The Main Street Depositor Protection Act is the latest example. The name sounds noble. The math is not.
Here is what the bill would change. The FDIC is the federal agency that pays you back if your bank closes its doors. Today, it covers up to $250,000 in each account. Most people never come close to that limit. Most small businesses do not either.

The bill would let the FDIC raise that limit as high as $5 million for business checking accounts that pay no interest. That is not a small bump. That is twenty times bigger.

Supporters say the change will help small community banks and the small businesses they serve. I wish that were true. It is not.

The current $250,000 limit already covers 99 out of every 100 bank accounts in this country. A study by JPMorgan Chase found that the typical small business keeps about $12,100 in its account on a normal day. The new limit would be more than 400 times higher than that.

So who really gains from a $5 million guarantee? Not the corner bakery. Not the family barbershop. Not the small farm down the road. The gain goes to the biggest depositors at the biggest banks. The bill even covers banks with more than $100 billion to their name. Fewer than one in 100 banks in America are that big. No honest person would call them “small.”

In other words, the bill takes the name of Main Street and hands the prize to Wall Street.

Here is the part that should worry every American. Insurance is not free. When the FDIC raises its guarantee, banks must pay more to fund it. When banks pay more, they lend less. When they lend less, the door closes hardest on the people who are already locked out.

Black-owned businesses are already turned down for loans 39 percent of the time. That is more than double the 18 percent rate for white-owned businesses.

Hispanic-owned businesses face a 29 percent denial rate. These are the dreamers most likely to hear “no” when they walk into a bank. A new cost on lending will make that “no” come faster and louder.

The economy runs on loans. When loans dry up, the trouble spreads. The Great Recession of 2008 began exactly that way. The people who pay the highest price are never the wealthiest. They are the families with the least cushion to fall back on.

The bill does offer a small shield to community banks under $10 billion. They would not pay the higher costs for ten years. That is a kind gesture. But the wider damage to the loan market will not wait ten years to arrive.

There is one more problem. Deposit insurance works in part because it has limits. Limits force big depositors to pay attention to where they put their money. That attention keeps banks honest. Take the limit away, and you take the watchdog away too. The taxpayer is left to clean up the mess.

The goal of helping Main Street is a good one. This bill is not the way to reach it.

If Congress wants to help small business, it should make loans easier and fairer to get. It should invest in the neighborhoods that banks have ignored for too long. It should knock down the doors that have stayed shut for Black and Hispanic business owners for generations.

And if big corporations want extra protection for their millions, they can pay for it themselves. The taxpayer should not be asked to insure the comfort of the rich while the dreams of working families go unfunded.

Read the name of a bill. Then read the math. The two should match. On the Main Street Depositor Protection Act, they do not.

Written by Ben Jealous

Official website; https://twitter.com/BenJealous

Some of that weight you putting on ain’t just from food.

It’s coming from everything you holding in.

I’ve been around this fitness game long enough to see the same story play out over and over. A brother comes in, looks me dead in the face, and says, “Man, I don’t even eat like that. I don’t get it.” And I believe him. Half the time he really isn’t overeating like people assume.

But then we start talking for real.

Not just reps, not just meals… life.

Work stressing him out. Bills stacking up. Family depending on him. No real break. No real peace. Just go, go, go. Day after day.

And somewhere in all that… his body starts changing.

Not loud. Not all at once. Quiet.

That stomach starts pushing out a little more. Energy ain’t the same. Clothes fit different. He brushes it off at first. Says he’ll tighten up later.

Later keeps getting pushed back.

Here’s the part nobody really explains to us growing up. When your mind stays under pressure, your body reacts like you in danger all the time. It don’t know the difference between a real threat and everyday stress. It just knows something ain’t right.

So it holds on.

Holds on to fat. Holds on to energy. Slows things down.

That’s why you can be eating decent and still gaining. Your body ain’t in a state to let go of anything. It’s in protect mode.

And for Black men… let’s be honest… we carry a lot.

We taught early to deal with it. Don’t complain. Don’t show too much. Handle your business. Be strong. That sounds good, but what happens when you never let anything out?

It builds.

Not just in your head… in your body.

I’ve seen brothers who barely eat breakfast, grab something quick during the day, maybe a regular dinner… and still can’t lose that gut. They think they doing something wrong with food. Nah. It’s deeper than that.

You walking around tense all day.

Shoulders tight. Jaw tight. Mind racing.

That does something to you over time.

And then sleep gets messed up. That’s another big one. A lot of us ain’t really resting, we just laying down. You ever wake up still tired like you ain’t sleep at all? That’s your mind still working all night.

Thinking about money. Thinking about problems. Thinking about what tomorrow might bring.

That ain’t rest.

When your sleep off, everything else falls behind it. You start craving quick food. Sugary stuff. Anything that gives you a little boost. You don’t feel like moving as much. You more irritated. More drained.

Now combine that with stress already sitting in your system… weight starts creeping on.

Quiet.

No big moment. No warning.

Just little by little.

I remember one dude I worked with, mid 40s, solid brother. Took care of everybody but himself. That’s how it usually go. He came in frustrated. Said he tried different diets, even tried working out harder.

Nothing stuck.

Once we really talked, I found out he hadn’t had a real moment to himself in years. Everything was about providing. Everything was about making sure everybody else straight.

That pressure sat on him every day.

We didn’t just change his food. We changed how he moved through his day. Small things. Taking time to breathe. Actually sitting still for a minute. Getting some real rest when he could.

