Connect with us

Business

My wife sold her engagement ring to pay our tax bill. It led to my PhD and my career tackling the student-debt crisis

Published

on



An engagement ring changed my life, but not only the way you might think. Let me explain.

The only reason I went to college, honestly, was football. I was lucky to secure an athletic scholarship that covered half my tuition. My family didn’t talk about money a lot growing up – unless it was in the context of an argument. So, when I got to college, I decided to major in finance, trying to make up for lost time. I was taught everything people should do to develop healthy financial habits, but I still had trouble implementing those practices in my own life. I ended up taking out significantly more loans than I needed.  Even with a scholarship, I still graduated in 2008 owing around $60,000 in student loans. Back then, especially in the Midwest, that was a significant sum.  

I started working in insurance sales after graduation. I got a credit card and thought, “Great, I can buy all the cool stuff I’ve never had.” I thought it was like free money. I knew it wasn’t, but it was just there. And coming from a more humble background than my peers, I overcompensated by spending on things I shouldn’t have, like expensive clothes and trading in my car for a BMW. Ironically, my old colleagues would probably make fun of me now because I don’t care what I wear anymore, and I drive a Bronco, but I used to.

  

The Great Recession marked a pivotal moment in my financial life. It wasn’t too bad early on, but once we were in the thick of it, my pay dropped substantially. My spending, however, did not. This continued for a while until I had what I call my “come to Jesus moment.” As a 1099 employee, I was responsible for making payments to the IRS then the remaining balance on Tax Day. But, I received a large commission reversal right before taxes were due, and I hadn’t saved enough to make up the difference. It was truly the worst timing. In hindsight, I realize it wasn’t bad luck. I brought it on myself.

Given my credit card debt and lack of emergency savings, my decision came down to this: do we owe the IRS a huge amount with penalties and interest, or do we find money wherever we can? At that time, the only thing I could sell was my wife’s engagement ring, which for those who have ever bought a wedding ring know can cost you a few paychecks. She had a beautiful ring, and she actually sold it without telling me because she knew I’d be too egotistical to let it happen. She just did it. That’s how we got out of the tax situation.

After that, I was devastated. I realized I brought it on myself. I knew what people should do, but I still didn’t do it. That’s when I started observing and studying peoples’ relationships with money and how their underlying habits affect their finances. I became deeply interested in the behavioral side of personal finance. My own experience, and my wife’s sacrifice, gave me empathy for those with financial struggles. That drove me to want to help people. So, I got my *CFP® certification, a Master’s, and eventually a PhD. I focused on how people make decisions and how we all can be guided toward healthier habits.  

There’s often a lot of judgment when it comes to money. And honestly, it’s not just people judging each other, professionals judge people, too. I’m sure my doctor is judging me, thinking, “Dude, you need to lay off those burritos. It’s only a matter of time before this catches up to you.” And he’s right!

But, when people fear being judged, they don’t ask important questions. According to new research from SoFi, 44% of students and parents feel uninformed about student loans but are probably too afraid to ask questions. I never wanted to be the kind of professional who judged people. Instead, I wanted to coach people and empower them to find solutions.

Today, I work with a lot of young people facing financial challenges. After the five-year pandemic grace period, collections on student loans have resumed, putting millions at risk of defaulting. In the first quarter of 2025, nearly 6 million people who had borrowed were at least 90 days behind or already in default. More than 2 million saw a 100-point drop in their credit score in that same time period — with over 1 million experiencing dips of over 150 points. What’s more, our data tells us that 93% of borrowers say they would have approached college financing differently if given another chance.    

The key to a vision for better student lending is simple: people should borrow only what they can reasonably afford to repay. And our system should be set up to reinforce that.  Student debt can be a positive tool. But it requires being honest with yourself about your finances and the amount of borrowing you take on. Liberal and performing arts majors, for example, should think twice about borrowing hundreds of thousands in student loans if their median salary within five years of graduation is approximately $38,000. That advice seems obvious. But as my own story shows, good advice is all too easy to ignore.  

