https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GW8n2z-OAI

Kamala Harris decides not to run for governor of California. In the news, Meta reaches an all time high in its stock price after hearing a speech and most recent revenues from Mark Zuckerberg. Good news for that company and its shareholders. E News Network not such good news that TV network has, has now been put out of business. Will anyone notice in an era where everything seems like it's entertainment news these days, the Secretary of the Treasury Scott Besant in the United States announced yesterday or revealed that maybe, just maybe the Trump, the Trump bonds, the thousand dollars kids or families get if they have a kid during the Trump administration is really a kind of a backdoor way of ending, ending Social Security. And Also in Africa, 39 boys died from circumcisions gone wrong. All that and more today on the program. By the way, this program was called Communiverse and I've had to change the name because it turns out I have not done my due diligence. So looking at changing the name to Filtered with TJ Walker, I'm coming to you today live from my new studio. We're just setting up. The paint just went on the walls. Everything is chaos. All the bookshelves, everything were just moved in here today. And yes, you can see, you can hear hammering and sawing going on. I've moved into a new home and this time I'll have my TV studio, my YouTube studio, social media studio in house rather than a separate outside office. So exciting things coming up. But that's why you're going to hear hammering and sawing and nailing. Which reminds me, just, just last week I had lunch with the very first Wall Street White House correspondent for CNN who reminded me of the days that CNN went on the air. You could hear hammering in the back ground way back in 1980. Now, I'm not saying I'm going to become as big as cnn, but there is a tradition of people launching new shows, new networks when things aren't a hundred percent ready. I want to come to you every single day to give you my take. My analysis of the top business, technology and cultural stories through the lens of communication skills and personal development, all with the goal of improving your success. That's what we're about right here. Issue one, Kamala Harris, the former vice president of the United States, the former Democratic nominee for president, was considering running for governor of California next year. She announced yesterday that she's not going to run. I have not some reporting insights there, but I have a perspective on why I think that is the case. That's our first big issue today. Let's dive in. So Kamala Harris was the vice president. Before that, she was the United States Senator. Before that, a district attorney and state attorney general of California. She's had a long, illustrious political career. However, when she did run for President back in 2020, campaign did not go well at all. She was picked as Joe Biden's vice presidential nominee, and he won. She won. She got to serve as vice president for four years, arguably second most powerful job in the world. And she was the substitute for Biden when he withdrew very late in the game. In 2024, she did not win. She lost by not a landslide, but by millions of votes to Donald Trump, who then and now is one of the most unpopular presidents in the history of the United States. So what's really going on here? I'm looking at this not as a psychic trying to read her mind. No one can read her mind. But I do want to give you some perspective of how the modern media world is shaping politicians options. In the modern world, if you get to be vice president, you're so famous, there are millions of ways you can monetize that fame and have, frankly, a fantastic lifestyle. I mean, look at someone like Al Gore. Al Gore, by most accounts, is today a billionaire. He's on the boards of Apple and Google or has been. He's had so many investments that have paid off. He can make documentaries, win Academy Award. He can do so many things, all without much scrutiny or criticism from the media. All of his old political enemies don't bother attacking him. So here's my guess as to what is going on in the brain of Kamala Harris. It's that, you know, I did pretty well in politics. Got to be a U.S. senator of the most populous state, got to be vice president, second most powerful person in the world. Pretty good. And then I think she's a rational person, she's a smart person, she can read polls. Right now, the polls show not that many Americans, even that many Democrats, want her to run for president. Again, in theory, the main reason to run for governor of California would be to position herself as a stronger presidential candidate. But in some sense, being governor of California is a step back from being the vice President of the United States. Why take a step back when you've already been the number two for the entire world, or at least arguably in the United States? So I could understand not wanting to run for governor, especially if there's a chance you don't win. So then there's the option of, okay, should she just wait and run for president. If I had to guess today, it's not based on inside knowledge. It's based on the modern media ecosystem we live in. And that is, it's very hard to change people's public opinions at this stage in her career. Most recent polls show that Pete Buttigieg, the former Transportation secretary for President Biden, is beating her in polls among Democrats right now. Her negatives are still very high. And if you're a rational person, you're on her team. I don't think there's any easy way of saying, yeah, there's a very easy, clear path to becoming the President of the United States. For that matter, it would be extraordinarily difficult to even get the nomination for the Democratic Party. Her own fellow Californian, Gavin Newsom, the current governor, is pretty much battling her very closely in the polls for votes among Democrats if the election were held today. So to be the vice President of the United States and then potentially lose a bid for the White House is kind of an unglamorous, ignominious ending to a political career. My prediction is she looks around and says, who's having fun in life? And I think she sees someone like Al Gore, the former vice president, having a lot of fun, getting really rich. I think she looks at someone like Michelle Obama having a lot of fun, making a lot of money, getting Netflix deals, getting six figure speaking engagements. Indeed, Kamala Harris has just gotten a fantastic lucrative book deal. A new book is coming out. So life is really, really cushy as a former vice president who isn't running for office again. Now, I'm not saying she is greedy or motivated primarily by money, but she's in a position. I mean, she's still relatively young. She's 60 years old. She's younger than I am. Let's say she has another 30 years. She has a third of her life. So she, and she can set things up so that she, her stepchildren, her grandchildren, can be fabulously wealthy for generations after. I mean, she can set up a dynasty, essentially with the amount of wealth she can create from beyond corporate boards, media deals, Netflix deals, podcasting deals. Even though she wasn't a podcast super superstar in the last election, she could certainly start a podcast. And maybe she won't be as popular as Joe Rogan, but she could make a lot of money with that. The speaking gigs, the name ID for selling books for all kinds of services and expertise she can market. I really think that within a decade, she could become a billionaire and she could do it without being attacked on Fox News every day. If she takes herself out of political running, then Fox News never bothers attacking her again. It's a pretty easy, cushy lifestyle and I could see where it would be highly attractive, frankly, to anyone. There also comes a point, I think, in a lot of people's lives where you think, okay, maybe I didn't get the number one top prize, but maybe I did as well as I could do. Now. She has a lot of political talents, she has a lot of charm, but she didn't go all the way to president running against one of the least popular presidential candidates ever in Donald Trump. Manas, good to see you today. Hope you're doing well. And forgive the the very casual appearance day. It's moving day. I'm completely covered with wires, dirt. We're setting up a brand new studio. I am very casual today. And mana strikes. Gavo lost hugely. Maybe she denied Joe Rogan and the Lex Friedman podcast. You know, there's a lot of second guessing of how she could have campaigned better, no doubt. I think the next Democratic nominee is going to be extraordinarily aggressive at going on podcasts like Joe Rogan and all the manosphere shows. They're going to be very aggressive, which is one reason why I think you see Pete Buttigieg sort of edging a lot of polls right now among Democrats because he is so aggressive, going on podcasts, going on Fox News and really positioning himself as a star communicator. And to be fair, I think Kamala Harris is a good communicator. You don't get to be a United States senator from California without being a good communicator. You just don't. But is she world class? Is she as good as Pete Buttigieg? I don't think so. Is Gavin Newsom potentially better as a communicator? He might be. Is Donald Trump, in his own way, a better community? He absolutely is. There's simply no denying that. So what else is going on here? We live in a very different world from when Grant, General Grant, who became President Grant, left the White House and was essentially impoverished and had to write his own memoirs. We certainly had a situation where other presidents, much less vice presidents, left office and really had to scrounge around just to make a living. That's not the case anymore. We live in a world where you can monetize fame in so many, many ways. And Kamala Harris is very, very attractive to a lot of people, a lot of Hollywood people. She's represented the Hollywood people for decades in California. I mean, I'm sure she could get all kinds of Netflix deals or from Apple Streaming and others and live a life of extreme luxury and still speak out on public events and public issues, give speeches, write books on things she cares about, have an institute, have a think tank, be involved with issues, but do it in a way where she's in a cocoon of luxury at all times. Now that may sound like I'm criticizing her. Well, no, I think all humans would like to have luxury. I know I would. So it's not meant in any way to be criticism. Back to my concept of, I think sometimes self aware human beings realize, okay, I wanted to be number one at something or I want to do really well and I reached high. Maybe the place I got was the best I could. She got to the second most powerful elected position in the world. That's pretty good. And maybe she just has come to the conclusion she's not going to be president. I think that's a pretty smart self aware decision. We all grapple with that at some point. Now I can remember 35 years ago, I won a golf tournament. Did I say, okay, now I'm gonna play every day and I'm gonna reach the Masters and I'm going to win the British Open? No, I won a golf tournament. It was a best ball tournament where you play off the best ball of anyone in your 4 7. You can be awful as I was. As long as you have one player who, who hits well, you can still win the tournament. I won a tournament. I want a large graphite driver. And. And I was so happy. And guess how many golf tournaments I've lost since then? Zero. I never lost another tournament. Was it because I was so filled with confidence? No, it's because I never played golf again as long as I never played a tournament as long as I lived because I knew I'm not a very good golfer. Winning that tournament is going to be the highlight of my golf career. It's called self awareness. Plus the fact that I don't really love golf. I think that may be part of what is factoring into Kamala's thinking of why she's not running for governor. And it's why, if I had to guess, and don't hold me to this, I have no inside information. I did not have dinner last night with the vice president. I don't think she's going to run for president. She had her chance in 2024. It was as golden an opportunity as you're ever going to get. It was handed on A silver platter. And I'm not one of those who wants to second guess everything she did and say she ran an awful campaign. I don't think she ran an awful campaign. But the fact is she lost. And she didn't just lose in the electoral college, she lost the good old fashioned way of losing by a few million votes. So I don't know that she really needs to, to go and do it again when she can have a life of influence, a life of prestige and yeah, she could become a billionaire. Manas writes. Fun fact. Nancy Pelosi had accumulated $286 million. You're saying from insider info her husband was fabulously wealthy Mana. So I do think that's a cheap shot. And I do think that Nancy Pelosi will go down in history as the most, certainly one of the most, if not the most powerful and effective speakers of the House ever. I don't think she's someone motivated by money. I don't think there's any evidence she was trading on insider information. But if you want to make the case that once someone is elected to public office, they and members of their family shouldn't make any trades and all their money should go into a blind trust, I'm all in favor of that. But to suggest that she somehow got rich because of her position as speaker, I don't think the facts bear that out. Okay, again, I'm TJ Walker. Thanks for joining me. If you've been watching the last month you heard me talk about this is the communiverse. Well, unfortunately I didn't do my due diligence and that name. It turns out Pixar uses that in one of their movies. There's another communications company. When I did my due diligence about six weeks ago, I didn't uncover that. But now it's come to my attention that there's just not good enough legal clearance on that name. So you're not watching the communiverse. What you are watching is my podcast. My take on the top business news, technology news and cultural news of the day filtered through the prism of communication skills and personal development. All with the goal of improving your personal development and making you more successful. Issue 2. Big announcement from Mark Zuckerberg. In the last 24 hours, Meta's revenue skyrocketing. Its stock price at an all time high is now worth trillions of dollars. The company, its market cap and a lot of enthusiasm from investors based on Zuckerberg's speech about artificial intelligence. Now every tech CEO is hyping Artificial intelligence. He seems to be going deeper, saying they are really close to. He didn't use the phrase general intelligence, but the way he's describing it, at least to my ear, sounds like he really believes Meta is close to having some kind of general level intelligence, or certainly AI intelligence superior to most human beings. And it's going to continue to revolutionize not only their advertising business, which is how they make most of their money, but open up the potential for them to monetize agents to help their user base across many, many different spectrums. Now, Mark Zuckerberg is a very unpopular leader in pop culture these days. A lot of investors are begrudgingly give him respect, but only begrudgingly. He's a fun person to mock. He's certainly the CEO who never seemed like the cool guy. He always seems like he's trying a little too hard, whether as new hairstyle or a gold chain or talking about getting in a fight with Elon Musk. But by all accounts, he is a tenacious businessman with incredible focus. And yes, he makes mistakes. The Metaverse. It's hard to imagine how all of us got sucked into this hype for Metaverse just a few years ago. It all seems like a bad dream. It all seems like that perm I got in high school in 1979. Something that seems so far, long ago, so crazy, you wonder, did it even actually happen? Well, yes. Zuckerberg was a big, big proponent of the Metaverse to the point where he even changed the name of Facebook to Metaverse. That was just pouring billions and billions of dollars down the drain. Well, now he's pouring billions of dollars into artificial intelligence. Earlier this week, he announced that he is forecasting $85 billion in capital expenditures in the next year. 10 billion higher from the previous forecast. They're just spending billions and billions and billions on artificial intelligence. They are on the tech gurus behind it. AI experts. They're sometimes doing pay packages of a quarter of a billion dollars for some of the top AI experts in the world. So they're really investing heavily. Some tech analysts, like Kara Swisher of the Pivot podcast and and formerly of the Wall Street Journal, is skeptical of Mark Zuckerberg being able to buy his way into this. She thinks it's a little too mercenary. But sometimes just raw power, raw computing power, raw server power, and in this case maybe raw intelligence from AI programmers may be enough to give you a tactical advantage and short term and long term generate rapid revenue growth. We will say people who've underestimated Mark Zuckerberg in the past have usually come back to regret it. I'll be watching that closely, as I think you will as well. I also want to point out I can't show you the clips today because I'm not at full capacity today. I am running around unpacking, trying to build my new studio. Things are chaotic here. But Mark Zuckerberg, I will give him credit, he has gained a lot of poise as a communicator. These days, when he gives a speech, no one's talking about how much he's sweating or perspiring. Long time ago, first time Kara Swisher interviewed him, he was so covered with sweat she had to give him the opportunity to take off his jacket, he was sweating so much. So he has shown that as you mature, as you grow, as you simply do more speeches, you can build confidence and get better and better at it. He is improving, which is why people are now focusing on the substance of his speech and why he sees a pop in his stock price like he did yesterday rather than people picking apart the fact that he looks callow or nervous or scared or nerdy or anything else. So he's not a client of mine, but I give him credit for improving. Next story, Issue three in the News E News Shutters the E. News Network has gone out of business. This was released just earlier this week. Its final broadcast will be September 25th. Now, I saw that and I thought, wow, that's a huge network. Huge, big network. You can't imagine E. Network just being gone. And I realized, when is the last time I ever watched the E. News Network? It has to have been at least a decade. So sometimes something goes out of business because there's no consumer demand anymore. You know, there's not a lot of buggy whip companies anymore or as many Horseshoe companies as there used to be once cars became popular. Sometimes there's just not a need. Other times someone is so successful that it permeates the culture in such a way that that thing they produced is everywhere. That's what I would say the situation is with E. News. I mean, there used to be a time if you wanted news about Paris Hilton and celebrities and people like the Kardashians and the latest movie star and Angelina Jolie, you would go to E. News. Well, nowadays all you have to do is walk by your phone and things are flashing up. Tiktoks and tweets and and notifications on your phone and email feeds and your friends Facebook post. We live in a world where entertainment news is just this giant squid Sucking up everything in its pat. So in, in a sense, I would argue that E News is a victim of its own success. It created such an interest in entertainment news that everyone else who's got a tool like I have right now, anyone with a cell phone or 15 years ago, the blog, or anyone with a podcast is now essentially in the entertainment news business. So sometimes you have to say, you know, mission accomplished. I guess if their goal, I mean, their goal is to make money, let's not kid ourselves. But if your goal is to put a spotlight on entertainment news, they did it. They did it well for a long time. And now I guess you could argue it's not really needed anymore. Hi, I'm TJ Walker. Thanks for joining me today. This is a new show. I'm still debating on the name we're going to call it. It's going to launch officially September 2nd. Once I get the whole studio built up here again. I'm in a moving day. You can see there's my globe. The walls have just been painted. It's a part of my new neighborhood. There's a plant, you may recall. I've got cameras set up. But I'm just using my cell phone today in the middle of a move. I got to get back to unpacking in just a moment. But I wanted to spend some time with you today, every day, because that's my commitment to you. This is the one place where you can hear about the top news stories of the day and not feel bad, but actually learn something about it, help you in some personal development way, either as a better communicator or some other personal development habit. That's what we're all about as it relates to E News. The issue there is to to realize there's always going to be change in the world. You've always got to be adapting. Just because you're successful one day doesn't mean you're going to be successful the next day. And the next day, things rise, things fall. You've always got to be experimenting and adapting. That's why I'm right here with you. I can't rely just on my online courses of getting thousands and thousands of new students every single day. Because there have been times and there's still days when I have that. But that part of my business goes in various cycles and I'm in another part of my business now, starting video podcast, starting audio podcast, and reaching even more people through, through new tools like this and in new ways. This is an old tool, but there's always more Distribution in social media. So I urge you, if you got a gig that's working for you, don't just coast. Always be thinking about the future. Always be thinking about the next new technology. Because E. News was a cable network. Cable was really new when I was a kid. Cable was really new in the 80s, still in the 90s, but it's an old technology now. Now there's this thing called the Internet. So always be looking for something new. That's why I spent a lot of my time in the last 14 months creating my own interactive digital video clone where you can see me and you see me nicely dressed and shaven every day in my clone because it's a video from one day a year and a half ago. But my clone can answer your questions, can rehearse with you, can critique your messages, can critique your media appearances. Doesn't even cost you anything the first handful of times you use it. So I urge you, try it out. It's TJ Walker AI. TJ Walker AI for the interactive clone. And that's my way of not trying to end up like the folks at E. News, who are presumably getting fired as of September 25th, that is the last day they will be broadcasting on the air. Condolences to them, but also, congratulations, you had a good run. Issue four in the news, Secretary treasury of the. Of the Treasury, Scott Bessant says that the Trump accounts could pave the way to privatizing Social Security. Now, this is something that that is talked about every so often. Typically, when it does, it creates such a huge backlash among the public that politicians go scurrying back into the closet and say, I never really talked about that. It happened during President George W. Bush's tenure, right after he was reelected. He came out and said, well, now that I'm reelected, my mandate is to privatize Social Security. And voters are like, huh? Wow. What? They did a whole Scooby Doo thing. What are you talking about? Because he never really mentioned it during the campaign. Once he started talking about it in his second term, senior citizens and others just pounded him to the point where he had to say, you know, we're taking that off the table. It essentially went nowhere. Now, look, I'm a capitalist. I believe in the capital markets. I believe in investing. I believe that most of an economy should be in the private sector. I invest heavily in about 321, mostly technology companies through index funds. And I'm not here selling you anything today, and I'm not giving you stock tips either. But I just want to Give you my perspective on it. Here's the problem for this administration or any administration that wants to privatize Social Security is the whole point of Social Security was to help people in their time of need. Because there was a point in the United States where the poorest demographic was senior citizens. They're now the richest. So in a sense you can say mission accomplished. Social Security did a great job, but now we're at the point where people feel like they paid into it. They do pay into it, so they feel like they're entitled. The reality is most people, especially if they've had a high paying job and have good health their whole life and are not doing backbreaking work, chances are they're going to live a long life, often 10 years longer than lower income Americans. So the wealthy Americans proportionally put less money into Social Security and, and they get a lot more advocate because they live so much longer. So there's a lot of unfairness in Social Security. But, and this is a big, big but. The problem with privatizing it is if you have all of your money in your own 401k account, as we call it here in the United States, your own private investment fund, if all of a sudden the markets go down 30% as they did earlier this year, if they're down 30% at the exact moment when you're retiring and you have to pay some big lump sum to go into a retirement home or a huge medical expense, it creates such panic, it terrorizes you. And what a lot of people would just do is say, well, I'm not going to pay my medical bills because I want my family or my kids to have something. I'll just die. We don't, as a civilized society want people dying. We don't want them feeling impoverished, especially after a lifetime of work. So that's always a problem. If people say, let's just get rid of Social Security, does it need to be revamped? Sure. I mean, one popular provision I'm not endorsing it is raise the age limit. Problem for that is lower income Americans, by and large, and specific minority groups are not living any longer. So it really is kind of screwing them over if you're poor or a minority to just arbitrarily say, well, we'll save more money if we don't give people Social Security until 72. That's one problem with that or with that solution. Another solution, frankly, would be to say, let's not cap the amount of money you pay Social Security taxes on right now. It's capped at $160,000 a year. So someone who makes millions of dollars a year pays proportionally a tiny percentage of their income compared to someone who makes $160,000 a year, who pays what, 7.58% of their income to their Social Security. So I would anticipate that these comments by the secretary of the treasury are kind of walked back. They'll be saying in the next day or so, oh, I misspoke, or the president will disavowance that. I don't even know that guy, or something like that. Because it is not popular if you are a president, to talk about cutting Social Security, you could talk about reforming it for the future. You position it as something about won't affect anyone alive today but your grandchildren. It'll affect them. I'm not saying that's a good thing because it is a demographic time bomb. It is an actuarial time bomb. There's no doubt about it if certain changes aren't made. But I think a lot of these catastrophists, like they're never going to be Social Security when I'm alive. That's when I'm retired, when I'm older. It's crazy. It's going to be, no, that's wrong. Because if you think politicians are going to shut down Social Security, you're what you're really saying is they care more about fiscal discipline than votes. Well, guess what? There's simply no evidence to back up your opinion. One thing we know about politicians of both major political parties in the United States is that they want to do what helps them short term. And nothing helps you more short term than getting on the right side of senior citizens because they vote disproportionately. If anything, the real danger in 10, 20, 30 years