Connect with us

Finance

She Found Financial Freedom After Dumping Her Spouse, House and Job

Published

on

She Found Financial Freedom After Dumping Her Spouse, House and Job

For Jannese Torres, a personal finance expert, podcast host and entrepreneur, life couldn’t be better. She’s living in her dream home in Tampa Bay, has passive income rolling in and just embarked on her first national tour to promote Financially Lit!, her personal finance book.

And to think a few short years ago, she was burnt out and miserable.

Less than five years ago, Torres was living in a house she hated, stuck in a toxic marriage, working a job she didn’t love and had thousands of dollars of student loan debt in her name. Torres felt like she did everything right, but she found herself disillusioned with the American Dream she’d been sold. 

It wasn’t until she turned her back on the milestones she felt she needed to achieve that she found true happiness.

“It’s never too late to make a change,” said Torres. “The first step is usually the hardest. Your only regret will be not doing it sooner.”

Advertisement

It can be terrifying to make big pivots in life — not to mention expensive. But staying in an unhappy situation can cost you even more. Torres knows this firsthand and wants to share the tips she wished she had when her “perfect life” was dragging her down.

Buying a home doesn’t always buy you happiness

When many of us approach our 30s, we begin measuring our achievements and successes against our peers’. This need for comparison combined with the pressure from our communities and society can lead us to make financial decisions that aren’t aligned with what we actually want in life, Torres said. 

When Torres turned 30, she found herself buying a home in a state of autopilot. She didn’t stop to ask herself if she even wanted to buy a home. She just knew she felt behind her peers and assumed that’s what she was supposed to do.

She wasn’t even sure if she was financially ready to be a homeowner. But fear of missing out and the idea that buying a house was the next logical step convinced her to take the plunge. 

“The pinnacle of success in my Puerto Rican family is to buy a home,” said Torres. “That’s how you know you’ve made it.”

Advertisement

After three years, she realized she was living somewhere she didn’t love, and sold the home for $10,000 less than what she bought it for. 

“It was not a great financial decision in the short term, but in the long term, it definitely set me up for success,” Torres said.

Having the courage to make a choice that contradicted what society had led her to believe she should do changed her life. “Getting rid of my home was the single largest factor in me being able to pursue financial independence,” said Torres. 

“The most rewarding thing is being able to pour into my relationships and prioritize my happiness and health because money is no longer a factor that controls my life.”

Advertisement

Torres traded in her $3,500 monthly mortgage in New Jersey for her dream rental in the Tampa Bay area for $1,600 a month. Six years later, Torres still rents and isn’t in a hurry to buy a home. She pays more than she did in 2018, but for her, it’s worth it. She enjoys the year-round nice weather and no state income tax — which is a benefit to being a self-employed high-income earner, she added. 

Don’t get married without protecting your money

As much as we want some life decisions to work out, they don’t always. No one enters into a marriage expecting a divorce, but that’s how many marriages end. Maintaining separate bank accounts and creating a postnuptial agreement allowed Torres to get out of her marriage financially unscathed. But it could have been much harder if she hadn’t planned ahead. 

Combining finances can make sense for shared bills, but Torres recommends always having your own money set aside. It’s sage advice for anyone moving in with a partner or contemplating marriage. 

Advertisement

“One of the advantages that I had, especially in the process of getting divorced was I always kept my finances separate.”

If you’re not sure where to start, Torres suggests growing an emergency fund in an individual savings account. This money can help you get out of a situation that’s no longer working for you. Stashing the money in a high-yield savings account can help you earn a competitive interest rate, while making it easy to access your funds when you need them.

If you don’t love your career, it’s not too late to change paths

Torres spent $55,000 in student loans to get a bachelor’s degree in molecular biology and a master’s In biotechnology only to end up in a 9-to-5 corporate job that was draining her. She was making a decent salary. But the student loan debt and unfulfilling career had her questioning her choices.

At 36, she decided to go into business for herself — a big shift, but one she felt she had to try. 

Advertisement

She didn’t jump ship from her full-time job until she had her new business set up correctly. She took her time to build up a bigger emergency fund — just in case — and looked into retirement and healthcare plans to make sure she was protected when she left her job. She also made sure to set up her business as an S-corporation so she could pay herself regular paychecks, while setting aside enough money for business costs and taxes. 

And she has no regrets. “Taking the extra time to make sure that those things were in place made me feel like I built something that’s sustainable versus something for the short term,” said Torres. 

Now she’s her own boss, creates her own schedule and is doing work that’s rewarding. Some days, she’s coaching clients or building a new course. Other days it’s recording podcast episodes or creating social media content. And when she needs a break, she loves that she has the freedom to book an impromptu trip. 

“The most rewarding thing is being able to pour into my relationships and prioritize my happiness and health because money is no longer a factor that controls my life,” said Torres.

Life’s too short to settle

Although Torres encourages her followers to get out of unhappy situations as soon as they can, she also stresses taking the time you need to prepare. Planning to leave a marriage or start a small business may require saving money for several months. 

