Latest news with #COVID-era
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Here's the Cost of Living in the Least Expensive City in Every State
In the era of economic uncertainty that is 2025, finding every single creative way to save money is likely becoming the name of the game for many. Whether it's shopping for the biggest sales, or belt tightening and not spending, or taking a side hustle, the instability created by a tariff-rattled economy along with the hangover of COVID-era inflation might have you looking for every financial corner to cut. Find Out: Learn More: One potential way to save money is to decrease your rent, grocery costs and overall cost of living. How? By moving to a cheaper city in your state. Recently, GOBankingRates consulted Zillow's data on the 2,500 largest cities in America with regards to housing market size. From those cities, GOBankingRates located the ones with the lowest 2025 rent, along with low cost-of-living elements (such as groceries, healthcare, rent, transportation and utilities), selecting the lowest out of each of the 50 states. Wondering where the cheapest place to live in your state might be? Also see the cost of living in every state. Annual cost of living: $31,807 Annual rent: $9,000 Annual groceries: $5,581 Check Out: Also Read: Annual cost of living: $46,262 Annual rent: $19,296 Annual groceries: $7,403 Discover More: Annual cost of living: $39,046 Annual rent: $16,956 Annual groceries: $5,775 Annual cost of living: $32,020 Annual rent: $10,992 Annual groceries: $5,660 Annual cost of living: $39,321 Annual rent: $15,024 Annual groceries: $5,956 Annual cost of living: $36,344 Annual rent: $15,288 Annual groceries: $6,089 Also Find: Annual cost of living: $42,706 Annual rent: $16,908 Annual groceries: $6,289 Annual cost of living: $42,867 Annual rent: $19,332 Annual groceries: $6,259 Annual cost of living: $39,727 Annual rent: $17,100 Annual groceries: $6,132 Annual cost of living: $32,048 Annual rent: $10,200 Annual groceries: $5,762 Read More: Annual cost of living: $58,317 Annual rent: $26,652 Annual groceries: $8,371 Annual cost of living: $33,299 Annual rent: $12,432 Annual groceries: $5,581 Annual cost of living: $31,245 Annual rent: $8,448 Annual groceries: $5,750 Annual cost of living: $29,157 Annual rent: $9,336 Annual groceries: $5,502 Annual cost of living: $29,386 Annual rent: $8,400 Annual groceries: $5,775 See More: Annual cost of living: $29,877 Annual rent: $8,676 Annual groceries: $5,629 Annual cost of living: $32,454 Annual rent: $11,760 Annual groceries: $5,756 Annual cost of living: $33,595 Annual rent: $11,712 Annual groceries: $5,623 Annual cost of living: $36,531 Annual rent: $15,396 Annual groceries: $6,325 Annual cost of living: $33,347 Annual rent: $12,408 Annual groceries: $6,120 Trending Now: Annual cost of living: $41,141 Annual rent: $18,420 Annual groceries: $6,362 Annual cost of living: $33,520 Annual rent: $11,640 Annual groceries: $5,357 Annual cost of living: $30,132 Annual rent: $10,512 Annual groceries: $5,654 Annual cost of living: $35,645 Annual rent: $13,812 Annual groceries: $5,799 Annual cost of living: $29,662 Annual rent: $8,196 Annual groceries: $5,805 Check Out: Annual cost of living: $33,130 Annual rent: $11,676 Annual groceries: $6,059 Annual cost of living: $34,130 Annual rent: $10,740 Annual groceries: $5,865 Annual cost of living: $38,539 Annual rent: $16,104 Annual groceries: $6,089 Annual cost of living: $43,374 Annual rent: $20,856 Annual groceries: $6,277 Annual cost of living: $42,685 Annual rent: $19,656 Annual groceries: $6,120 Also See: Annual cost of living: $32,853 Annual rent: $13,740 Annual groceries: $5,672 Annual cost of living: $31,821 Annual rent: $10,956 Annual groceries: $5,762 Annual cost of living: $32,662 Annual rent: $11,676 Annual groceries: $5,678 Annual cost of living: $32,323 Annual rent: $10,812 Annual groceries: $6,107 Annual cost of living: $31,989 Annual rent: $10,500 Annual groceries: $6,017 Consider This: Annual cost of living: $32,883 Annual rent: $8,676 Annual groceries: $5,526 Annual cost of living: $34,981 Annual rent: $14,124 Annual groceries: $5,890 Annual cost of living: $29,811 Annual rent: $8,736 Annual groceries: $5,744 Annual cost of living: $42,655 Annual rent: $18,672 Annual groceries: $6,319 Annual cost of living: $30,381 Annual rent: $10,224 Annual groceries: $5,738 Explore More: Annual cost of living: $34,940 Annual rent: $13,788 Annual groceries: $6,083 Annual cost of living: $32,092 Annual rent: $10,908 Annual groceries: $5,726 Annual cost of living: $30,770 Annual rent: $9,624 Annual groceries: $5,357 Annual cost of living: $36,876 Annual rent: $16,200 Annual groceries: $5,575 Annual cost of living: $49,474 Annual rent: $24,372 Annual groceries: $6,749 Check Out: Annual cost of living: $35,677 Annual rent: $14,172 Annual groceries: $5,599 Annual cost of living: $35,811 Annual rent: $15,120 Annual groceries: $5,986 Annual cost of living: $33,414 Annual rent: $10,800 Annual groceries: $5,805 Annual cost of living: $32,113 Annual rent: $11,196 Annual groceries: $5,545 Annual cost of living: $36,846 Annual rent: $13,008 Annual groceries: $5,557 Methodology: For this piece GOBankingRates looked at the 2,500 largest cities in terms of housing market size, according to Zillow's March 2025 data. With these cities isolated, GOBankingRates found the city with the cheapest 2025 rent and from there found the annual essentials (Rent, Groceries, Utilities, Transportation, and Healthcare) cost of living for these places. Cost-of-living figures were calculated by first finding the annual average expenditure, as sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2023 Consumer Expenditure Survey and from there used cost-of-living indices sourced from Sperling's Best Places. For ME, ND, and VT the market size was relaxed to 4,000. All data was collected on and is up to date as of May 14, 2025. More From GOBankingRates 6 Big Shakeups Coming to Social Security in 2025 This article originally appeared on Here's the Cost of Living in the Least Expensive City in Every State
USA Today
a day ago
- Business
- USA Today
Social Security garnishment paused for student loan defaulters
Social Security garnishment paused for student loan defaulters Show Caption Hide Caption Collection of defaulted student loans to resume May 5: What to know Since the pandemic, federal student loan borrowers have been mostly protected from the harshest consequences of defaulting. That's about to change on May 5. The Department of Education paused its plan to garnish Social Security benefits for defaulted student-loan borrowers, a process that was initially set to take effect when the administration restarted student debt collections on May 5. Spokesperson Ellen Keast told USA TODAY in a statement on Tuesday, June 3, that the Department of Education has not offset any Social Security benefits since collections restarted last month. 'The Trump Administration is committed to protecting social security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,' Keast said in the statement to USA TODAY. 'In the coming weeks, the Department will begin proactive outreach to recipients about affordable loan repayment options and help them back into good standing.' We explain: As millions miss student loan payments, here's how it could hurt the economy The announcement is a reversal for the administration after announcing April 21 that the Education Department's Office of Federal Student Aid would resume collections of its defaulted federal student loan portfolio on May 5, ending a more than five-year pause instituted in March 2020 as part of COVID-era policies. The Department of Education says in a note on its debt resolution page that it is "delaying offsets' of monthly federal benefits, including Social Security, for 'a couple of months and plans to resume sometime this summer." The Department did not provide a more concrete timeline of when collections could resume on Social Security payments in a request sent by USA TODAY. Over 400,000 defaulted borrowers likely receive Social Security: Report As of late April, there were 42.7 million borrowers owing more than $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to the department, with more than 5 million