Lewis Hamilton showcases his distinctive sense of fashion in royal blue jacket with purple tapes

Lewis Hamilton turned around as he competed in the Abu Dhabi Formula 1 Grand Prix at the Yas Marina Circuit in the United Arab Emirates.

The 36-year-old racing driver is aiming for an eighth record title on Sunday, but the winner of the last four F1 titles has been pushed by the 24-year-old all season Max Verstappen.

And on Saturday, Lewis made sure all eyes were on him when he showed up in a royal blue jacket with large pockets and purple ribbons in the front and matching pants.

Stylish: Lewis Hamilton, 36, wore a royal blue jacket with large pockets and purple ribbons at the Abu Dhabi Formula 1 Grand Prix at the Yas Marina Circuit in the United Arab Emirates on Saturday

The athlete wore a sky blue T-shirt under his jacket and had a chunky silver chain around his neck.

His t-shirt matched his Gucci shoes, which had a white border around the bottom green and red stripe on the side.

Lewis could be seen protecting his eyes from the bright sunlight by opting for dark sunglasses.

Fashion forward: The athlete wore a sky blue T-shirt under his jacket and had a chunky silver chain around his neck

He wore black face covering to protect himself and others from the coronavirus.

The star wore her hair in a ponytail behind her head to complete her look for the day.

His excursion takes place when Formula 1 announced a contract to continue the race in Abu Dhabi, in which the season finale will take place on Sunday, until 2030.

Brave style: Lewis wore dark sunglasses and he wore black face cover to protect himself and others from the coronavirus

Brave style: Lewis wore dark sunglasses and he wore black face cover to protect himself and others from the coronavirus

The Abu Dhabi Grand Prix takes place at the Yas Marina Circuit and was added to the F1 calendar in 2009.

Sunday’s race marks the conclusion of three consecutive events in the Middle East and the fourth and final stop in the region on the F1 calendar.

“We are pleased to announce that under this new agreement we will be driving in Abu Dhabi until 2030,” said F1 Managing Director and President Stefano Domenicali on Thursday.

“We’re really looking forward to the season finale this weekend, when more Formula 1 history will be written.”

Hamilton used three wins in a row to draw level with Verstappen in the overall standings before the final.

It is the fourth time that the title will be decided in Yas Marina, where the championship was held in 2010, 2014 and 2016.

Max has insisted that he be “treated differently” from other drivers and that he will not change his driving style after receiving two time penalties in the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix.

The Dutchman has refused to give in to his conviction that he did nothing wrong in the penultimate race of the season and is going into his championship showdown Lewis.

Max was deeply involved in fights with Lewis twice at Turn 1, both times asked to relinquish position – and received a five-second time penalty for gaining an off-track advantage.

Winner: Lewis and Max Verstappen (L) celebrate on the podium at the end of the French Formula 1 Grand Prix (picture in June 2021)

Winner: Lewis and Max Verstappen (L) celebrate on the podium at the end of the French Formula 1 Grand Prix (picture in June 2021)

At the most controversial moment of the Grand Prix, Max was found guilty after the Hamilton brake check on lap 37 – after braking to let the Briton through, which resulted in a ten-second penalty.

Lewis hesitated to overtake Max in front of the DRS line so he could gain the speed advantage on the main straight before the Dutchman hit the brakes and the Briton damaged his front wing after cutting off the Red Bull’s rear.

Looking back on Thursday’s race, Max said that “clearly things don’t apply to everyone”.

As reported by Motorsporthe said, ‘The things I did about defense, two other guys did about racing too, and they didn’t even get a mention or a penalty.

“So I don’t get it because I thought I was just driving hard. What happened to me didn’t deserve a punishment, and the other two who did it clearly didn’t get one, but obviously it’s only me who get it.

“Of course the people at the front are a bit more critical, but I don’t understand that for me.” The 24-year-old added: “I think on my part, which is unfair.” [is] that I am treated differently than other drivers. “

Close: Verstappen has been criticized for his wheel-to-wheel battles with Lewis in Saudi Arabia

Close: Verstappen has been criticized for his wheel-to-wheel battles with Lewis in Saudi Arabia

Scout Willis flaunts eager sense of favor throughout procuring journey in LA

Scout Willis shows off her keen sense of style in an abstract sweater and combat boots during a solo shopping trip in Los Angeles

Scout Willis showed her keen sense of style while she was out and about The angel this weekend.