Over time… his body started responding.

Not because of some magic workout. Because his system finally got a break.

That’s the part people miss.

You can’t beat your body into shape if your life is out of balance.

And look, I ain’t saying food don’t matter. It does. But if you ignore what’s going on mentally, you only solving half the problem.

Another thing I see a lot is what I call low key eating. Not full meals, just grabbing stuff here and there. You stressed, you reach for something. You bored, you reach for something. You don’t even realize how often you doing it.

It adds up.

And when your body already holding on to everything, that extra intake sticks quicker.

Then you got the energy side of it. Not lazy… just worn down. Big difference. When your mind tired, your body follows. You skip workouts. Or you go, but you ain’t really there.

You going through the motions.

I’ve been there myself. Times where I was training, but my mind was somewhere else. Felt heavy. Felt off. Took me a minute to realize I needed to check what was going on internally, not just physically.

Once I did that, everything started lining back up.

So what can you do about it?

First thing… pay attention to how you actually feel. Not what you tell people. What’s really going on. Are you always on edge? Always thinking? Always carrying something?

Be honest with yourself.

Second… find moments to slow down. I ain’t talking about hours. Even a few minutes matters. Sit in your car before you go inside. Turn everything off. Just breathe.

Sounds simple, but most of us don’t do it.

Breathing right can calm your system more than you think. Deep breaths, slow, steady. It tells your body you good. You safe.

Movement helps too, but don’t always make it about going hard. Sometimes a walk does more for you than a heavy session. Clears your head. Loosens your body up.

Drink more water. I know that sound basic, but a lot of brothers ain’t drinking enough. That alone can mess with your hunger and your energy.

And sleep… do what you can to improve it. Cut the noise down before bed. Give your mind a chance to slow down.

Last thing… talk to somebody.

Not everything got to stay inside you. Find somebody you trust. Let some of that weight go. You don’t lose strength by speaking up. You gain control.

At the end of the day, this ain’t just about looking better.

It’s about feeling right.

Because when your mind is right, your body follows.

But if you ignore what’s going on inside, that weight gonna keep showing up on the outside… no matter how hard you train.

And that’s the truth a lot of people won’t tell you.

Staff Writer; Lee Walker

This brother is a fitness trainer with 12 years of experience, focused on building strength, clarity, and real health in the Black community.

Have questions? Reach me at LeeW@ThyBlackMan.com.

As to Caltech, Daniel McCarthy of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute writes: “In the most recent City Journal college rankings, Caltech took the top spot for ‘value added to career,’ but languished at a dismal 95th place for ‘student ideological diversity.’

“The rankings noted the school’s ‘disproportionately large Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion bureaucracy’ — with ‘roughly ten DEI staff members per 1,000 students’ — and its ‘overwhelmingly liberal’ student body, ’16 liberal students for every conservative.'”

Education, by itself, is not the problem. The problem is something else: ideological certainty reinforced in environments where dissenting views are scarce.

In 2024, The Duke Chronicle wrote: “In the Harvard Crimson’s spring 2023 faculty survey, 31.8% of respondents drawn from Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences identified as ‘very liberal,’ while 45.3% of respondents identified as ‘liberal.’ Fewer than 3% of respondents identified as ‘conservative’ (2.5%) or ‘very conservative’ (0.4%).”

What happens when smart people are surrounded mostly by others who think the same way? Often, it produces not wisdom, but moral certainty — an unshakable belief that one’s conclusions are not just correct, but righteous.

A survey from the Skeptic Research Center suggested those with graduate degrees are nearly twice as likely to believe “violence is often necessary to create social change.” The Skeptic Research Center wrote: “In the politically tumultuous Summer of 2020, PEW reported the results of a survey indicating that 80 percent of Americans have ‘none’ or ‘just a few’ friends with political views different from their own. A few years later, the American Psychiatric Association found that around 20 percent of Americans had become estranged from family due to political disagreements, with an additional 20 percent skipping family events because of political disagreements. Another recent study found that around 1 in 6 Americans have ended or considered ending a romantic relationship because of a political disagreement.”

My closest friend — someone I had known for more than 40 years — ended our friendship over Trump. A law professor, he received a perfect score on his SAT. He has a son with special needs. But he became convinced that Trump had mocked a disabled reporter out of cruelty.

I explained that Trump did mock the reporter, but not because of the reporter’s disability. Trump ridiculed the reporter because, in Trump’s opinion, the reporter distanced himself from his own article when Trump used it to corroborate an assertion Trump made that on 9/11, some Muslims in New Jersey were seen cheering the collapse of the Twin Towers. I referred my friend to a website called Catholics4Trump with a video from several other instances where Trump used his hand waving “mocking” gesture to make fun of himself, an able-bodied general and others.

“Why,” I asked my friend, “would I support someone who would do such a thing? Why would his supporters? And what politician would think it is a good idea to get votes by mocking a disabled person?”

But this narrative stuck. In 2016, before the election, NBC News wrote: “When asked in a recent Bloomberg poll what bothered them most about Donald Trump — of a slew of controversies — likely voters picked one action above all others: When the candidate mocked a reporter with a disability last November.”

Trump, of course, denied the accusation and insisted he was unaware of the reporter’s disability. The reporter, in fact, is a calm, articulate speaker who does not wave his hands in the comic fashion as Trump did.

None of this mattered to my friend. And it struck me. Once someone, no matter how intelligent or well-educated, is invested in hating Trump, no amount of information or alternative explanation would make him unhate Trump.