But it goes beyond borrowers. The government can play a central role by setting clear guidelines about aligning the amount of debt students take on with their means for repayment and by setting reasonable limits on the amount of government loans available. Private lenders play a role, too, by offering alternatives that meet the unique needs of different people. At SoFi, we offer student loan options that allow recent graduates to make interest-only payments for their first nine months in the “real world,” as they build up their emergency savings and get on their feet.

Lastly, educational institutions can work to match tuition and fees with the economics of real people. Right now, they have no incentive to control the cost of education if there is an unlimited pool of borrowed cash available. Limiting the levels of debt could encourage colleges to match the cost of tuition to the value of the degrees they offer. 

Collectively, these steps can help create a smarter way for young people to avoid the pitfalls of overextending themselves – and not make the same mistakes I did when I was younger. It’s how we can help the next generation get their money right.  

 ###

In May 2025, SoFi commissioned a study of 3,500 prospective and current students, graduates, and parents of students to gauge their perspectives on the value of higher education and the methods of paying for it. All current students and graduates included in the sample must have financed at least some of their education through student loans or other educational financing. The sample was nationally reflective within the aforementioned parameters, including a balanced sample of gender, race & ethnicity, geography, and income.

SoFi Technologies (NASDAQ: SOFI) is a one-stop shop for digital financial services on a mission to help people achieve financial independence to realize their ambitions. Over 11.7 million members trust SoFi to borrow, save, spend, invest, and protect their money – all in one app – and get access to financial planners, exclusive experiences, and a thriving community. Fintechs, financial institutions, and brands use SoFi’s technology platform Galileo to build and manage innovative financial solutions across 160 million global accounts. For more information, visit www.sofi.com or download our iOS and Android apps.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Down Arrow Button Icon

Published

on



China has fulfilled its initial commitment to buy 12 million metric tons of soybeans from the U.S., but it’s not clear if the trade agreement announced in October can withstand President Donald Trump’s ever-shifting trade policy as American farmers are still dealing with high production costs.

Earlier this month, Trump said he would impose 25% tariffs on any country that buys from Iran, which would include China. Then last weekend he threatened to impose 10% tariffs on eight of America’s closest allies in Europe if they continue to oppose his efforts to acquire Greenland.

So the administration’s trade policy continues to change quickly, and Iowa State University agricultural economist Chad Hart said that could undermine the trade agreement with China and jeopardize the commitment by the world’s largest soybean buyer to purchase 25 million metric tons of American soybeans in each of the next three years.

“Those new tariffs — what does that mean for this agreement? Does it throw it out? Is it still binding? That’s sort of the game here now,” Hart said.

Beijing paused any purchase of U.S. soybeans last summer during its trade war with Washington but agreed to resume buying from American soybean farmers after Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping met in South Korea and agreed to a truce.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the purchasing milestone China has met in an interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business on Tuesday from the sidelines of a major economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, where Bessent met with his Chinese counterpart, Vice President He Lifeng. Bessent said China remains committed.

“He told me that just this week they completed their soybean purchases, and we’re looking forward to next year’s 25 million tons,” Bessent said. “They did everything they said they were going to do.”

Last fall, preliminary data from the Department of Agriculture cast doubts on whether China would live up to the agreement because it was slow to begin purchasing American soybeans and there is a lag before the purchases show up in the official numbers.

On Tuesday, the USDA data showed that China had bought more than 8 million tons of U.S. soybeans by Jan. 8, and its daily reports indicated that China placed several more orders since then, ranging from 132,000 tons to more than 300,000 tons.

China has shifted much of its soybean purchases over to Brazil and Argentina in recent years to diversify its sources and find the cheapest deals. Last year, Brazilian beans accounted for more than 70% of China’s imports, while the U.S. share was down to 21%, World Bank data shows.

Trump is planning to send roughly $12 billion in aid to U.S. farmers to help them withstand the trade war, but farmers say the aid won’t solve all their problems as they continue to deal with the soaring costs of fertilizer, seeds and labor that make it hard to turn a profit right now. Soybean farmers will get $30.88 per acre while corn farmers will receive $44.36 per acre. Another crop hit hard when China stopped buying was sorghum, and those farmers will get $48.11 per acre. The amounts are based on a USDA formula on the cost of production.

That and uncertainty about trade markets and how much farmers will receive for their crops has even some of the most optimistic farmers worried, said Cory Walters, who is an associate professor in the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Department of Agricultural Economics. Soybean prices jumped up above $11.50 per bushel after the agreement was announced, but the price has since fallen to about $10.56 per bushel on Tuesday. So prices are close to where they were a year ago and aren’t high enough to cover most farmers’ costs.

“Everything is changing — the land rental market, the fertilizer market, the seed market and it’s all pinching the farmer when they go to do their cash flows. The ability to make a decision is tougher now because of all the uncertainty in the market,” Walters said.

___

This story has been updated to correct that Bessent spoke on Fox Business, not Fox News.

___

Funk reported from Omaha, Nebraska. Associated Press writers Didi Tang and Fatima Hussein contributed from Washington.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Wall Street is talking about whether Trump’s Greenland plan will end U.S. ‘primacy’

Published

on



Investors reacted emphatically to President Trump’s insistence that he won’t back down on his plan to take over Greenland: They hate it. The S&P 500 fell 2% yesterday, even though 81% of its companies have beaten their Q4 earnings expectations so far. The dollar fell off a cliff, losing nearly 1% of its value against a basket of foreign currencies. U.S. bond prices weakened modestly. Gold, the safe-haven investment, hit yet another new record high.

The “sell America” trade is in full effect, in other words. S&P futures were up marginally this morning, suggesting that the bloodletting has been put on hold until traders hear what Trump has to say at the World Economic Forum in Davos later today. Trump offered a small ray of hope before he left for Switzerland when he told NewsNation, “We’ll probably be able to work something out.”

The drama has started a global debate about ending America’s “primacy” as the place for investors to hold assets. Increasingly, analysts and economists are talking about hedging against U.S. risk and deploying their capital in markets which are more predictable. The fact that the S&P 500 underperformed last year compared to markets in Asia and Europe is helping make the case. It’s a rerun in 2026, too. The S&P is down 0.71% year-to-date, while the Europe STOXX 600 is up 0.69% and the South Korean KOSPI is up an astonishing 14%.

“Until the US no longer ‘threatens’ with the use of tariffs … the so-called ‘primacy’ of the U.S. remains at risk of further dissolution, and with it an upending of the geopolitical alignments that have upheld markets in recent years,” Macquarie analysts Thierry Wizman and Gareth Berry wrote in a recent note to clients.

Their argument—perhaps one of the most extreme ones that Fortune has ever seen in an investment bank research note—is that when the U.S. goes through a major political convulsion a period of stagnation follows, and thus investors should begin moving their money away from America:

“A line can be traced, for example, from the failure of the U.S. in the Vietnam War and the follow-on decline in U.S, primacy, to the U.S.’s gold reserve depletion, and the subsequent end of the fixed exchange rate system under the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944. The ‘fiat money’ era that followed was associated with a large decline in the real value of the USD, from 1971 until 1981, as well as a period of inflation and recessions across the 1970s,” they said. 

“We should worry about the USD and its relation to other currencies, too. If the reserve status of the USD does depend on the U.S. role in the world—as guarantor of security and a rules-based order—then the events of the past year, and of the past three weeks, in particular, carry the seeds of a reallocation away from the USD, and the search for alternatives, especially among reserve managers. So far, allocators have only found solace in gold, but they may eventually move toward other fiat currencies, too.”

Wall Street got a glimpse of what this might look like when the Danish retirement savings fund AkademikerPension said yesterday that it would sell its $100 million stake in U.S. bonds by the end of the week.

So far, traders are flinching at Trump’s actions. But we haven’t yet seen the kind of full-scale capital flight away from U.S. assets that might, for instance, raise inflation, interest rates or trigger a recession. But the mere fact that Wall Street is discussing it is significant.

Deutsche Bank’s George Saravelos told clients in a note at the weekend: “Europe owns Greenland, it also owns a lot of Treasuries. We spent most of last year arguing that for all its military and economic strength, the U.S. has one key weakness: it relies on others to pay its bills via large external deficits. Europe, on the other hand, is America’s largest lender: European countries own $8 trillion of US bonds and equities, almost twice as much as the rest of the world combined. In an environment where the geoeconomic stability of the western alliance is being disrupted existentially, it is not clear why Europeans would be as willing to play this part. Danish pension funds were one of the first to repatriate money and reduce their dollar exposure this time last year. With USD exposure still very elevated across Europe, developments over the last few days have potential to further encourage dollar rebalancing.”

This note was internally controversial. Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing had to call U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to disavow it.

The CEO does not stand by it but Saravelos’s colleagues may be more sympathetic. Jim Reid and his team, who religiously send an early morning email summarizing market action, did not send their email this morning. The bank told Fortune, “Deutsche Bank Research is independent in their work, therefore views expressed in individual research notes do not necessarily represent the view of the bank’s management.”

In fact, the idea that Europe might move out of U.S. assets is a commonplace inside investment banks right now. At UBS, Paul Donovan told clients earlier this week, “The implications of additional tariffs are more U.S. inflation pressures and a further erosion of the USD’s status as a reserve currency. So far, bond investors do not seem to be taking the threats too seriously.”

This morning he said that the most likely scenario wouldn’t be investors selling U.S. debt but simply refusing to buy new debt, thus reducing the flow of funds that the America is dependent on.

In a tariff war, one under-discussed weapon at Europe’s disposal is its Anti-Coercion Instrument: It has the power to ban U.S. services businesses from the E.U.

“U.S. services exports to the E.U. were $295B in 2024, equivalent to 0.9% of US GDP, suggesting the harm could be much greater if the E.U. pulled this relatively new lever at its disposal than if it responded simply with tariffs, though its economy would be hurt more too,” Pantheon Macroeconomics analysts Samuel Tombs and Oliver Allen told clients.

“In short, nobody would win from a new trade war, but the E.U. has ample scope to harm the U.S. if the Greenland situation escalates,” they said.

Here’s a snapshot of the markets ahead of the opening bell in New York this morning:

  • S&P 500 futures were up 0.19% this morning. The last session closed down 2.06%.
  • STOXX Europe 600 was down 0.4% in early trading.
  • The U.K.’s FTSE 100 was flat in early trading. 
  • Japan’s Nikkei 225 was down 0.41%.
  • China’s CSI 300 was flat. 
  • The South Korea KOSPI was up 0.49%. 
  • India’s NIFTY 50 was down 0.3%. 
  • Bitcoin was down to $89K.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Match Group says a ‘readiness paradox’ is crippling Gen Z in dating

Published

on



Gen Z is sometimes criticized for its proclivity toward slang or its approach to the workforce. But this generation is facing challenges very different from those of their elders. The young adults are slowing down their pursuit of the American Dream of finding “the one,” owning a home, and having kids.

But it’s not because Gen Z doesn’t want to find love, according to a report by Match Group and Harris Poll shared exclusively with Fortune. In fact, their survey results from 2,500 randomly selected U.S. adults shows 80% of Gen Z say they believe they’ll find true love, making them the most optimistic generation about finding love. Yet, only 55% of Gen Z feel like they’re actually ready for partnership. 

Therein lies the “readiness paradox,” a phenomenon that paralyzes Gen Z from taking that initial step toward a serious relationship, and subsequently toward marriage and having children. While more than half of Gen Z says they feel lonely despite having online connections, 48% of Gen Z women report feeling additional pressure to enter a relationship for “the right reason,” rather than solely to avoid loneliness. This cycle traps young people in loneliness, which is amplified by social media pressures, like the dread of “hard-launching” a relationship. 

“It makes total sense to be stuck in that paralysis of, I want this, I want a relationship, but I don’t feel ready for it, and so I don’t do it,” Chine Mmegwa, head of strategy, corporate development, and business operations at Match Group, told Fortune. “What they’re afraid of is failing. What they’re afraid of is that the other person on the other side isn’t ready.”

Match Group defines this phenomenon as a “self-reinforcing cycle” in which Gen Zers set a high bar for readiness for a relationship, then feel anxious about being alone, then crave new relationships, believe they’re not ready for it and wait longer, experience more loneliness, and then the cycle repeats. 

And some of this cycle stems from the fact that Gen Z prioritizes investing in personal growth, therapy, and defining success over other generations. Nearly 60% of Gen Z women say therapy is essential to relationship success, according to the Match Group report, and almost 50% say that setting and respecting healthy boundaries is a prime indication of being ready for a romantic relationship. And as a result, they may be more likely to delay dating. 

This report serves as a launchpad for Match Group and other dating app companies to rethink how to best serve Gen Z consumers, some of which had ditched the apps when they did have features they could relate to. But now Tinder has introduced more casual modes for Gen Zers to meet each other, like through its double-date feature and college mode where the generation can meet more people with the same relationship goals in mind.

That’s a step in the right direction for a generation that is reverting back to a desire to meet in real life.

“This is the way Gen Z wants to connect,” Match Group CEO Spencer Rascoff previously said. “They want to vibe their way through meeting people.”

Reprioritizing milestones

Unlike how some other reports about Gen Z love life have portrayed the generation, they’re not rejecting romance. Instead, they’re reshuffling life’s timeline amid economic and social strains. 

Match Group’s report shows nearly half of Gen Z say they’re not ready for relationships now, and 75% aren’t rushing into one. But, again, 80% say they believe they’ll find true love.

“They believe that when they work on themselves, their relationships become stronger,” according to the Match Group report. “And they are more likely to wait until they can put their best selves forward to give themselves the highest chance of relationship success.”

Although that may sound like worrisome news for a company trying to appeal to the latest generation, Mmegwa didn’t shy away from the challenge. 

Gen Z is “still looking to our products to solve real big issues. And they are still looking to our products and to dating to solve the things that are most important to them” she said. “It’s just a question of when and how they will use our products that [is] very different from prior generations.”

This generation also has a very different view of how happy their own parents’ and grandparents’ relationships are: Only 37% described those relationships as happy, and 34% of Gen Z women also feel working through issues from past relationships indicates readiness, according to the report.

Social media’s vicious cycle

Being highly inundated by and invested in social media has also exacerbated the readiness paradox. While 46% of Gen Z “soft-launch” relationships versus 27% overall, 81% see it as an ironclad agreement, and dread backlash from a public failure. 

It’s different from how other generations view making relationships public: “You can also hard launch and then delete the photos the next day, and it’s okay,” Mmegwa said. 

But still, for Gen Z, relationship performance pressure creates a cycle: High readiness bars lead to loneliness, which ultimately leads to them pursuing lower-stakes or casual relationships that rarely escalate into something more serious.

Instagram exacerbates the stall. While 46% of Gen Z “soft-launch” relationships versus 27% overall, 81% who hard-launch see it as an ironclad commitment, dreading public failure. Mmegwa highlighted this generational shift: “You can also hard launch and then delete the photos the next day, and it’s okay.” This “performance pressure” creates a cycle: High readiness bars lead to loneliness (over 50% feel it despite online ties), prompting low-stakes connections that rarely escalate.​

“For us, the focus is on how we bring people together and encourage them to return to in-person connections,” Hinge CEO Jackie Jantos previously told Fortune. Hinge is part of Match Group, along with Tinder, Match, and OkCupid.

How Match Group plans to address the readiness paradox

Match Group is planning to meet Gen Z where they are: They’ll keep introducing “low-pressure” tools, like Tinder’s Double Dating feature and College Mode.

“The idea here is really around helping our users have the power to control what they’re looking for in a given moment and be able to find that more easily,” Cleo Long, Tinder’s senior director of global product marketing, previously told Fortune.

Using the report as a roadmap for new product plans, future features could include features like readiness signals, Mmegwa said, and more curated matches will be important. 

“It’s no longer a speed and volume game,” she said. “It’s [about] truly making our algorithms help you know yourself better, and then help you know the person on the other side of the connection better.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.