the White House race on July 21 and quickly endorsed his vice president, who then formally secured the Democratic nomination in early August.

Biden’s various budget proposals, released in March, were not expected to find much traction in the Republican-run House of Representatives.

Similarly, if Harris is elected president but Republicans control one or both chambers of Congress, many of her proposals would face a tough path to becoming law. And even with Democratic control of both chambers in 2021 and 2022, the Biden-Harris administration struggled to get sufficient support for some of its priorities.

 A federal judge in California on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit accusing social media platform X of forcing out workers with disabilities after Elon Musk took over the company and barred employees from working remotely.
U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin in San Francisco said the plaintiff in the 2022 proposed class action, Dmitry Borodaenko, failed to show how Musk's mandate to return to the office specifically impacted employees with disabilities. The judge gave him four weeks to file an amended lawsuit including more detailed claims.
Borodaenko, a former engineering manager and cancer survivor, claims he was fired shortly after Musk acquired X, then called Twitter, for refusing to report to the office during the COVID-19 pandemic. The lawsuit claims X violated a federal law requiring employers to accommodate workers' disabilities.
Musk said in a memo to the company's staff in November 2022 that employees should be prepared to work "long hours at high intensity" or quit, and later tweeted that it was "morally wrong" to work from home.
Martinez-Olguin on Wednesday said the ban on remote work did not amount to disability discrimination.
"Borodaenko’s theory improperly relies on the assumption that all employees with disabilities necessarily required remote work as a reasonable accommodation," Martinez-Olguin wrote.
A lawyer for Borodaenko did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
X responded to multiple requests for comment with emails stating "busy now, please check back later."
The lawsuit is one of several that former employees filed in the months following Musk's $44 billion acquisition of the company and the ensuing layoffs of about 75% of its workforce.
Other cases accuse Twitter of not giving employees and contractors advance notice of layoffs, failing to pay billions of dollars in promised severance, and disproportionately targeting women and older workers for job cuts. X has denied wrongdoing.

Online fast-fashion giant Shein has filed another lawsuit against competitor Temu, accusing the China-founded shopping platform of stealing its designs, copying its product images, and engaging in other types of fraud.

The complaint filed in a Washington federal court this week alleges that Temu, which has grown in popularity in the U.S., has subsidized its low prices by encouraging sellers to offer counterfeited items, stolen designs, and sub-standard products.

The allegations come as Shein itself is the target of lawsuits from brands and designers that have accused the company of stealing their designs and selling copycat items on its e-commerce site.

Asked for comment about the new lawsuit, a Temu spokesperson said in a prepared statement that Shein’s “audacity is unbelievable.”

“Shein, buried under its own mountain of IP lawsuits, has the nerve to fabricate accusations against others for the very misconduct they’re repeatedly sued for,” the spokesperson said.

The new lawsuit against Temu represents an escalation of the ongoing feud between the two companies, which have sued each other in U.S. courts before.

Temu, a platform owned by Chinese e-commerce company PDD Holdings, alleged in a previous lawsuit that Shein compelled clothing manufacturers to submit to unfair supply chain arrangements to prevent them from working with Temu.

Shein, which was founded in China but is now based in Singapore, accused Temu in court of engaging in deceptive business practices and misleading consumers by creating impostor accounts on social media that used Shein’s name but directed people to Temu’s platform.

The companies dropped those lawsuits in October. Temu sued Shein again in December, accusing its rival of employing “mafia-style intimidation” of suppliers to hamper its growth in the U.S.

Attorneys for Shein wrote in the new complaint that at least one Temu employee stole “valuable trade secrets” from Shein that identify best-selling products and internal pricing information.

They also claimed again that Temu falsely presented itself as Shein through impostor X accounts that directed customers to Temu’s site. They further alleged Temu has engaged in similar practices through sponsored Google ads.

Former President Donald Trump has blasted his rival’s call for a federal ban on food price gouging as “communist” price controls. But experts say the proposal is a far cry from Soviet-style caps, and over three dozen states led by both parties already have versions of their own.

Laying out her economic agenda last week, Vice President Kamala Harris called to crack down on “excessive prices unrelated to the costs of doing business” by food and grocery sellers, including those in the wake of big mergers.

Trump, at a rally in Pennsylvania over the weekend, responded: “After causing catastrophic inflation, Comrade Kamala announced that she wants to institute socialist price controls.”

While some pundits and analysts have criticized Harris' idea as likely ineffective, comparing it to President Richard Nixon’s freezes on wages and prices in the early 1970s, others say there’s an important distinction.

“A price control is exactly what it sounds like — an agency setting an actual hard cap on a price,” Erin Witte, director of consumer protection at the Consumer Federation of America, a nonprofit group, said in an email to NBC News. Economists generally agree that such caps can cause shortages, as limited profit potential leads companies to produce less of a good even if the lower price juices demand.

Witte said price-gouging laws, by contrast, target corporate conduct rather than mandating concrete pricing levels: “Price-gouging laws require the enforcing agency to look at several factors and decide whether the conduct was unlawful.”

Harris’s plan, while so far light on details, is to work with Congress to impose new “rules of the road” on price-setting for industry heavyweights. She would also authorize the Federal Trade Commission and state prosecutors to investigate and punish “bad actors” who are found to break them.

A potential Harris administration would have no shortage of state anti-price-gouging statues on which to model a federal one, though most have different goals and parameters. Thirty-seven states and Washington, D.C., prevent companies from quickly raising prices on certain goods and services under specified circumstances, according to a 2022 tally by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The regulations, spanning liberal states like California and New York and conservative ones like Idaho and Alabama, typically kick in during emergency declarations, but some, like Michigan’s, are always in force. Most ban excessive price increases for “essentials” like fuel, medicine, water, or other products. Some cover a wider range of goods — or even all consumer purchases — to restrict sellers from taking undue advantage of shortages or unusual spikes in demand.

Many of these rules were enforced heavily during the pandemic, Witte said. Authorities in Texas, which has long had some of the strictest penalties on the books, warned businesses during the early days of Covid that they could face up to $250,000 in fines if the victims of any price gouging were seniors.

In March 2020, Trump himself issued an executive order to head off corporate price gouging and the hoarding of “necessary health and medical resources,” like personal protective equipment and sanitizing products. That move, under the Defense Production Act, ordered the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services to police any pandemic-related corporate malfeasance, including stockpiling “unnecessary quantities of items to sell them above the fair market value.”

A Trump campaign spokesperson didn’t respond to requests for comment.

“This is not a blue state, red state issue at all,” said Zephyr Teachout, a professor at the Fordham University School of Law and senior counsel for economic justice in the New York state Attorney General’s office, which proposed its own price-gouging curbs in March 2023. Teachout, an antitrust expert and a consumer advocate who has run unsuccessfully for several statewide offices as a Democrat, said federal law would help bridge some gaps in the patchwork of state measures.

“The limits of these state laws are that they are effective on small-time operators but not effective against big multinationals, which can play with their accounting to avoid the state laws and operate in multiple states,” she said.

Harris’s plan could help “stop the big-shot scofflaws,” Teachout said.

Taming consumer price increases has been a yearslong focus for the Biden-Harris administration that Harris is now extending. She has acknowledged on the stump that voters are still struggling even as inflation has mostly returned to normal levels since peaking above 9% more than two years ago.

Nonetheless, some economists see the fixation on corporate misbehavior as misplaced.

Research this year by the San Francisco Federal Reserve concluded that markups likely aren’t to blame for the latest surge in inflation. And the food industry has criticized Harris’ proposal, saying brands aren’t reporting excessive profits and warning that her crackdown would fuel inflation.

“We’re in a penny business,” Target CEO Brian Cornell said of retailers’ profit margins, speaking on CNBC Wednesday, adding that bargain-hunting shoppers have many options to compare prices.

If Harris wins the White House and persuades Congress to move forward with the idea, its impact would hinge on how it’s implemented, Witte said.

“Any price-gouging ban will only be as good as its enforcement,” she said.

The oldest members of Gen X are turning 60 next year. Many can’t afford to stop working any time soon.
Born between 1965 and 1980, Gen Xers launched their careers at the start of a massive shift in how Americans work. Companies moved from pensions that promise steady income after years of service, to plans such as 401(k)s that place employees’ retirement destiny in their own hands.
Some Gen Xers were hit hard in their prime working years during the 2008 financial crisis. Others are still paying off student debt. Their children are increasingly living at home well into adulthood, while their own aging parents often require care. Few believe they can rely on Social Security to make ends meet later in life.
By some measures, Gen Xers are worse off financially than their baby boomer predecessors. The median household net worth of Gen Xers between 45 and 54 years old was about $250,000 in 2022, about 7% lower than that of baby boomers at the same age in 2007, according to inflation-adjusted Federal Reserve data. That was the only age group that experienced a drop in median wealth over the 15 years.
David Bryan, 55, earns about $35,000 a year as a school bus driver and lives on Tybee Island, Ga. He doesn’t own property and has about $100,000 in retirement savings from his previous jobs as a railroad conductor and a researcher at a college foundation.
It’s a different life than that of his parents, who worked for decades for the sheriff’s department and the post office and received steady pension checks when they retired.
“As long as my body will let me, I should keep working,” said Bryan.
The roughly 65 million Americans in Gen X are sometimes referred to as the “forgotten generation,” sandwiched between the larger and louder baby boomer and millennial generations. They are also called the “latchkey generation,” often coming home from school as children to an empty house. Goldman Sachs Asset Management in a recent report called Gen X the “‘401(k) experiment’ generation.” 
David Bryan, 55, is a school bus driver in Georgia.
For decades, employers often supported loyal workers in old age through traditional pensions with set payouts for life. The advent of the 401(k) system pushed the responsibility onto the individual—and Gen X was caught squarely in the transition.
“Gen X is the first generation where they were mostly expected to figure out their retirement on their own,” said Jeremy Horpedahl, an economics professor at the University of Central Arkansas and director of the Arkansas Center for Research in Economics.
The early champions of the 401(k) never thought that it would become the dominant way most Americans save for retirement. It is named for a line in the tax code changed in 1978 that gave executives a tax-free way to defer compensation from bonuses or stock options. Human resources executives and economists jumped on the 401(k) as a way to encourage saving for rank-and-file employees.
By the mid-1980s, the number of active participants in defined-contribution retirement plans—such as 401(k)s—overtook those in defined-benefit plans—such as traditional pension plans—in the private sector. Now, private pensions are rare.
When Gen Xers entered the workforce, the 401(k) was a new concept. Features such as automatically enrolling employees in a workplace plan and automatically increasing contributions every year didn’t become commonplace until later. 
Other common private retirement savings tools were also introduced in the last half-century. The individual retirement account—a tax-deferred investment vehicle—was authorized in 1974, while the Roth IRA—funded with posttax money, but tax-free when withdrawn—was established in 1997.
John Kotrides makes social-media content at his home.
Gen Xers between 45 and 54 years old had a median account balance of roughly $60,000 in defined-contribution retirement plans at Vanguard Group in 2023, according to the firm. For most Americans, that is well below the target some financial experts recommend of having roughly six times one’s salary saved for retirement by age 50.
John Kotrides, a 54-year-old living near Charlotte, N.C., had contributed to 401(k)s ever since he started his career in banking about three decades ago. But whenever he moved to a different employer, he usually cashed out his 401(k) because there was a more urgent expense, such as a home repair or moving costs.
Keeping the money invested in the stock market didn’t seem worth it after witnessing crashes like the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Retirement seemed far away. 
“You no longer have a generation of people whose employer took you from your first job into your retirement,” he said. “When we were offered 401(k)s, I don’t think that was a great deal.”
Scott Zibel, right, and his wife Heidi.
Kotrides says he doesn’t have much in retirement assets, besides the home he owns, where he lives with his wife and two daughters, who are 12 and 20 years old. After quitting his job as a mortgage lender during the pandemic, he now works as a bartender part-time and earns most of his money-making social-media content, mostly nostalgic videos about the 1970s through 1990s. He likes having more time to spend with his family. 
“This is basically my retirement plan,” he said. “I truly assume that I’ll continue to work to provide for my family as long as I need to.”
Even those who have benefited from the 401(k) system say it hasn’t been easy.
Scott Zibel, a 56-year-old in Leominster, Mass., started putting money in a 401(k) when he began working at a grocery store at 15. His father encouraged him to contribute. The account grew as he continued working at the store through college and became a manager. In his early 30s, he became an English teacher and expects to receive a pension after retiring.
When the stock market crashed in 2020 at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, he and his wife pulled the money in his wife’s 401(k) out of the market and into a money-market fund. Now they have reinvested the money but put a greater portion of it into bonds than before.
“I’m grateful for the 401(k), but there are no guarantees as well,” he said, estimating his household retirement savings at a little over $1 million.
Zibel feels prepared for retirement but says he has to live frugally to save. He has driven the same car for 12 years and has avoided pricey expenses such as new carpeting for his 30-year-old home.
“My wife and I have done so much planning for the future with our money, it’s made living in the now difficult,” he said.
Darling ‘Diva’ Moore went back to school in recent years.
For some Gen Xers, the 2008 financial crisis was a hit that took years to recover from.
Around 2007, Darling “Diva” Moore was at the peak of her career as a managing partner at a title company in West Palm Beach, Fla. Then the housing market collapsed and her company went under. She couldn’t make rent on her apartment and had to crash with her significant other at the time, sometimes turning to sleep on the beach or in the car. 
“The Great Recession changed everything for us,” said Moore, who is 57. “After that, I don’t know how many Gen Xers trusted that system.”
After settling in Denver, more than two years went by before she landed a new job. She went back to school, getting an online bachelor’s degree in business management and a master’s degree in human relations and organization development. Now she is self-employed as a career counselor.
As she is approaching her 60s, Moore is trying to locate money she contributed to various 401(k)s from jobs earlier in her career. Whenever she switched jobs, she didn’t roll over her balance to an IRA or new 401(k), so those accounts are scattered across plan providers. “In the ‘90s, they didn’t make it easy to find out where that money is,” she said.
She is also contending with student debt from a for-profit associate program she completed in her 20s that has swelled to nearly $90,000 from around $27,000 due to interest.
More than a quarter of U.S. households led by Gen Xers between the ages of 45 and 54 had education loans in 2022, compared with about 15% of baby boomers at the same age in 2007, according to Fed data.
Soaring tuition costs, sky-high rents, and other inflationary pressures for Gen Z are also Gen X’s problems. Many Gen Xers have forked over tens of thousands of dollars for their children to attend college. Young people are also increasingly living with parents, or relying on them for financial support, well into adulthood.
Pamela Likos’s 21-year-old son lives at home with her in the suburbs of Madison, Wis., while another son and daughter are at college. 
Pamela Likos and her family.
“My kids are still definitely not grown and flown,” Likos said.
Some Gen Xers are simultaneously caring for aging parents, who are living longer than previous generations.  
Likos isn’t in that situation yet, but her stepmother, who has Alzheimer’s, and her father are in their 80s.
“I need my parents to hang on healthwise for another five to 10 years because we are not ready to help financially, really,” she said. 
Dede Nesbitt, left, and Avery Nesbitt, right, with children Ava and Aiden.
Likos, who is 54, was the first person in her family to go to college but didn’t work for about two decades after she got married and became a stay-at-home mom. When she got divorced about seven years ago, she found herself with no savings of her own and no resume to apply for jobs. She got a license to work as an esthetician for a few years and now is remarried. From her divorce, Likos received about half of her ex-husband’s 401(k), which comprises most of her retirement plan.
The youngest members of Gen X are in their mid-40s, offering more time to boost savings ahead of retirement. Tyler Bond, the research director at the National Institute on Retirement Security, wonders if there will be diverging retirement experiences between the older and younger ends of the cohort.
“The older Gen Xers simply may not have time,” he said.
Avery Nesbitt, a 44-year-old operations manager in the Atlanta area, isn’t waiting for retirement to go on nice vacations or buy a new car because he wants to enjoy them now—and he doesn’t expect to be able to save up a cushy nest egg for later in life. If the Covid pandemic taught him anything, it was that anything can happen.
He and his wife have contributed modestly to employer-sponsored retirement accounts but didn’t feel like they could afford to save more. They own a home, where they live with their two children. That makes up the bulk of their wealth. He said he has put more money into life insurance policies than in retirement accounts.
“I fully expect to work until I die,” Nesbitt said. “It is what it is.”
David Bryan sweeps the floor of a school bus at a fleet maintenance shop in August.