As to the would-be assassin, the question is not how much he learned, but whether he ever learned to question his beliefs — and whether in his environment this was encouraged, tolerated or punished.

Columnist; Larry Elder

Official website; http://www.larryelder.com

The term itself dates back to 1812, when then-Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed legislation redrawing legislative districts to benefit his Democratic-Republican Party. A newspaper, the Boston Gazette, famously mocked one contorted district as resembling a salamander, giving rise to the term “gerrymander.” While the name may sound quaint, the strategy it describes is anything but. The objective remains clear: Concentrate opposition voters into a small number of districts while distributing one’s own supporters efficiently across many, thereby maximizing political advantage and securing representation far beyond what statewide voter preferences might justify.

Recent developments underscore how entrenched and aggressive this practice has become. In Texas, congressional districts were redrawn in a way that favors Republicans in 30 of 38 seats, a notable gain. In response, Virginia has pursued a redistricting approach that could give Democrats an advantage in 10 of its 11 districts, significantly shifting the balance in their favor. This tit-for-tat dynamic is no longer confined to a handful of states. Mid-decade redistricting, once an anomaly, has spread across North Carolina, Ohio, Missouri and California, with Florida still weighing its options. Yet despite these aggressive maneuvers, the overall partisan balance in the House of Representatives remains largely unchanged, revealing the limits of strategic mapmaking when both sides are equally determined to game the system.

Traditionally, redistricting occurred once every 10 years following the census, reflecting population shifts and preserving a sense of procedural fairness. The Supreme Court reinforced this principle in Wesberry v. Sanders, requiring districts of roughly equal population under the “one person, one vote” standard. But that norm is steadily eroding. Facing the prospect of losing congressional control and escalating political pressures, President Donald Trump encouraged Texas to redraw its districts mid-cycle. That decision triggered parallel responses in Democratic-leaning states, accelerating a dangerous cycle of retaliation.

The consequences extend far beyond partisan advantage. The erosion of redistricting norms contributes to a Congress that is increasingly polarized and structurally resistant to compromise. When electoral outcomes are largely predetermined by district design, the incentive to appeal to a broad cross-section of voters diminishes. Instead, candidates are driven to satisfy the most ideologically committed voters within their party’s primaries. The result is a legislature populated by extremes, less willing to negotiate and more inclined toward gridlock. In such an environment, legislative paralysis becomes the norm, and power gradually shifts toward the executive branch, which faces fewer institutional constraints in acting unilaterally.

This trajectory should concern anyone invested in the health of our democracy. Politics, at its best, is not a zero-sum contest where one side’s gain must come at the other’s expense. It is, or should be, a process of negotiation, compromise and shared progress. Yet today, only about 40 of the 435 House seats are considered genuinely competitive. In nearly 90 percent of districts, the decisive contest occurs not in the general election but in the party primary, an arena that often attracts the most ideologically driven voters. As a result, elected officials increasingly reflect the edges of the political spectrum rather than its center, making consensus both politically risky and practically rare.

Is there a path out of this vicious cycle? The Supreme Court addressed the issue in Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), ruling that partisan gerrymandering presents a political question beyond the reach of federal courts. In doing so, the court effectively removed itself as a referee in disputes over district fairness. Congress retains the authority, under Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution, to regulate congressional elections and could, in theory, prohibit partisan gerrymandering. But given the deep divisions within Congress, such legislation remains unlikely.

That leaves reform largely in the hands of the states and their citizens. As of April 2026, nine states — Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, New York and Washington — have adopted independent redistricting commissions, often composed of citizens rather than politicians, to draw district lines. In addition, courts in several states, including Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, have interpreted their constitutions to limit partisan gerrymandering. Some states, such as Oregon and Michigan, have gone further by embedding explicit prohibitions against partisan advantage into their governing documents. These efforts represent meaningful attempts to restore fairness and public confidence, though they remain uneven and, in some cases, politically contested.

Still, it is important not to overstate the role of gerrymandering in driving polarization. Members of the United States Senate are elected statewide, without the influence of district boundaries. There are no Senate gerrymanders. Yet the Senate exhibits many of the same characteristics as the House: ideological rigidity, partisan division and legislative stalemate. The deeper problem, therefore, is not merely structural. It is cultural.

Former Sen. Lamar Alexander once reflected on the wisdom of his mentor, former Sen. Howard Baker, who often said, “The other fellow might be right.” That simple acknowledgment rooted in humility and openness has become increasingly rare in modern political discourse. Today’s environment rewards certainty and confrontation, not reflection and collaboration.

If we are to bridge the widening political divide, reform must extend beyond redistricting maps and legal frameworks. It must begin with a change in mindset. Public servants should approach their responsibilities with a measure of humility, recognizing that no party holds a monopoly on truth or wisdom.

Perhaps the most meaningful step forward is also the simplest: that those entrusted with governing begin each day with a quiet, honest reflection: I could be wrong.

Written by Armstrong Williams

Official website; http://twitter.com/Arightside

This leaves the Republicans with 9% of the state’s congressional representation, despite Republicans and Republican-leaning voters comprising nearly half of the state’s electorate. The gerrymandering war demonstrates the latest action-reaction dynamic in electoral politics while becoming another example of Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion. Newton’s third law states that for every action (force) in nature, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

This means if object A exerts a force on object B, object B will exert an equal and opposite force on object A. President Donald Trump started this current redistricting madness by pressuring Texas legislators to adopt a map that favored Republicans in five seats currently held by Democrats. When Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the Republican-led legislature complied, the Democrats didn’t accept it without a national fight. Voters in California and now Virginia have aggressively pushed back, “Donald Trump and Republicans launched this gerrymandering war,” House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters. “And we’ve made clear as Democrats that we’re going to finish it.” The political version of Newton’s third law is definitely in play with the president pushing Republicans to gerrymander their states on one side and the House minority leader doing the same with the Democrats on the other.