Advertisement

Make moves in the meantime to better yourself, she said. For example, if you want to change roles at your job, think about how you can pivot without having to pay a significant amount in school costs. Are there opportunities at your current workplace to mentor in a different department or shadow someone in a career you’re interested in? Maybe you can lean on free resources online, like a free or low-cost boot camp to earn a certification.

“That could put you on a path to making a pivot without you having to go and get a whole other degree,” she added.

It’s OK if you can’t make a change immediately, but don’t be complacent. Before you know it, five to 10 years will have passed and you may be in the same situation. 

You may never be 100% ready to take the plunge. But preparing as much as you can in advance can help you feel more secure, so you’re not tempted to idle in a situation that’s holding you back.

“The worst thing you can do is use money as the reason why you’re going to stay stuck in the situation,” said Torres.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Finance

UK cities where families ‘losing significant cash in the bin due to food waste’

Published

on

UK cities where families ‘losing significant cash in the bin due to food waste’

Families in Glasgow, Liverpool and Nottingham are particularly likely to be wasting high amounts of money on food that goes uneaten, a survey indicates.

The survey of more than 2,000 UK parents of children aged four to 12 found that 60% said their children refuse to eat a meal they are served at least once a week.

The average amount that parents estimated their family wasted annually on uneaten food was £283 – with families in Glasgow estimating they waste £369 on average, according to the research for Bernard Matthews.

Liverpool was another food waste hotspot in the survey, with an estimated £316 wasted annually typically by families, while in Nottingham, the average annual food waste bill was found to be £315.

In London and Belfast, families were also found to be wasting more than £300 per year on average on uneaten food, according to the research, carried out by Censuswide in May.

Advertisement

At the other end of the spectrum, families in Bristol estimated they were wasting £198 per year typically.

Half (50%) of parents surveyed felt that encouraging their child to play with food would help to reduce the pressure.

Laurence Hinton, head of marketing at Bernard Matthews, said: “Parents agree that playing with your food can take some of the pressure out of mealtimes, encouraging children to engage positively with food and ultimately making family meals more enjoyable and less wasteful.”

Here are the average amounts parents estimate they waste on food annually across various UK cities, according to the survey:

Glasgow, £369

Advertisement

Liverpool, £316

Nottingham, £315

London, £312

Belfast, £306

Leeds, £299

Advertisement

Edinburgh, £291

Newcastle, £286

Cardiff, £285

Birmingham, £277`

Manchester, £252

Advertisement

Sheffield, £251

Plymouth, £250

Brighton, £243

Southampton, £240

Norwich, £235

Advertisement

Bristol, £198

Continue Reading

Finance

Personal Finance: New housing affordability law has promising provisions | Chattanooga Times Free Press

Published

on

Personal Finance: New housing affordability law has promising provisions | Chattanooga Times Free Press

On June 23, members of Congress did something commendable and all too rare: They came together to pass legislation in a broadly bipartisan move to address the housing affordability crisis in the U.S. The new law, designated the 21st Century Road to Housing Act, includes an expansive compilation of 56 separate provisions aimed at increasing the supply of housing, improving access to financing and limiting ownership by large financial institutions.

The act is more evolutionary than revolutionary, since many of the barriers are down to state and local zoning and building codes that are beyond the reach of the federal government. Still, the measure creates a framework for streamlining local permitting, removes several obstacles to expansion of manufactured homes and includes many incremental incentives that should materially improve the supply of residential housing units over time.

Housing affordability has emerged as a public policy priority in recent years, as costs have accelerated faster than incomes since the COVID pandemic. The median price of a single-family home today is $440,000, up 50% over the past six years according to the National Association of Realtors. Zillow reports that the cost to rent a single-family home has risen by 45% over the same period, while apartment rents are up 28%. Meanwhile, median nominal household income has risen by just 25% since 2020.

The housing bill cleared the House of Representatives on a vote of 358 to 32 and passed in the U.S. Senate by a margin of 85 to 5, a commendable accomplishment. However, on June 24, the president abruptly cancelled a scheduled signing ceremony in reaction to the Senate’s unwillingness to pass new voter restrictions, calling the housing act a “big yawn.” Legislators from both parties were blindsided, having anticipated a high-profile bipartisan victory to tout in advance of the approaching midterm elections.

The president’s action did provide Americans with an interesting constitutional lesson. When Congress passes a bill, the president may either sign it into law or veto the bill, challenging Congress to muster a 2/3 majority to override the veto. However, the president can also simply refuse to sign, in which case the bill becomes law after 10 calendar days, excluding Sundays, if Congress is in session. The 21st Century Road to Housing Act therefore went into effect automatically at midnight on July 11.

Advertisement

Among the numerous provisions in the law, a few stand out as particularly promising.

