<p>Four Seasons CEO Alejandro Reynal tells HBR editor at large Adi Ignatius why the luxury hotel brand hires for attitude over experience.</p>
Citi Merchant Offers are similar to Amex Offers and Chase Offers. With these offers, Citi credit cardholders can unlock additional savings and benefits when making purchases with select merchants. Citi Merchant Offers often include discounts, cashback rewards, or special promotions tailored to cardholders’ spending habits and preferences.
Citi Merchant Offers are now available for all Citi cardholders, although specific offers might still be targeted. Some people are now seeing an offer that can save you $up to $30 at Home Depot, either online or in-store. Check out the details below.
There are two separate offers:
With this Home Depot Citi Merchant Offer you can save $5 or $30, depending on which version you find in your accounts.
You can take advantage of this offer by simply using your Citi credit cards for eligible transactions. Just make sure you enroll in the offer first, before making a purchase. You can enroll multiple Citi credit cards for this same offer, as long as the offer shows up in that account.
HT: DoC
I said it was going to be a big week for mortgage rates and it didn’t disappoint.
But oddly, mortgage rates shot up for a reason unrelated to jobs data.
It was words from new Fed chair Kevin Warsh that caused rates to jump yesterday.
Today, they will likely ease thanks to underlying economic data, which matters more than words.
And that’s perhaps a taste of what’s to come under Warsh. Tough talk but ultimately data leading the way as always.
This week’s slate of economic data has all been released ahead of the July 4th holiday, culminating with the BLS jobs report today.
A day earlier than usual, it was tame and well below forecast, with just 57,000 jobs added during June versus a consensus of 115,000.
Meanwhile, April’s numbers were revised down by 31,000, from +179,000 to +148,000, and the May was revised down by 43,000, from +172,000 to +129,000.
Thanks to these revisions, employment numbers for April and May combined are 74,000 lower than previously reported, per BLS.
In other words, the labor market is still questionable, despite showing continued “resilience” over the past year and change.
Had it come in hotter-than-expected, there would have been even more pressure on bond yields and mortgage rates, which were near their recent highs going into the report.
Instead, the 10-year bond yield has fallen from around 4.50% to a couple ticks below.
Now everyone can breathe a sigh of relief until the next batch of data arrives.
I got to thinking that the new Fed chair, who was ostensibly hired by President Trump to cut rates, might be taking a tough talk approach knowing the data will be soft.
So the other day he said “prices are too high,” leading many to believe a rate hike was coming.
But then he gets this weak labor report and he can say well, we need to look at things on the whole.
Our dual mandate is price stability and to promote maximum employment, so we’ll stand pat here. We’ve got no other choice.
Put another way, Warsh can talk tough and satisfy the bond hawks while letting the data bail him out as to not upset the man who hired him.
In the end, that means he’s not much different than his predecessor, Jerome Powell, in that he stays grounded and makes decisions based on data.
And of course, he is but one vote and there are 11 other voting members of the Federal Reserve.
The weak jobs report already reduced rate hike expectations pretty significantly, per CME FedWatch.
The odds of a July hike are down to 17.6% today from 28.9% yesterday, while September is also now odds-on staying put as opposed to a hike.
It was 49.8% in favor of a 25-basis point hike yesterday, and now down to 46%, slightly below the 46.2% odds of holding steady.
While the Fed doesn’t set mortgage rates, Fed rate expectations can push mortgage rates higher or lower.
If the expectation is no longer hikes, mortgage rates can ease, especially if stability in the Middle East is maintained and oil prices continue to fall.
Read on: Use my mortgage rate calculator to compare different rates and payments side by side.
Before creating this site, I worked as an account executive for a wholesale mortgage lender in Los Angeles. My hands-on experience in the early 2000s inspired me to begin writing about mortgages 20 years ago to help prospective (and existing) home buyers better navigate the home loan process. Follow me on X for hot takes.
Sa video nato ay ituturo ko sa inyo kung paano mag trade ng Crypto (Step by Step Guide) for beginners.
YouTube Link:
Trading Interface Guide for Beginners | Master the Basics!