As I lead a social justice ministry at a local church in Maryland, we are challenged with the reality that many people are not paying attention to and understanding the political climate we face. Particularly, those with long-lasting consequences for the Black community. During a recent SJM meeting, I asked the members to tell me why they felt so many Black people do not consistently vote. The purpose of the question was to identify the reasons and then discuss ways to address them.

The variety of answers included: people don’t understand the voting process and its impact, people are in “survival mode” and focused more on the personal issues of their lives, people see politics as a game and are turned off by it, people don’t vote because there is too much division and voting adds to the division, people lost hope and believe their vote doesn’t count. Each response is understandable. The gerrymandering war can easily turn off voters because it is a game. It is a political game that reflects the constant power grabs for control in our social and political systems, and it feeds into the wide range of reasons people don’t vote.

If I were a voter in Virginia, I too would have voted for the referendum’s passage. In the past, I disagreed with any methods of mapmaking that disproportionally and unfairly flip congressional seats. Generally, gerrymandering is wrong when both parties act to predetermine election results. Before this latest war, Democratic states such as Maryland, New York, and Illinois were already heavily gerrymandered. But these are not normal times, and Newton’s law is needed to keep the aggressive Republican tactics in check.

People must always have the assurance that their one vote does matter, even in this toxic political climate. The results of gerrymandered districts remain in the hands of the voters. The positive signs from Texas show that Hispanic support is not guaranteed to meet 2024 levels. As a result, the president’s plan to create five GOP-friendly districts may actually backfire. While people are correct in their assessment about the divisiveness of politics, it should never mean that political power and control are automatically turned over to elected officials by not casting their vote. Applying Newton’s law to aggressive Republican tactics doesn’t have to be left solely to Democratic-controlled state legislatures. It still comes down to voters in the general elections, especially in gerrymandered districts that remain competitive. It is an encouraging sign to see the opposition party step up. Just as the Democratic leadership pushed back on the issue of gerrymandering by way of a national strategy, can they do the same with the anti-DEI attacks?

Written by David W. Marshall

Official website; https://davidwmarshallauthor.com/

One may purchase his book, which is titled; God Bless Our Divided America: Unity, Politics and History from a Biblical Perspective.

You look down one day and it’s not just a little softness. It’s pressure. It’s your shirts fitting different. It’s bending down and feeling it. That’s when it hits you.

Now here’s the part people don’t break down properly. Belly fat is tied to how we live, not just what we eat. You can’t outwork a lifestyle that’s out of balance. I’ve seen brothers train hard and still carry that gut because everything outside the gym is working against them.

Stress is one of the biggest pieces nobody wants to deal with. Not talk about, deal with. A lot of us stay in go mode. Work, bills, family, expectations, all of that sitting on your shoulders. You might not feel it mentally all the time, but your body does. That pressure turns into hormones that tell your body to hold onto fat. Especially around your stomach.

So you got a man working all day, maybe even hitting the gym, but he’s constantly tense. Sleeping light. Mind racing. That belly is not just food. That’s life weight.

And speaking of sleep, a lot of brothers cheat themselves there. Staying up late, waking up early, running on fumes. You might feel like you’re handling business, but your body is struggling to recover. When you don’t rest, your system gets thrown off. Hunger goes up, discipline drops, fat loss slows down. It all connects whether we want to admit it or not.

Now let’s talk about food without acting like we don’t know what we like. We grew up on flavor. Food that actually means something. Nobody is trying to live on dry salads and pretend that’s satisfying. But at the same time, everything can’t be heavy, fried, or loaded every single day.

It’s not even about cutting everything out. It’s about how often you’re going there. If every meal is rich, if every drink got sugar in it, if late night eating is a habit, that belly is going to stay right where it is.

And portion size, that’s a quiet problem. We eat until we feel full full. Not satisfied, full. That extra little bit every meal turns into something over time. You don’t notice it day to day, but months later it shows up in your midsection.

Let me clear something up too. You can do all the sit ups in the world and still have a stomach. That’s one of the biggest myths out here. Working your abs is good, but it’s not going to melt the fat off your belly by itself. Your body drops fat based on overall habits, not just one area you focus on.

So what actually works then.

You build muscle and you move consistently. That’s the foundation. Lifting weights changes your body over time. It makes you stronger, but it also helps your body burn more even when you’re not working out. Cardio keeps things moving. It doesn’t have to be extreme. Walking counts. Being active counts. Sitting all day and expecting results is where people get stuck.

And consistency matters more than anything. Not motivation. Not hype. Just showing up. Even on days you don’t feel like it.

Another thing we don’t like to admit is how alcohol plays into this. A couple drinks here and there turns into a regular thing. Then it starts slowing everything down. Fat loss, recovery, decision making. It’s not just the drink itself, it’s what comes with it. Late food, missed workouts, low energy the next day.

Water sounds basic, but a lot of us are not drinking enough of it. Everything is soda, juice, something flavored. Your body needs water to function right. Even fat loss depends on that more than people think.