Manufactured housing. In what may be the most impactful action, the act eliminates one of the biggest impediments to expanding manufactured housing: the permanent chassis requirement. Since 1976, thanks to lobbying from traditional homebuilding interests, the federal government has forbidden the removal of the heavy steel trailer on which the unit was built even though 90% are never moved, and many are set on permanent foundations. This rule is risibly applied even in cases where an additional unit was stacked to form a second story. As I wrote in this space in October, factory-built homes can be produced more efficiently and therefore more affordably through mass production techniques. Eliminating the useless chassis after delivery could save a typical buyer an additional 5% and 10% of the purchase price as well as qualifying for more traditional mortgage financing.

Financial incentives to cities. Although the act does not include any additional federal funding, it directs a significant reallocation of existing incentives. The 1970s-era Community Development Block Grant program is reimagined, providing extra grant funding to high-cost metro areas that move aggressively to build affordable housing. The program is cost neutral, transferring funds from other cities that continue to discourage new unit construction through restrictive local policies.

Improving access to financing. Nearly half of the surge in housing costs is due to sharply higher mortgage interest rates since 2020. The housing act cannot impact rates, but it does provide additional access to financing. Small dollar loans of $100,000 or less will now be eligible for Federal Housing Administration guarantees, providing more access to lower-income buyers. The act also more than doubles the Federal Housing Administration loan limit for multifamily housing units.

Promoting rental homebuilding. The role of large institutions in purchasing single-family homes since the 2008 financial crisis has garnered significant public attention. The housing bill strikes a constructive balance.

Advertisement

“Large institutional investors”, defined in the bill as investors holding 350 or more single-family residences, are now prohibited from acquiring additional homes subject to specific exemptions. For instance, homes purchased for the specific purpose of renovation for rental are excluded. These institutional investors are also not required to divest their existing holdings.

Importantly, the restrictions do not apply to so-called build-to-rent acquisitions wherein large investors purchase newly constructed homes specifically for rental. Economic research generally finds that large investor ownership tends to push up home purchase prices to buyers but reduces pressure on rent costs by adding to supply, just what the doctor ordered.

Local zoning and permitting reforms. As mentioned above, states and municipalities retain jurisdiction for their own local building and zoning codes, many of which have served to hinder the construction of more affordable residential units. The new housing act directs the Department of Housing and Urban Development to create a template incorporating best practices for modernizing zoning and land use policies to support more housing construction and renovation.

A curiously unrelated addition to the bill forbids the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital cryptocurrency version of the U.S. dollar, called a stablecoin, until 2030. The crypto industry has vigorously opposed an official U.S. stablecoin and accounted for nearly half of all corporate political contributions to federal election candidates in 2024. The president himself has amassed $1.4 billion in profits from his various crypto ventures since taking office in 2025.

Additional elements include a variety of incremental pilot projects, regulatory reforms and tweaks to existing federal housing programs that, taken together, could also have a meaningful impact and set the stage for further progress based upon the results. And perhaps most important: bipartisan cooperation, compromise and agreement.

Advertisement

Christopher A. Hopkins, CFA, is a co-founder of Apogee Wealth Partners in Chattanooga.

Continue Reading

Finance

Former Bank chief financial officer sentenced to three years for $4.3 million loan fraud

Published

on

Former Bank chief financial officer sentenced to three years for .3 million loan fraud

LINCOLN, Neb. (KOLN) – A former bank chief financial officer was sentenced to three years in prison for a bank fraud scheme involving a car wash and undisclosed debts in a $4.3 million loan scheme.

The Department of Justice said Aaron T. Luneke, 44, of Columbus, was sentenced after being convicted of committing bank fraud and attempted bank fraud in connection with loans he sought to build and operate a Legacy Express Wash, a car wash in Columbus.

According to the DOJ, Luneke was sentenced to 36 months’ imprisonment. There is no parole in the federal system.

After his release from prison, Luneke will begin a five-year term of supervised release. Luneke was also ordered to pay a $10,000 fine.

The jury found that Luneke attempted to defraud Stearns Bank, located in St. Cloud, Minnesota, by using fraudulent and inflated contractor invoices to artificially inflate the valuation of the car wash property in pursuit of a $3.5 million refinancing loan. Further evidence at trial established that Luneke failed to reveal significant personal debts owed to family members in connection with the Stearns Bank loan application.

Advertisement

The jury also found that Luneke defrauded Bank of the Valley by submitting fraudulent and inflated invoices from contractors as the basis for additional construction loan proceeds, obtaining two loans totaling approximately $4,320,000.

At the sentencing, the judge found that Luneke’s abuse of his position as chief financial officer at Bank of the Valley significantly allowed for the fraud against the victim bank to occur, and helped to conceal the crime.

The DOJ said the court further determined that Luneke employed sophisticated means to carry out the scheme, and that he served an aggravating role by organizing, leading, managing, or supervising others in executing aspects of the fraud.

Luneke also obstructed justice by providing false testimony during trial and caused a victim to suffer substantial financial hardship.

Click here to subscribe to our 10/11 NOW daily digest and breaking news alerts delivered straight to your email inbox.

Advertisement

Copyright 2026 KOLN. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending