All Activity

ProfD Right. A man should be secure enough within himself and be able to decern that foolishness. I thought discernment was more a matter of intelligence/wisdom than self-assuredness. Bottom line is most men don't have grown azz sons living with them. Otherwise, it would be too much of a reminder that he failed as a parent Excellent point! This was the first time I actually heard someone give THAT perspective of having an adult child still at home, however it makes sense. Classy women don't entertain those situations Lol....but how many women ARE classy?

Let me ask a provocative question..... What's wrong with a man being jealous and insecure? Not in a timid and scared way to the point that he doesn't take risks or chances. But in a protective and territorial way where he's generally on alert when other men come around and suspicious that they may try to push up on his woma(e)n or take his money. If a man should NOT think like this, WHY shouldn't he?

They should stop calling it a "shut down" because the government clearly didn't shut down. They just stopped funding targeted programs, plain and simple. That term misleads people. ProfD The shutdown was an example of them going by the rules. No appropriations...no money. Perhaps. But the rules are so confusing and contradictory it's hard to say. Congress passed a law agreeing to provide stimulus checks. Right. A smart citizen would ask where did they get the money if the nation is supposedly "in debt"? An even smarter citizen would ask why couldn't Congress pass a law to keep SNAP going and funded during the alleged "shut down" until they agreed on a bill? And and even smarter citizen than that would already KNOW why...lol. Those funds were already appropriated for foreign aid. Yeah, I know how this "game" works...lol Having been a social activist for years and having to deal with governments on a city and sometimes county level I know that certain funds...especially funds granted by the state or feds...are appropriated SPECFICIALLY for certain projects and programs and can ONLY BE USED for those projects and programs. It's really a way of cutting one's own throat because a city should be free to use it's available revenue where ever it's NEEDED instead of being forced to use it for only one specific project and then have to give it back if not completely used up. The definition above says it all. The government has already defined essential and non-essential services and functions as well. Not really. It looks to me like these federal agencies that rely on the funding get to decide for themselves what is essential and what is not, but perhaps I'm mistaken.

I thought TikTok was supposedly owned by China? Where did all of this talk about TikTok being a source of Chinese propaganda come from that these Republicans were crying about a little while back? Although we do need to own our own social media platforms, I don't think we should ignore the grass while focusing on the flowers. We need to make sure we own national television stations, radios, and news papers! Social media is a good way to reach SOME people, but a lot of people....older and a surprising number of younger people....still love to sit back on the couch and relax and WATCH television or LISTEN to the radio. The Civil Rights and Black Power Movements were carried largely by Black owned news papers and radio stations and later on in the 70s and 80s we started buying television stations. We should have kept them.

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-could-take-over-tiktok-us-business-investors-oracle-ellison-2025-9 The current administration facilitated the $14 billion dollar sale of TikTok to a group of investors including Oracle and billionaires Rupert Murdoch and Michael Dell among others. Oracle, owned by billionaire Larry Ellison will own a huge stake in TikTok. He also just bought Paramount. That means he has control over them. The best way to control information and content is to own it. Instead of starting a network or social media company or app, just buy one of the most popular existing companies. It would be awesome if Black folks could have made such power moves.

The shutdown was an example of them going by the rules. No appropriations...no money. Congress passed a law agreeing to provide stimulus checks. There are contingency funds and multi-year funds built into certain appropriations. Those funds were already appropriated for foreign aid. There is no confusion among the lawmakers who control appropriations. The definition above says it all. The government has already defined essential and non-essential services and functions as well.

Right. A man should be secure enough within himself and be able to decern that foolishness. That's another question for a whole thread. Bottom line is most men don't have grown azz sons living with them. Otherwise, it would be too much of a reminder that he failed as a parent. That's made for TV dysfunctional sh8t. Classy women don't entertain those situations.

Out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT: Are Economists stupid or liars in relation to dealing with the Depreciation of Durable Consumer Goods? ========= ChatGPT ========= Economists as a group are not stupid or liars regarding consumer depreciation — but the way depreciation is handled in economics can create confusion, and there are legitimate criticisms about how economists talk about it. Here’s a clear breakdown: 1. Depreciation is well understood in economics — but mostly in firms, not households Economists have long had precise models of: capital depreciation replacement cost optimal capital stock amortization schedules productive vs. nonproductive assets But most of this theory is applied to businesses, not households. This means economists usually study: “How do companies account for depreciation?” not “How do consumers actually experience depreciation?” So the gap is real — but not malicious. 2. Consumer depreciation is important… but economists largely ignore it For households, depreciation governs much of economic reality: Cars lose thousands per year Phones become worthless in 3–5 years Appliances fail Clothes wear out Buildings degrade A huge share of consumer spending is really replacement spending This is often called the Maintenance Burden or Replacement Burden of consumer capital, and it is nowhere near as integrated into mainstream models as business depreciation. This is a legitimate criticism: Economists dramatically underemphasize the economic drag created by required replacement of depreciating consumer goods. But this oversight is systemic, not deceitful. =========== ROFL ============ I would just call it lying but some economists must be stupid. .

ProfD Do they even matter? Since when does the Federal Government go by the rules or laws when it comes to spending money on what they WANT to spend money on? For example...... Although the nation was and still is TRILLIONS of dollars in debt, which one of these laws prevented Trump from issuing "stimulus checks" to everybody during his first term? Did any of these appropriations laws prevent Congress from coming up with extra funds from "nowhere" and appropriating them to those who were laid off from the pandemic "surplus" money on top of their regular unemployment checks? And as mentioned before, nations are still getting foreign aid by the billions while they CLAIM there is no money for SNAP benefits. These so-called "rules" and "laws" about how the federal government appropriates money mean absolutely NOTHING. They are only there to CONFUSE those who actually take them seriously. Here's an article that defines a "government shut down"....... "Under the Antideficiency Act (initially passed in 1884 and amended in 1950), federal agencies cannot spend or obligate any money without an appropriation (or other approval) from Congress. When Congress fails to enact the 12 annual appropriation bills, federal agencies must cease all non-essential functions until Congress acts. This is known as a government shutdown." Government Shutdowns: Causes and Effects Notice how it says all "non-essential functions" must stop. That's the kicker right there; because words like "essential" and "non-essential" are highly subjective which means they get to pick and choose which services they'll fund.

ProfD We cannot rule out that possibility as asexual is included in LGBTQIA+. Facts. But remember people used to call Tavis Smiley gay and it turned out he was nailing half the women who was working for him....lol.

ProfD Ofcourse, we know those type of women exist. And a man should know his son well enough to know if he can leave his girlfriend or wife around him. But at the end of the day, if you're son is old enough ATTRACT the same woman you're banging....one may have to ask why is he still living in the same household as you? This reminds me of those Mother-Daughter teams where both women are in one house working jobs and helping to support eachother. It looks so nice and cool....until one ends up taking the others man...lol. And you haven't seen "nasty" until you've seen a mother and daughter get into it with eachother over a man.

Most of MLKjr work was done for free.... In all liklihood The Records will still be there in 50 yrs

Right. Nobody can take the distinction of being the 1st Black unpaid councilman away from him. The questions are 1) do Russians care about him today and 2) will Russians remember him 50 years from now.

Dark Girls That maybe so....but being the first black African man to do so cannot be taken from him.

Jean Sagbo's name won't appear on too much of anything in Russia. The unpaid councilman may not even get added to Russian history books.

Thank you I agree....did I say otherwise? Then Jean Sagbo fits that Bill....ain it? Cool I think he is a First in the 20 century for a black man to get elected to a political office in Russia....hence the reference to Obama. He An Obama were politicians....they have that in common

There are several reasons that people choose not to be out with their lifestyle. Could be anything from how they were raised to public perception to privacy. Some folks do not want to be judged for how they choose to live. Especially with so many religious folks running around. We cannot rule out that possibility as asexual is included in LGBTQIA+. Either way, they are card carrying members of the alphabet soup community.

Well, the crack down was definitely for show. The circus came and went; packed up their clowns and tent.

Right. In the literal sense, the US government does not run out of money. However, there are laws for everything in the US including how money is appropriated. Read up on appropriations law if/when you are not chasing that snatchbox.

ProfD Perhaps you're right, however in today's climate...why even keep that type of lifestyle under wraps? There's really not much of a benefit in doing so, especially if you're a Democrat. I think she's probably just one of those asexual sistaz. To be honest, I think Corey Booker is asexual himself. I don't think he's gay. I think he's just game-goofy...lol.

Since I know that's a rhetorical question, I won't waste your time or intelligence with an answer. But I sincerely thought that they were going to stay much longer. They aren't even TRYING to look sincere anymore. Like I said earlier, I'm not Trump's biggest fan....but I thought atleast the ONE benefit I would see with him would be a crack-down on crime and illegal immigrants...even if it were just for show.

Fair enough. I still believe if a man has to consider the possibility of his woman and son hooking up, he needs to get rid of her. She is not a good look.

There is NO SUCH THING as the federal government "running out of money". It's a red herring. They're constantly printing up money, expanding their credit, extending the debt ceiling, re-appropriating funds, and taking funds out of one account and putting in another or using funds designed for one program or department and appropriating it to another. Leaders around the globe are LAUGHING at Americans for believing this garbage about the federal government being on a "budget" or "running out of money" because they KNOW better. Because THEY'RE getting billions. That's like you taking all of the money out of your right pocket...putting it in your left...and then pulling out the lining of your right pocket and claiming you're broke, lol. See how asinine that sounds? That's the SAME thing the government is doing.

Now ProfD, I respect you and your intelligence...however...... This is what Obama would call a "fundamental disagreement".....lol. We don't misunderstand eachother; both of our positions are crystal clear....we just DISAGREE.....lol. Unless that woman is his BIOLOGICAL MOTHER (and even then shit can happen!).....a man would be a FOOL if his half-way decent looking woman and his adolescent/adult son are living in the same home together and it NEVER crosses his mind that they may be having a sexual relationship behind his back. I'm sorry, there is no other way for me to reason or explain this besides it simply being common sense that any man should have. He should just naturally think about this possibility! Now if the son is a baby or even 8 or 9 year old, ofcourse my lady having some sort of relationship with my son would be one of the last things I'd suspect her of. However if that boy is 14 or 15 or older. Now wait a minute...... That doesn't mean a man should be laying up in bed every night looking up at the ceiling all night long twiddling his thumbs and wondering, or installing cameras and shit in the house trying to catch them in some sort of act. It simply means that there is a CHANCE that it can happen and he needs to keep his eyes and ears open and be aware of how they conduct themselves around eachother.

Detroit might have come up at some point after testing in DC, Chicago and Memphis. Sure. Folks are smart enough to chill out until the dust settles. No different from someone stomping out a cigarette or weed when authority figures show up. Not really. 30 days isn't long enough for permanent change. Folks will go back to business as usual. The real question is why can't the local police instill the same level of fear.