Now I want to get into mindset because that’s where most people fall off. A lot of men don’t really believe they can change once that belly gets to a certain point. They try for a little while, don’t see quick results, then go back to old habits.

This is not fast. That’s the truth. If it took time to build, it’s going to take time to come off. But if you stay steady, it will move. I’ve seen it too many times not to believe it.

You also have to stop comparing yourself to other people. Some men lose weight faster. Some don’t carry it in the stomach the same way. That has nothing to do with your journey. You focus on your own body and what it responds to.

Age is real too. What you got away with in your twenties might not work now. You might have to eat a little cleaner, move a little more, rest a little better. That’s not punishment. That’s just adjustment.

And genetics, yeah that plays a role. Some of us are built to hold weight in the midsection. But that doesn’t mean you’re stuck with it. It just means you have to stay on point longer. That’s it.

Let me keep it simple in a way you can actually use.

Wake up and drink some water before anything else. Get your body going.

Try to move every day. Even if it’s just a walk. Don’t let a whole day go by with no movement.

Lift weights a few times a week. Focus on getting stronger, not just sweating.

Watch how often you’re eating heavy meals. You don’t have to cut them out, just don’t make it every meal.

Pay attention to how much you’re eating. You don’t need to be stuffed to be satisfied.

Get some real sleep. Not passing out, actual rest.

Be honest about your stress. Find something that helps you slow down mentally.

Cut back on drinking if it’s regular.

That’s it. Nothing fancy. Just real habits done over time.

Showing up for working-class people requires President Trump to first, recognize and acknowledge the plight of American workers;

1) The most accurate and comprehensive March unemployment rate, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) economists is, actually 8.0%, and not his official or political rate of 4.3%

and

2) Working class Americans shifting their vote helped Mr. Trump immensely. They did this because they were disgusted with Democrats underreporting unemployment numbers, and at the same time allowing millions of economic immigrants into the country, who competed for available Jobs.

Now, unemployment, affordability (inflated prices) and Jobs, are issues, being weaponized by Democrats, and being used to defeat Republicans in the coming midterm elections. But American voters are not spoiling for a bitter fight, they just want effective, and doable solutions to the issues of Jobs and affordability. Mr. Trump, constant promotion of his notion, he is overseeing a great economy, is in no way a solution. Polls reflecting voters’ disenchantment with his handling of the economy will not and cannot be easily dismissed. A notion is an opinion, not an answer to the problems of high unemployment, and economic prosperity.

We know for sure, it is time for American voters to speak with one voice, when it comes to the real unemployment rate, if voters are going to get positive action, when it comes to the creation of millions of good paying Jobs. Competing and confusing views, as to what the real unemployment rate is, only serves the best interest of – and let us face facts – politicians, like President Trump, Senator Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority leader, and Senator Elizabeth Warren, social media influencer, as it leads to ineptness, and slow or no action, when it comes to solutions, to the #1 issues of Jobs and the economy. As stated above, American voters want to see doable and effective solutions, which these politicians have yet to produce.

The Trump administration promotes the U-3 category rate from the Table of Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization, as the most comprehensive and accurate rate of the nation’s monthly unemployment situation, which for March, our latest report month is 4.3%. The U-3 rate measures persons, who actively looked for a Job in the last four weeks. So, if you are unemployed, and have not actively looked for a Job in the past 4 weeks, “you are not considered by Trump to be unemployed.”

Additionally, the 4.3% is representative of another very important benchmark. Investopedia, a highly regarded financial educational web site, which states their experts offer more than 250 years plus of combined experience to ensure they are giving readers the most accurate information, states, “Unemployment of 5% or lower is often considered full employment in a real-world context.”

Essentially, President Donald J. Trump is telling Americans and its labor force of 170 million workers, that there is no compelling reason to be concerned about Joblessness. The U-3 category rate, 4.3%, implies, if these fully employed Americans, in his fully employed economy, wanted to switch Jobs in pursuit of a better Job; per President Donald Trump they could do this with relative ease, as there are enough Jobs being produced monthly in his economy, to allow them to do so.

Working-class people know for sure that is not true or accurate, because they are living and working in Trump’s Top 10%-20% $3.4 Trillion Tax Cut driven economy, to billionaires, millionaires and corporations. The Bureau of Labor Statistics showed 178,000 Jobs were created in March, however when you average Job creation out over the last 3 months in Trump’s erratic economy, we get a different story. January saw 160,000 Jobs created: February saw no Jobs created, as a matter of fact, there was 133,000 Jobs lost. Thus, the average number of Jobs created over the last 3 months is 68,000; woefully inadequate, when it comes to switching Jobs, when you consider the nation has a 170-million-person labor force.

Furthermore, we know for sure, President Trump’s action, in promoting the U-3 category rate as the most accurate and comprehensive rate does not line up with the Bureau of Labor Statistics economists conclusion, who declared in 1994, when the unemployment rates were adjusted, under the Clinton administration, the U-6 category rate of unemployment is the most accurate and comprehensive rate. That rate for March is 8.0%, almost two times the rate of Trump’s political rate of 4.3%. The 8.0% rate means, 8 out of every 100 workers cannot find a full time Job that pays a living wage, as these workers understand what a living wage is, in Trump’s poor economy. The African American rate is 2.7% higher at 10.7%.

We know for sure, the Trump administration, when they promote the U-3 category rate as being accurate and comprehensive, also does not line up with the international definition of unemployment, as established by the International Labor Organization (ILO). The ILO, the only tripartite United Nations Agency, since 1919, brings together international governments, employers and workers of 187 member states, to set labor standards, develop policies and devise programs promoting decent work for all women and men. Their definition of unemployment, not only measures those actively looking for work as stated in Trump’s measurement but workers who are underemployed. Trump does not count underemployed workers as part of his unemployment definition.

Underemployed workers are individuals who are working part-time but desire full-time employment. They may also include those whose skills and education exceed the requirements of their current jobs. For example, a college degreed person working as a door keeper. This group often faces financial instability due to insufficient hours and low wages. Trump’s U-3 category rate doesn’t count this group.

However, BLS economists in declaring the U-6 category rate in 1994, as being the most comprehensive and accurate unemployment rate does include underemployed workers and persons actively looking for work, just as the international definition does. Additionally, the U-6 rate goes beyond the ILO definition of unemployment and counts discouraged workers, who may not be actively seeking work. Common reasons for discouragement could include a lack of skills, age and prolonged unemployment, and the lack of available Jobs, as illustrated above in Trump’s economy. Click on https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1995/10/art3full.pdf.

The U-6 category unemployment rate, which is the most accurate and comprehensive unemployment rate, better reflects the realities of and gives a fuller picture of the Job market, such as low Job creation numbers, that politicians may not want to discuss or deal with. So, they hide behind the lower U-3 rate category, while neglecting to tell voters the U-3 category rate is not comprehensive or is not the most accurate state of the United States monthly Job situation, which is unfair, and unjust to voters. Voters have a right to know the full story when it comes to our economy.

So, what is the long-term solution? End the Clinton era policy of underreporting/undercounting our unemployment rates. The solution to the nation’s Job, and growth problem, which by the way solves the affordability issue, is to move immediately away from the current 10-year, Top 10%-20% Tax Cut driven economy, which cost the nation $3.4 trillion, to a 10% 10-year $25,000 Bottom 70%-80% Tax Cut driven economy, which will only cost $1.7 trillion, which is half the cost of the One Big Beautiful Bill. It is an opportunity for the Trump’s Treasury Secretary to directly control $1 trillion, when it comes to spending on spurring the economy and economic growth. Click on TheFixThisTime.com for details.

We know for sure, you are going to get 4 times the spending on products, and services through a larger group of some 62 million consumers. The bottom 70%-80% spending will also be different, as they will spend the tax cut money on a wider array of products and services, whereas the top 10%-20% usually spend tax cut money on real estate and in the investment markets, which result in low Job creation numbers. We are observing these low Job numbers in real time based on the latest numbers of Jobs created in Trump’s Top 10%-20% Tax Cut driven economy.

A 10% Tax Cut to the Bottom 70%-80% of Americans, will produce surplus revenues. It is mathematically and empirically sound economics. Finally, we know for sure, if the Truth is told “good neighbors,” 5 major tax cuts, since 1986 to the Top 10%-20%, have not proven to be effective, when it comes to Job creation and long-term economic growth!

Staff Writer; James Davis

Mr. Davis is a Financial Analyst. His articles are about relating facts in a usable, truthful, and understandable way. That way, WE ALL WIN. James is, the author of three books, among them, “The Fix This Time,” Boost Your Retirement Income! Simultaneously Create Jobs and Spur Economic Growth (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MI3PD2M). Reach out to James @ his blog https://thefixthistime.com.

Question? Comment? One may use this email address; MrDavis@ThyBlackMan.com.

The “special relationship” between the United States and the United Kingdom could undergo a stress test.

For one thing, Charles is probably horrified and mystified at the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ dinner but probably too polite to say so. The British disapprove of making scenes in public, with gunfire interrupting dinner parties.

Charles did refer to “the incident not far from this great building” in his Capitol address to a full chamber.

The king rode in on American waves of Anglophile applause but also against the currents of our own head of state. President Donald J. Trump takes trouble with him wherever he goes.

Trump has flung slings and arrows across the Atlantic Ocean at Great Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, lately. He’s called the leader a coward for not joining the not-so-splendid little war Trump started in Iran.

Trump has insulted so many of our allies that none wish to join him in an unwinnable war he started without consulting any of them.

But Charles is the one that will have to face and finesse the Trumpian temper face-to-face. Well-mannered English gentleman that he is, can he expect the same conduct from Trump?

Our rough-hewn, coarse president is not one to edit his tongue to meet standards of diplomacy and etiquette. He claims to find the king a great guy, but will he restrain himself for once?

As an American who lived in London for a few years, I learned there are several unwritten rules of social interaction there.

First, pleasantries are important. That means avoiding unpleasantries as much as possible. Charles, in a speech that blended style and substance, expressed “the highest regard and friendship of the British people.”

Looking back at the 1776 American Revolution and forward to our “semi-quincentennial,” Charles declared, “We can perhaps agree that we do not always agree.”

That was as close as he came to the delicate difference dividing the president and prime minister.

By Jove, he added, 250 years ago was “just the other day.” Nice touch.

Second, words are well chosen, clever and at least above average, showing that you care about the English language. The King cut back to the 1215 Magna Carta’s common law and then to the present “living mosaic” of American democracy.

Third, the British are the best friends you can make and keep, if you try. Charles made a most gracious guest in our house, and he made the point that our partnership in a volatile world may be more important than ever.

Fourth, charm and appearances do matter. I’ve broken that rule once or twice at roast chicken Sunday lunches and garden parties out in the country, and for that I apologize.