What You’ll Learn:
How to create account
How to deposit
How to execute a trade
How to trade crypto
Trading tips and mindsets
#coins.ph
#cryptotrading
#cryptoforbeginners
#cryptotutorial
#tradingtutorial
#cryptocurrency
DISCLAIMER: Please be advised that I am not a professional advisor in business areas involving Cryptocurrency Trading, Staking, Investing, etc. The information and content written, broadcasted, and/or disseminated by and through “KyrosPH” is intended FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. Nothing written or discussed is intended to be construed, or relied upon, as investment, financial, or similar advice, nor should it be. All content expressed, created, and conveyed by “KyrosPH” is premised upon subjective opinions pertaining to currently-existing facts readily available.
source
A new federal lawsuit is trying to answer a question more than 1.5 million student loan borrowers have been asking: did the Department of Education actually cancel the loans it publicly promised to forgive?
The Project on Predatory Student Lending (PPSL) sued the Department (PDF File) on July 1, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, after the agency sat on fifteen Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests (some for more than two and a half years) seeking records on how it carried out its announced group discharges.
The College Investor team has previously filed similar FOIA requests for borrower defense data, the latest with a response in 2023, which took roughly 14 months to process.
Between April 2022 and January 2025, the Department announced ten group discharges for borrowers who attended schools it found had engaged in widespread misconduct:
Each announcement told approved borrowers their federal loans would be discharged automatically — no application, no further action needed. In total, the announcements covered more than 1.5 million borrowers and more than $23 billion in federal student loan debt, by the Department’s own estimates.
According to the lawsuit, the Department has never publicly released data on its progress toward fulfilling those commitments. PPSL says it continues to hear from hundreds of borrowers who were approved for group discharge relief but whose loans remain outstanding.
Group discharges were supposed to be the easy path towards student loan forgiveness. Instead of filing an individual borrower defense application, approved borrowers were told relief would arrive automatically, along with credit repair and, in some cases, refunds.
If loans that should have been canceled are still sitting on borrowers’ accounts (accruing interest, blocking mortgages, or landing in collections), borrowers may not even know they need to complain.
The lawsuit won’t cancel anyone’s loans directly. But the records it seeks (servicer guidance, compliance audits, and counts of how many approved borrowers still have outstanding loans) would show for the first time whether the Department of Education followed through on its public announcements.
PPSL filed five FOIA requests in November 2023 covering the CollegeAmerica, Corinthian, ITT, Marinello, and Westwood discharges, and ten more in April 2025 covering all ten schools.
The Department acknowledged every request, telling PPSL its average processing time was 185 business days — well beyond FOIA’s 20-business-day deadline. As of the lawsuit filing date, all fifteen requests were still listed as “In Process” in the Department’s FOIA portal.
“The Department made public promises to more than 1.5 million borrowers,” said Eileen Connor, PPSL’s president and executive director, in a statement. “It shouldn’t take a lawsuit to learn whether those promises have been fulfilled.“
Borrowers covered by these announcements can check whether their school qualifies on The College Investor’s for-profit college student loan forgiveness list. The suit also lands amid broader processing breakdowns at the Department — hundreds of thousands of borrowers remain stuck in application backlogs, and the AFT’s lawsuit has similarly pressed the agency to deliver forgiveness borrowers already earned.
The case, PPSL v. U.S. Department of Education, asks the court to declare the Department’s inaction unlawful and order it to produce the records at no cost. FOIA cases often end in negotiated production schedules, so documents could emerge in stages.
Borrowers approved for a group discharge whose loans remain outstanding should contact their servicer and file a complaint with the FSA Ombudsman and keep records of both.
Don’t Miss These Other Stories:
Editor: Colin Graves
The post Lawsuit Demands Proof Education Dept. Delivered $23 Billion in Student Loan Forgiveness appeared first on The College Investor.
The Nasdaq-100 is made up of the 100 most valuable companies listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange, excluding banks and financial institutions. It has a very high degree of exposure to the “Magnificent Seven,” a group of technology companies operating at the forefront of revolutionary industries like artificial intelligence (AI).