is not that Social Security isn't there, it's that we don't have roads and schools. There's certainly some politicians, well, let's just cut down. Let's privatize schools. These kids don't vote. To heck with them. That, I think, is the far bigger danger that we see a public commitment to infrastructure for things like roads, highways, airports, schools. We see funding for those go away and the Social Security goes up, perhaps even at a rate higher than inflation. So that's what I think is the bigger problem there. Issue five today, and we have to have a somewhat truncated show today because I'm in the middle of a move and I got to get back to unpacking here, setting up the new studio as well as my home. I'M still in the Palm beach area, southern part of Florida, South Florida as we call it here. So not a huge move, but no longer living in Delray beach as of today and as of tonight. So a new home. Looking forward to new beginnings and new circumstances. New friends, issue five. This is one I do have a particular strong interested in. Interested. Mass circumcision ceremony in South Africa recently resulted in 39 boys dead. Dozens more were mutilated. This was a tribal initiation in South Africa. It was teenage males, not little infant boys. These were teenage males and 25, excuse me, 39 died in, in the year 2025. So here's the other bizarre thing. Complications in 2024 led to 11 penis amputations in South Africa. After unskilled, traditional surgeons used old spears and razor blades to perform these rituals. Now I got to tell you, there is a lot of sexism in the world. There's no doubt about it. And I think by and large a lot of the sexism is anti female. I do think it's a real problem. But I gotta tell you, this is one of these weird, weird issues where the sexual dynamic is different and unfair in the opposite way. So a lot of people in the world are very upset over clitorectomies, which is a horrible, horrible, gruesome, medically unnecessary surgery. And yet many people, especially in the United States, think oh well, circumcision, of course you have to do that. Well now you don't. There's no medical necessity for circumcision. It is all based on a patently absurd religious principle in that or surround the idea of self pleasure is evil. And if you circumcise a boy, they're less likely to self pleasure. That is the entire motivation. That's the biblical rationale for circumcision. And you're saying, well now tj, you don't know your science because it's been medically proven that with circumcision you reduce the chances of certain diseases and penal cancers and things like that. Well, timeout. That may technically be true, but it's also technically true that if you gave a mastectomy to every pre adolescent girl in the world, you could eliminate breast cancer. And yet if anyone said let's just slice off all of the breasts, the healthy breast of every, every girl, woman, prepubescent teenager, I think you would rightfully be called a misogynist. You'd be called bizarre. You know, you would never get brain cancer if you cut your neck off, if your head off too. So in no other field do we proactively amputate healthy tissue, especially tissue that can give sensual pleasure to a human being just because it might reduce a health risk? We don't do that to women, certainly not civilized societies. And yet so called civilized societies do routinely circumcise, although other than the United States, it's actually pretty rare outside of religious purposes. Now this is changing a little in the United States. This is an issue particularly of interest to me because 30 some years ago I happened to do some communications work for an organization called Doctors Opposing Circumcision. So I did spend a lot of time learning about this issue and studying it. And it's, it is really, if you study it, you come to very, very different conclusions from what you just hear in mainstream communication media and in medical circles in the United States. And I'm not someone in general saying there's a big conspiracy. I don't think doctors are cashing in, making millions of dollars themselves by performing these surgeries. I just think it's become a part of a culture and people justify it aesthetically. Looks, they think it's somehow cleaner. And it's really a whole bunch of myth that is communicated again and again and again specific to the United States. It's not like this in Europe and Asia. And I think it's time to change the practices. And that's why I do think it's important to occasionally put a spotlight when these things really go wrong. As was just revealed in South Africa with 39 boys getting killed in the process of a circumcision. Absolutely tragic. I want to thank you for spending time with me today. Again, my name is TJ Walker. This is a brand new show. I think the name of the show, once we nail it down in the next few days is going to be either Filters with TJ Walker, Filter with TJ Walker, or Filtered with TJ Walker. The idea is I'm filtering the news through a communication skills lens and a personal development skills lens to help you become more successful. And that's really my message and even this last story is you have to question everything and, and you have to look at what the science truly tells you and put it in perspective. Just having someone say, well, circumcision reduces chances of cancer, at first blush that sounds like, okay, well that's enough. Somebody likes cancer, right? But then if you say, well, wait a minute, if that's, if that's our rule of thumb, we could be cutting off a lot of other body, body parts too. So that's why I want you to question things go a little deeper. I'm TJ Walker. Thanks for spending time with me today. See you tomorrow.