borrowers in default. When borrowers default on their federal student loans, the government can collect the outstanding balance through forced collections, including the offset of tax refunds, as well as the garnishment of wages and Social Security benefits. There are an estimated 452,000 student loan borrowers age 62 and older with defaulted loans who are likely receiving Social Security benefits, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said in January. More than one in three Social Security recipients with student loans are reliant on Social Security payments, according to a January report from the bureau, meaning forced collections, if implemented, could 'significantly imperil their financial well-being.' What does it mean to default on student loan payments? Federal student loan borrowers enter default after 270 days of missed payments and are then transferred to the Department of Education's default collections program after 360 days of non-payment. Defaults negatively impact borrowers' credit scores and leave them vulnerable to forced collections. Trump administration tightened student loan debt policies About 195,000 borrowers who haven't paid their student loan bills for at least nine months received a 30-day official notice the week of May 5 from the U.S. Department of Treasury notifying them that their federal benefits checks will be cut in early June. "There's no such thing as forgiveness, just shifting the payment burden from one party to another. We will not force American taxpayers to take on the debts that are not theirs," Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in an X post in late April. "Borrowers should pay back the debts they take on." Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
Time of India
a day ago
- Health
- Time of India
ICS 2025: Breathe Easy-The Mental Health Revolution
HighlightsNikhil Taneja, Co-Founder & Chief of Yuvaa, emphasised that mental health encompasses daily experiences of joy and personal balance, challenging the notion that it is only relevant during crises. Taneja argued that therapy should be viewed as a strength and 'the coolest thing in the world', advocating for a shift in how society perceives emotional wellbeing. The session highlighted the importance of genuine conversations in the workplace, exemplified by Taneja's organisation's practice of sincerely asking employees 'How are you?' to foster a supportive environment. In a refreshingly candid conversation about mental wellness, Nikhil Taneja , Co-Founder & Chief of Yuvaa , alongside session chair Devesh Gupta, Content Lead - Product & Community at at the India Communication Summit 2025 shattered traditional stigmas surrounding mental health, transforming a potentially heavy topic into an enlightening and empowering dialogue. Taneja, a passionate advocate for mental wellness, challenged conventional narratives by highlighting that mental health isn't just about crisis moments, but encompasses daily experiences of joy, happiness, and personal balance. "Mental health isn't spotted only in crises," he explained, "It's about every moment we experience." Drawing from personal experiences, Taneja shared his own journey of recognising anxiety, emphasising how vulnerability can be a strength. He provocatively argued that therapy isn't a weakness but "the coolest thing in the world" - a perspective that could revolutionise how we perceive emotional wellbeing . The session brilliantly dismantled archaic language around mental health, moving beyond terms like "disturbed" or "mental" to create a more compassionate dialogue. By encouraging meaningful check-ins and genuine conversations, the speakers demonstrated how workplace cultures can transform. A standout moment was Taneja's revelation about his organisation's COVID-era practice of genuinely asking employees, "How are you?" - not as a perfunctory greeting, but as a sincere invitation to share your heart. The conversation was a rallying cry for normalising mental health conversations, breaking down barriers, and creating supportive environments where individuals feel safe expressing their emotional experiences.
Fast Company
2 days ago
- Business
- Fast Company
How product companies can smartly navigate tariffs, supply chain pressure
The next wave of physical product innovation needs to go beyond new features and aesthetics. Technical products are large investments and must be designed for resilience in an unpredictable global trade environment. With the current political administration's sweeping global tariffs, officially announced on April 2, many manufacturers are revisiting design decisions made years ago. Factors like sourcing and factory location, previously largely unseen, can now determine which products will remain profitable, which will become liabilities, and which must be redesigned to maintain viability. The prior USMCA/CUSMA free trade agreements remain in place for North American product companies, meaning low or no tariffs on compliant products. However, products beyond the scope of the CUSMA will face tariffs of 25%, which includes hundreds of product types. Companies are already adjusting. According to the World Economic Forum, 40% of businesses are increasing US sourcing, and a third are cutting costs to offset tariffs. Based on recent sales calls, we see tariff concerns firsthand, and leads frequently ask how to mitigate tariff impacts. My company has guided hundreds of manufacturers through new product development challenges, and we are seeing a fundamental shift in how smart companies approach product design. If you or your clients are making products that cross the US border, it's time to get strategic. By following the principles and road map outlined below, you can make design resilience a competitive advantage. THE VULNERABILITY OF INFLEXIBLE DESIGN When trade policies shift, the greatest vulnerability isn't in your supply chain; it's in your product design. Who has design control? And what are your options when it comes to sourcing component parts? These questions are critical. A medical device manufacturer with high sales numbers in North America recently discovered this when 45% tariffs on Chinese electronics transformed their profitable monitoring system into a loss leader overnight. The culprit wasn't just sourcing strategy but design decisions that locked them into specific components from newly expensive locations. Due to the unprecedented nature of current US tariffs, manufacturers face design constraints they never anticipated. Products developed without consideration for manufacturing flexibility have little room to maneuver when tariffs suddenly alter the economics. That makes you and your profit margins vulnerable. Companies that can quickly adapt their designs for alternative sourcing will have a significant competitive advantage. Not only can companies protect their bottom line through flexibility, but tariff resilience is also becoming a procurement criterion. Major retailers and business-to-business (B2B) customers now evaluate suppliers on design flexibility and adaptability to changing trade conditions. From COVID-era supply chain disruptions to the US tariffs in 2025, product manufacturers have learned they can't take anything for granted. That's why forward-thinking companies are implementing new design requirements that build in resilience from the start: Keep your (sourcing) options open: Some electronics manufacturers now classify components based on availability across different tariff zones, with critical components requiring multiple sourcing options from different regions. I have spoken to several electronics manufacturers and component suppliers deploying this strategy, mainly in an ad hoc method, as tariff uncertainty continues. Choose materials wisely: Even subtle material choices on product components can dramatically affect tariff treatment. Certain plastics qualify for preferential treatment under trade agreements while nearly identical alternatives don't—a difference that can represent broad tariff swing percentages. Take care that your materials choices do not affect the entire tariff assessment for your product. Go modular—with care: Many products are increasingly made up of several modules, enabling companies to quickly shift production location of specific sub-assemblies if tariff conditions change. Care must be taken with margin-sensitive products, however, as I've found that modularity always increases product cost. In my experience, modular products require higher up-front investments in tooling and manufacturing setup. These can be offset if production volumes remain high, but when margins are tight, it increases risk for new products early on—so a shift to modularity to mitigate tariff and supply chain uncertainty will likely not pay off in the short term. Beyond principles, companies need practical tools for trade-resilient design. Three key approaches leading companies use: Simulators: Forward-thinking development teams can create simulations showing how trade disruptions might impact product designs. • Create two versions of your bill of materials (BOM) with different build locations, part costs and part suppliers. • Add additional info to track in-transit supply costs and calculate how tariff changes and factory location may affect total product cost in either scenario. Metrics: Traditional design metrics focus on acceptable product performance at the lowest cost. But the best companies now track additional metrics: • Geopolitical exposure index: What percentage of supply components come