Unfortunately, those tech giants delivered a sluggish performance during the first half of 2026, which is partly why the Nasdaq-100 is down 3% from its all-time high as I write this (June 30).
The Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ 1.73%) is an exchange-traded fund (ETF) that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq-100 by holding the same stocks. Should investors buy it while the index is trading at a discount? History offers some very clear guidance.
Image source: Getty Images.
The Nasdaq is often the exchange of choice for small technology companies looking to go public, because it offers lower fees and fewer compliance hurdles compared to alternatives like the New York Stock Exchange. Some of those budding companies went on to become the trillion-dollar giants that now make up the Magnificent Seven, which together represent a whopping 34.9% of the entire value of the Nasdaq-100 index.
|
Stock |
Invesco ETF Portfolio Weighting |
|---|---|
|
1. Nvidia (NVDA 1.39%) |
7.60% |
|
2. Apple (AAPL +4.88%) |
6.80% |
|
3. Alphabet (GOOG 0.37%)(GOOGL 0.23%) |
6.18% |
|
4. Microsoft (MSFT +1.69%) |
4.52% |
|
5. Amazon (AMZN +0.55%) |
4.08% |
|
6. Tesla (TSLA 7.35%) |
3.09% |
|
7. Meta Platforms (META 4.80%) |
2.66% |
Data source: Invesco. Portfolio weightings are accurate as of June 28, 2026, and are subject to change.
Unfortunately, the Magnificent Seven stocks delivered sluggish returns during the first half of this year. In fact, each of them underperformed the Nasdaq-100. The worst of the bunch is Microsoft, which has plummeted by more than 23%.
Data by YCharts.
On the bright side, the Nasdaq-100 also holds positions in soaring semiconductor stocks like Micron Technology, Advanced Micro Devices, Intel, Applied Materials, and Lam Research, which have each more than doubled this year. Their performance is offsetting some of the sluggishness in the Magnificent Seven, which is a key reason why the Nasdaq-100 isn’t down even more.
There is currently more demand for AI chips and infrastructure than those companies can possibly supply, which is why they have experienced such strong gains. This imbalance is likely to persist for the foreseeable future, which should buoy their share prices.
Stock market sell-offs can be unnerving, and the uncertainty of what might come next often keeps many investors on the sidelines. However, history suggests they offer the best buying opportunities, because the market typically trends higher over the long term.
The Invesco QQQ ETF has delivered a compound annual return of 11% since it was established in 1999, even after accounting for every sell-off, correction, and bear market along the way. In fact, the ETF has endured five bear markets (peak-to-trough declines of 20% or more) over the last 27 years, triggered by events like the bursting of the dot-com internet bubble in 2000, the global financial crisis in 2008, and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Today’s Change
(-1.73%) $-12.57
Current Price
$712.60
Day’s Range
$707.56 – $730.83
52wk Range
$549.58 – $748.65
Volume
51.1M
Since the Nasdaq-100 climbed to new highs after each of those drawdowns, investors who bought the Invesco ETF in the face of extreme uncertainty would have done exceptionally well in the long run. The current drawdown in the index — which is just 3% as I write this — is far less severe, but history suggests investors with a time horizon of five years or more are likely to earn a positive return if they use it as a buying opportunity.
Most of the Magnificent Seven stocks are entering the second half of 2026 at extremely attractive valuations. Nvidia, for example, is trading at a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of just 29.8, which is less than half its 10-year average. Microsoft, Meta, Alphabet, and Amazon each have a P/E ratio of below 30, so they are cheaper than the Nasdaq-100, which trades at a P/E of 34.1.
In my opinion, Wall Street won’t be able to ignore the value that’s on offer in some of America’s highest-quality stocks for much longer. That could lead to a recovery with the potential to lift the Nasdaq-100 to a new record high.
Anthony Di Pizio has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Applied Materials, Intel, Lam Research, Meta Platforms, Micron Technology, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends Intercontinental Exchange and Nasdaq. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
In recognition of America’s 250th birthday, iconic Inc. profiles that stand the test of time.
Update 7/2/26: Offer has increased, but only to 30,000 points and requires an authorized user this time. I’d hold for 40,000 points.
Update 11/5/25: 40k offer is back through 12/16/25.
Direct Link to offer
Nice bonus for Amtrak users. The card launched with FNBO last October with a 30,000 bonus, and this is a nice bump to 40,000. There’s some speculation that dummy bookings – which historically have been throwing in $100 – will show 40,000 + $100 soon. Dummy booking has never shown another $100 statement credit so not worth waiting if interested. You can view more about Amtrak points and their value here.
Post history:
Deeded CEO Reuven Gorsht says the best entry point is not the flashiest platform, but the repeatable tasks already draining time from a broker’s business.
Most of the conversation around AI in medicine focuses on what it gives physicians. Less administrative burden. Faster documentation. More time with patients.
That conversation is worth having. But there is another one that has been quietly building in the medical literature, and it deserves equal attention.
When AI handles a growing share of clinical cognitive work, what happens to a physician’s own ability to reason independently?
This is not a theoretical concern. Researchers, medical educators, and physicians themselves are actively working through it. The findings published so far are nuanced enough to be genuinely useful and practical enough that any physician using AI tools right now can act on them.
A 2026 perspective published in Nature Medicine laid out a framework that has quickly become the standard vocabulary for this conversation. The researchers identified three distinct risks that AI introduces for physicians and trainees.
The first is deskilling: the gradual erosion of a skill a physician already has, through reduced practice. The second is never-skilling: a newer and arguably more serious concern, where trainees who rely on AI early in their training may never develop foundational clinical reasoning in the first place. The third is mis-skilling: the quiet adoption of an AI tool’s errors as one’s own clinical judgment, where a physician internalizes a flawed AI output as fact without catching it.
The framework is careful to note that direct evidence from medical training is still limited, and that AI is not inherently harmful to learning. Its educational impact depends on how and when it is introduced. That nuance matters, because the concern is not that AI tools are bad, it is that using them without intention creates specific, identifiable risks.
This landed with the broader profession. According to the AMA’s 2026 Physician Survey on Augmented Intelligence, 88% of physicians surveyed had some level of concern about skill loss, with 70% specifically worried about the impact on current medical students and residents.
It is tempting to read this as a medical education problem, something for residency program directors to figure out. The evidence suggests the dynamic extends further.
A 2023 editorial published in JAMA by Khera, Simon, and Ross specifically examined the risks of automation bias in AI-driven clinical decision support, the tendency to accept AI-generated recommendations without sufficient independent review.
The editorial warned that overreliance on automated outputs, alert fatigue, and reduced clinical vigilance are real risks that can compromise a physician’s ability to critically evaluate what AI is actually telling them.
The concern is not about AI being wrong most of the time. It is about what happens when AI is right most of the time. When a tool consistently produces accurate outputs, the cognitive habit of questioning it weakens. And when the tool eventually produces something incorrect, that weakened habit creates a gap exactly where clinical judgment needs to be strongest.
A concrete example came from a 2025 multicenter observational study published in The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. Researchers studied 19 experienced endoscopists across four colonoscopy centers in Poland (each with over 2,000 procedures under their belt) before and after AI-assisted polyp detection tools were introduced.
Adenoma detection rates for non-AI-assisted colonoscopies fell by 6% following regular AI use across the four centers, described by the authors as the first real-world evidence of automation-induced deskilling linked to patient outcomes.
These were not trainees. They were experienced clinicians. The skill erosion came from reduced practice of independent detection, not from any gap in foundational training.
For a physician already using ambient scribes, AI literature summaries, or clinical decision support tools daily, the risk is rarely dramatic. It tends to be gradual and hard to notice from the inside.
It might look like reaching for an AI-generated differential before forming one independently. Accepting a medication suggestion without the same level of scrutiny applied before those tools existed. Or finding that the mental habit of working through a case systematically has become less automatic than it once was.
A March 2026 narrative review published in the Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics by Oettl, Pruneski, and colleagues described the core problem clearly: maintaining clinical excellence requires a shift in training paradigms that emphasizes critical oversight, where human reasoning validates AI outputs rather than defers to them.