Most Federal Reserve officials agreed last month that they would likely cut their benchmark interest rate at their next meeting in September as long as inflation continued to cool.

The minutes of the Fed’s July 30-31 meeting, released Wednesday, said the “vast majority” of policymakers “observed that, if the data continued to come in about as expected, it would likely be appropriate to ease policy at the next meeting.”

In July, the policymakers kept their benchmark rate at 5.3%, a near-quarter-century high, where it’s stood for more than a year.

Wall Street traders had already considered it a certainty that the Fed will announce its first interest rate cut in four years when it meets in mid-September, according to futures prices. A lower Fed benchmark rate would lead eventually to lower rates for auto loans, mortgages, and other forms of consumer borrowing and could also boost stock prices.

The minutes of the Fed’s meetings sometimes reveal key details behind the policymakers’ thinking, especially about how their views on interest rates might be evolving. Further guidance on the Fed’s next steps is expected when Chair Jerome Powell gives a highly anticipated speech Friday morning at the annual symposium of central bankers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

ImageA rate cut in September, coming less than two months before the presidential election, could bring some unwelcome political heat on the Fed, which seeks to avoid becoming entangled in election-year politics. Former President Donald Trump has argued that the Fed shouldn’t cut rates so close to an election. But Powell has repeatedly underscored that the central bank would make its rate decisions based purely on economic data, without regard to the political calendar.

Several Democratic senators, led by Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, had urged Powell to cut rates at the Fed’s July meeting and have argued that delaying a cut when it’s warranted by the inflation data would itself be a political act.

Inflation, according to the Fed’s preferred measure, has tumbled from a peak of 7.1% in 2022 to just 2.5% now. In recent interviews with The Associated Press, two Fed officials noted that as inflation slows, inflation-adjusted interest rates — which businesses closely track — rise. That trend supports a rate cut in the near term, according to both Raphael Bostic, president of the Fed’s Atlanta branch, and Austan Goolsbee, president of the Chicago branch.

“We might need to shift our policy stance sooner than I would have thought before,” Bostic said.

Most analysts think Powell will signal in his speech Friday that the Fed has become confident that inflation is headed back to its 2% target and might even give some hint about how many rate cuts could happen this year. When he held a news conference after last month’s Fed meeting, Powell had suggested that a broad range of policy moves were possible, from “zero cuts to several cuts,” by year’s end.

Two days after the Fed met late last month, the government released a jobs report for July that showed that hiring was far weaker than expected and that the unemployment rate rose for a fourth straight month, to a still-low 4.3%. The sluggish hiring data triggered a sharp two-day drop in the stock market, with traders suddenly fearing that a recession might be nearing.

But last week, the government reported that sales at retail stores and restaurants rose at a healthy pace in July, evidence that consumers were still willing to spend and help power the economy. A separate report showed that the number of people seeking unemployment benefits — a proxy for layoffs — slipped during the previous week, a sign that most businesses are still holding on to their workers.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post