from politically sensitive regions? • Redeployment time and cost: How quickly can you shift production to a different region? Moving a physical product design involves setting up new suppliers, ensuring their quality, and transferring design files and custom tooling. Moving locations becomes cumbersome and expensive if your manufacturer controls design and the manufacturing process changes. Unless your yearly production volume is very high, this cost can far exceed simply paying a tariff. Cross-functional integration: Studies suggest companies with highly integrated design and supply chain teams experience fewer disruptions during volatile periods (like a trade war). Breaking down walls between design and supply teams to strategize on trade compliance is an essential tactic. DESIGN A RESILIENCE ROAD MAP For companies looking to enhance their design resilience, I recommend a phased approach: Assess: Evaluate your current products for tariff sensitivity and design inflexibility. Identify components and assemblies that could prevent manufacturing relocation. Prioritize: Focus initially on high-volume and high-impact products with significant tariff exposure before expanding to other product lines. Build cross-functional teams: Ensure design, supply chain, and trade compliance teams collaborate from the earliest concept stages, and ensure the product owner maintains design control of all product builds, engineering changes, and unique manufacturing processes. Measure: Create specific measurements for design flexibility and resilience, and incorporate them into product development gates. FROM DOWNSTREAM TO PRIMARY CONCERNS Integrating tariff and supply chain changes into product design represents a fundamental shift in development strategy. What was once considered a hidden downstream concern is now a critical design parameter that must be addressed from the earliest stages of conception. This new climate presents challenges, but it can also be a golden opportunity. Those who quickly adapt their design processes will gain significant cost stability, market responsiveness, and long-term competitiveness advantages. The new competitive edge is not just having the best product. It's designing the one that is most resilient to supply.
Axios
3 days ago
- Business
- Axios
Chicago transit budget crisis deepens as funding stalls in Springfield
After months of grave warnings by Chicago-area transit leaders, unions and commuters, the Illinois General Assembly passed a $55 billion budget without the funding and reform agencies hoped for. Why it matters: Leaders warned they need $1.5 billion to prevent service cuts and layoffs at CTA, Metra and Pace. State of play: The Senate approved a proposal Saturday that would create a new governing body for Chicago-area transit as well as revenue from a fee on Uber Eats, Amazon, and other online food and retail deliveries. Yes, but: The House failed to take it up. Catch up quick: The Regional Transit Authority (RTA), which oversees CTA, Metra commuter rail and Pace suburban bus service, launched the "Save Transit Now" campaign in April, which encouraged riders to tell state legislators to include transit funding in the 2026 budget. A $770 million budget shortfall resulted from the expiration of COVID-era federal funding and a decline in ridership to pre-pandemic levels. Friction point: Lawmakers repeated throughout the session that state funding would not come without reform, saying a streamlined governing body was needed as well as better efforts to address safety on trains and buses. Additionally, the perennial issue in budget negotiations was at play, as downstate lawmakers pushed back against any legislation that would tax their districts to fund services their constituents don't use. Zoom out: The bill that passed the Senate included a new agency called Northern Illinois Transit Authority (NITA), which would replace RTA to oversee CTA, Metra, and Pace. NITA would have the authority to set and coordinate fares, allowing riders to use one fare card for all services. It also includes plans for a task force of officers from the Cook County Sheriff's Office, and Chicago, Metra and Illinois State Police dedicated to crime mitigation on transit. What they're saying: RTA spokesperson Tina Fassett Smith said in a statement that, "Balancing regional interests is challenging, but we are ready to continue our work to achieve consensus and deliver a solution." "In the coming weeks, the RTA will work with the Service Boards on a regional budget that by law must only include funding we are confident the system will receive in 2026," Smith said. Saturday's inaction "jeopardizes Illinois transit systems with expected cuts, massive layoffs, and service disruptions," Illinois AFL-CIO President Tim Drea said in a statement, adding that riders and workers are now "left concerned about the future of our communities." Between the lines: Pritzker said Sunday funding transit quickly is imperative, but took a shot at RTA's $750,000 "Save Transit Now" campaign. "I also would say that they'd have more money in their coffers if they hadn't spent money advertising here in Springfield to try to convince people of something that they really should be leaving to the legislators to decide," the governor said at a press conference. What's next: Pritzker said transit funding remains a priority and expects lawmakers to revisit the issue in the coming months.