The review also distinguished deskilling from never-skilling, noting that overreliance is especially harmful for early-career physicians who may not build the experiential foundation that later allows them to catch what AI misses.
The goal is not to avoid AI tools, the evidence does not support that conclusion, and the practical case for ambient scribes and documentation assistance remains strong. The goal is to use them in a way that preserves, and ideally sharpens, the clinical reasoning they might otherwise quietly displace.
These are not abstract principles. They are specific habits that fit within existing clinical workflows.
This is the most consistently cited recommendation across the 2026 literature. Before reviewing what a clinical decision support tool suggests, spend time generating an independent list. It does not need to be exhaustive. It needs to be genuine. The act of forming independent clinical hypotheses is the exercise that keeps the underlying reasoning functional.
When an AI tool produces a recommendation, the useful question is not only “does this seem right?” but “why does this tool think this, and do I agree with that reasoning?” Some AI tools surface their reasoning transparently; others do not. For those that do not, asking the reasoning question aloud — even briefly — is still a useful habit.
This does not mean abandoning tools. It means building in regular situations where independent clinical reasoning is practiced without AI assistance: complex case reviews, teaching rounds, peer consultation. These are valuable for any physician who wants to keep independent diagnostic thinking as a reliable skill, not just for trainees.
When an AI tool produces a clearly wrong output, that moment has genuine educational value. What was the clinical feature the tool missed? Why would a physician catch it when the tool did not? Working through that question builds exactly the kind of discriminative judgment that makes AI use safer over time.
Unlock the Full Power of ChatGPT With This Copy-and-Paste Prompt Formula!
Download the Complete ChatGPT Cheat Sheet! Your go-to guide to writing better, faster prompts in seconds. Whether you’re crafting emails, social posts, or presentations, just follow the formula to get results instantly.
Save time. Get clarity. Create smarter.
There is a professional dimension to this that tends to go unaddressed in most AI adoption conversations.
A physician whose clinical reasoning has been quietly displaced by AI dependence is more vulnerable in ways that extend beyond individual patient encounters. The ability to function independently is what makes a physician valuable in settings where AI tools are unavailable, unreliable, or outside their effective operating range.
It is what makes a physician credible in expert roles, consulting engagements, teaching positions, and any context where the physician’s judgment, not the AI’s output, is the actual product being offered.
Physicians building income outside of clinical medicine (through consulting, advisory work, educational content, or expert witness roles) are effectively monetizing expertise. That expertise is grounded in clinical reasoning developed through years of independent practice. Protecting that reasoning ability is not just a patient safety matter.
It is a professional asset worth preserving intentionally.
AI tools are not slowing down. The pace of adoption across clinical practice makes that clear. The question for any physician using these tools now is not whether to use them, but how to use them in a way that keeps the most valuable parts of clinical practice intact.
The 2026 research makes a consistent point: AI is not inherently harmful to clinical skill. Its effect depends almost entirely on how it fits into a physician’s workflow and what habits surround it. Used with intention, it handles low-value cognitive overhead and creates more space for the reasoning that matters most. Used passively, it can gradually take the place of that reasoning, often without the physician noticing the shift.
Knowing which one is happening requires paying attention. The good news is that the habits required to stay on the right side of that line are straightforward, and the physicians building them now are better positioned regardless of where the tools go next.
But what about you? What do you think of all these findings? Let us know in the comments!
At Passive Income MD, we cover the tools, strategies, and practical AI workflow tips helping physicians build more time and financial freedom. We’ll keep tracking where AI goes from here.
Download The Physician’s Starter Guide to AI – a free, easy-to-digest resource that walks you through smart ways to integrate tools like ChatGPT into your professional and personal life. Whether you’re AI-curious or already experimenting, this guide will save you time, stress, and maybe even a little sanity.
Want more tips to sharpen your AI skills? Subscribe to our newsletter for exclusive insights and practical advice. You’ll also get access to our free AI resource page, packed with AI tools and tutorials to help you have more in life outside of medicine. Let’s make life easier, one prompt at a time. Make it happen!