Americans can be a bit loud in expressing our opinions for British tastes. We are the mother country’s unruly and vexing children who sparked a revolution.

Charles did take a stand for defending Ukraine and for protecting the natural environment. Neither issue is popular with the president or congressional Republicans. You can’t go wrong quoting Abraham Lincoln and Charles Dickens, the greatest writers of their age, in this crowd.

Another point about the British character: They are good sports, win or lose, in cricket, tennis or rugby. If only that trait would rub off on Trump, our very own ugly American.

I’ll say this: How cheery it was to see both sides of the House happy for a sea change.

Once upon a time a charming Prince Charles and now the present king, his work is cut out for him as he and Queen Camilla reach across the ocean to try to make things right between us — or at least appear to be all right.

Written by Jamie Stiehm

Official website; https://twitter.com/JamieStiehm

Anyone who takes an interest in spiritual matters will note that they are some significant differences between a follower of Jesus Christ and a disciple of Jesus Christ, and although on the surface they both look alike, nevertheless it should be understood that a disciple is a follower but every follower is not a disciple; and the Bible clearly highlights this distinction.

At the most basic level a follower may simply be someone who may be an admirer, someone who gives support for your individuality and style, someone who associates with you because to do so brings benefits.

Jesus had many followers like that.

On one occasion more than five thousand followers followed him, and after he preached and taught them about the Kingdom he took five barley loaves and two small fish and fed them all, and the leftovers filled twelve baskets. Free food in abundance is a mighty good reason to follow, especially in times when food was scarce but Jesus recognised their motive: “Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.” (John 6:26)

They were followers of Jesus who went along for the “joy ride” of assembly, food, good stories and seeing miracles but they had no interest in going beyond that. Jesus knew that and tested their fickleness and insincerity as like when he said this, “…Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” (John 6:53) After this some followers responded negatively, “From that time many of his disciples [followers] went back, and walked no more with him.” (John 6:66)

For any preacher today to go to a village or a town unannounced and stand on a soap box and draw a thousand listeners would be amazing. This is what Jesus did repeatedly and drew thousands; the mention of his name did that and everywhere he went the masses followed him.

But Jesus was not deluded by such throngs for he knew that many of those followers would be the same people who, in a few short years, would be bellowing for his execution, “Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.” (Mark 15:14)

Many people, even today, follow Jesus Christ and Christianity for the wrong reasons:

Some follow to make money and live a lavish lifestyle; among them are false teachers and false prophets, the peddlers of prosperity theology, the bogus Christian websites and all those who see spiritual things as moneymaking ventures. To them all, the accursed spirit of Simony prevails.

Some follow to take advantage of vulnerable souls, just like wolves congregating to devour sheep; abusive priests, evil pastors and the like whom Paul warned against, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.” (Acts 20:29) and it’s these followers that the church needs to guard against and to be eternally vigilant.

Some follow to grab opportunities to satisfy their carnal lust and to snare the foolish and unsuspecting, of whom they are many scattered across Christendom; appropriately described by Paul to Timothy, “For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts.” (2 Timothy 3:6)

All of these can be accurately described as followers but their attitude and stance and commitment fall far short of genuine discipleship.

Jesus Christ knew that he would attract a lot of followers, this Son of God who were performing miracles and doing things never seen before was not interested in having followers, as before described, but in fashioning disciples, people who would transition from the crowds of followers looking for quick fixes and temporal benefits to believers and dedicated supporters of God and his provision for humanity as found in Jesus Christ himself.

Here is how Jesus described how this transition would take place.

“And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.” (Luke 9:23)

Observe closely how Jesus detailed the steps to true discipleship:

First the appeal was universal: Some people delude themselves that only some people can be saved, those whom God has chosen from before the world was created and no other, but Jesus taught differently for his call was to “any man”, meaning whosoever will (John 3:16) whether he be old or young, rich or poor, black or white, learned or unlearned, man or woman, Jew or Gentile, anyone that has a yearning and a desire can become a disciple of Jesus Christ.

Next Jesus said, “Let him deny himself”: Self is the biggest stumbling block and the most difficult to be removed on the way to true discipleship and so Jesus started with that. It has been said that, “A man’s self is to him the prime cause of most of his miseries” and in all honesty this truism is borne out by the facts.

A rich young man who wanted to follow Jesus came to him and Jesus said to him, “Go, sell that thou hast, and give it to the poor,” (Matthew 19:21) and the very thought of it gave this young man so much grief, that the Bible says, “he went away sorrowful”. He chose rather to part with his hope of heaven, than deny himself of his earthly wealth. This is equally true of those who hear the word that is able to save their souls, they admit the truthfulness of what they hear, they are even convicted by the word as did King Agrippa in Acts 26:28; yet they remain dead in trespasses and sins, dammed and unsaved because they will not deny themselves of their sinful pleasures even though they know that in resisting God’s call they sentence their souls to eternal punishment.

Very few believers practice this self-denial as taught in the Bible, for it is nothing less than a full-hearted commitment to doing God’s will in every circumstance, it is wholly pleasing God rather than self, it is always “not my will but thine be done” and seeking to comply whatever the cost until it becomes the only principle by which we live.

Then Jesus said, “Take up your cross daily”: Notice the specificity here that gives the lie to what so many believers understand by “cross”. The cross here is not old age, the ups and downs of godly living, sickness and pain and the routine disappointments of life for these are all common to all people of faith. Are these things not burdensome? Sure, but they are not to be confused with your cross.

The Prophet Jonah hated preaching to obnoxious and resentful people (as do most preachers) but preaching salvation to his most repugnant, savage enemy, the rampaging Ninevites that slaughtered Israelis by the thousands and ripped them to pieces for naked fun was for Jonah more than hateful, it was deliriously painful and abhorrent and Jonah would rather die than preach to these dogs (Matthew 15:26). Preaching to the Ninevites was Jonah’s cross that he was required to bear if he was to be true to God. After eventually preaching to the Ninevites Jonah found a comfortable perch to watch God wipe them off the face of the earth. Poor Jonah.

Every believer has a cross to bear, something you will never choose for yourself, something that is not fashionable or pleasant or that will bring you earthly honour or glory or generate esteem in your eyes or the eyes of the world, but that which God wants you to shoulder for his sake, for his honour and for his glory. It might be a call to poverty (like nuns and monks), it might be to do some work that you consider beneath you, it might be to do that which offends your family or friends or brings scorn from your professional colleagues, it might be to work in certain locations or any number of things. Any of these appointed for you is your cross and you are to submit knowing it is God’s will, for his glory and your eventual elevation and pleasure because passing through the fire may be painful but, like gold, it purifies and enhances.

Finally Jesus said, “and follow me”: This is the most pertinent fact in all Christendom for believers are not about following a creed, or some persuasive philosophy or even some well thought-out doctrine but it is all about following Jesus Christ and ALL that he represents. It was for compelling reasons that the disciples in ancient Antioch in Syria were called Christians; because they so closely followed Jesus Christ that they looked like him.

Daily following Jesus requires total commitment for the long run, it is not to bear the cross for a day or two and then laying it aside to do our own thing, it is not setting it aside to take a rest when we feel weary, it is not finding some excuse to abandon cross bearing because of some disagreeable circumstances attached to it; it is taking our cross gladly for the sake of Christ and the gospel, it is sacrificing self with all its concomitant ambitions and goals and dreams and completely surrendering to God’s will as did Caleb and Joshua, “…for they have wholly followed the LORD.” (Numbers 32:12) or like the magnificent Apostle Paul who remarked, “But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.” (Philippians 3:7)

This is what constitutes more than just following, this is nothing less than a full growth of the seed once planted in good soil now maturing, in full bloom and growing ever more so day by day and bringing forth fruits worthy of repentance, this is the commitment where self is now dead and the glory of God is the only guiding principle and doing his will the all-consuming passion of the soul and the body and the spirit.

This is more than just following; this is true discipleship.

Staff Writer; Henderson W.

You can contact this Christian brother at: HWard@ThyBlackMan.com.

Some journalists like to overdramatize everything, especially concerning themselves. Sure, the alleged attacker released a manifesto saying he wanted to take down Trump and members of his administration. But even if the suspect had made it inside, he probably wouldn’t have gotten past the guy in back, seen unperturbed and eating his burrata salad.

The most dangerous place that night was inside the assailant’s head. That hasn’t slowed the predictable banter about today’s toxic political environment and how anger at Trump and company apparently set off a would-be assassin. It was more likely only the trigger connected to the explosive device wired in his head.

“This is a person who attended one of the most prestigious stem universities in the country, in technology, Caltech. Got an engineering undergrad degree, got a master’s in computer science,” one commentator said in a surprised voice. “He was working as a part time teacher, but he described himself as a game developer.”

Let us disregard the assumption that academically or professionally successful people have their heads screwed on straight. Someone who talks eloquently in full sentences is not always more mentally coherent than the drug-addled street person hollering insanities at passersby.

Some of the worst killers had what our society generally considers the “best minds.”

The Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, entered Harvard at 16, earned a doctorate in math and taught at the University of California, Berkley. He later moved to a remote cabin in Montana from which he ran an 18-year bombing campaign that killed three people and injured more than 20. His preferred targets were universities and airlines.

Amy Bishop was a Harvard-trained neuroscientist who taught at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. When denied tenure, she shot three colleagues at a faculty meeting, killing three. At age 21, she shot her brother dead, an action then ruled as accidental. Would someone never enrolled at Harvard have been let off the hook so easily?

Michael Laudor entered Yale as an undergrad and cruised through its law school. He quickly landed a perch at the highly selective Bain & Company consulting group. But Laudor’s long struggle with serious mental illness developed into schizophrenia. He eventually knifed his girlfriend to death thinking that she was a robot or a doll out to kill him. Laudor’s friend, Jonathan Rosen, tells the story in his book, “The Best Minds.” Rosen condemns the 1960s-era push to close mental hospitals and end most involuntary confinement on the belief that even severe psychiatric illness would be managed through outpatient care.

At night, the Gilgo Beach serial killer stalked young women, strangling eight and dismembering bodies. By day, Rex Heuermann sat in his Manhattan office advising architects and builders on their projects.

Like Kaczynski, whose manifesto claimed that his violence would save humankind from unfettered technology, Allen’s screed pompously wallows in self-importance with florid apologies and thank-yous. He boasts, “I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.” And he threatens any participants standing in his way. After all, he adds, most of them “chose to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapists, and traitor, and are thus complicit.”

Fortunately, the alleged shooter’s efforts led to no deaths, his own included. If they served any purpose, it was not to replace the current leadership. It served as a reminder of America’s mental-health crisis and how hard it will be to confront honestly.

Written by Froma Harrop

Official website; https://twitter.com/FromaHarrop