Bruce Willis and Demi Moore’s 30-year-old middle kid let her long, dark hair flow freely as she reached for shopping in an off-white sweater with a black and red abstract print.

It was complemented with black straight-leg jeans and black Doc Marten combat boots.

Fall Fashion: Scout Willis showed off her keen sense of style this weekend while out and about in Los Angeles

Seen alone, the singer-songwriter showed that she was self-sufficient as she carried multiple bags.

She went the sustainable way and carried her groceries in reusable bags.

The independent young woman slung a bag over her shoulder, one over her forearm, and carried one in her hand.

Willis used her free hand to clutch a carton of S. Pellegrino drinks.

She looked like she had a minimally make-up face that was rounded off with a plum-colored lip color.

Saturday food run: Bruce Willis and Demi Moore’s 30-year-old middle child let their long, dark hair flow freely as she reached for groceries in an off-white sweater with a black and red abstract print

Coordination;  Her top was complemented with black straight-leg jeans and black Doc Marten combat boots

Coordination; Her top was complemented with black straight-leg jeans and black Doc Marten combat boots

In October, the multi-talented beauty released a music video for her guitar-heavy song Love Without Possession.

In the four-minute visual, the dark-haired stunner did nothing and covered her parts with strands of her long hair.

Ahead of its release, Scout took to Instagram to share her feelings about the vulnerable written melody.

“I wrote this song in 2016 amid deep heartache, hope, confusion, tenderness and growth,” she explained.

“It kept me company like an affectionate friend, telling a story I experienced in real time, and softening the edges of my pain as only art can.”

Stripped down: In October, the multi-talented beauty released a music video for her guitar-heavy song Love Without Possession

Stripped down: In October, the multi-talented beauty released a music video for her guitar-heavy song Love Without Possession

On Friday, the singer took to Instagram to celebrate five weeks since the video premiered.

‘Some love without possession BTS to mark 5 weeks since it came out!’ Scout wrote to her 262,000 followers.

She shared a number of outtakes from the set, including a group photo with mom Demi.

Another shot showed the artist in a floral robe in a room with green walls, hanging guitars and drums in the background.

Behind the Scenes: On Friday, Scout shared a number of outtakes from the set of Love Without Possession, including a group photo with mom Demi;  LR Juliana Giraffe, Nicky Giraffe, Monica Adriana, Demi, Scout

Behind the Scenes: On Friday, Scout shared a number of outtakes from the set of Love Without Possession, including a group photo with mom Demi; LR Juliana Giraffe, Nicky Giraffe, Monica Adriana, Demi, Scout

Set life: Another shot showed the artist in a floral robe in a room with green walls, hanging guitars and drums in the background

Set life: Another shot showed the artist in a floral robe in a room with green walls, hanging guitars and drums in the background


Suki Waterhouse showcases her edgy sense of fashion

Suki Waterhouse shows off her edgy sense of style when she steps out into Hollywood in a crazy stone-colored look with a velvet bucket hat

She is known for her edgy sense of style.

And Suki Waterhouse, 29, showed off her chic fashions on Friday when she was spotted wearing a crazy outfit in West Hollywood.

The actress looked stunning in a pared-down look that consisted of a slightly opened button-down cardigan with matching trousers and a bucket hat.

Elegant: Suki Waterhouse, 29, showed off her chic fashions on Friday when she was spotted wearing a crazy outfit in West Hollywood

Suki kept things warm in her gaze as she pulled on the stone colored cardigan, which remained slightly open to take a look at her stomach.

She wore her blonde locks in loose waves, which were rounded off with the hat, while she draped her figure in a large scarf in a dark gray shade.

The model recently made headlines when she criticized the Gossip Girl Revival for making a joke about her and actor friend Robert Pattinson.

She was offended after one of the show’s characters disparagingly referred to her as “nobody” in a casual joke.

On the go: The actress looked stunning in a simple look, consisting of a slightly opened button-down cardigan with matching trousers and a bucket hat

On the fourth episode of the new show’s season one, Luna (played by Zion Moreno) mentions Suki while giving tips to her friend Zoya (Whitney Peak) on how to increase her social media presence to help her find Obie ( Eli Brown) to get closer.

“When do you get it? For the press he’s R-Patz and you’re Suki Nobody, ”she says.

In now-deleted tweets, Suki made it clear that she didn’t appreciate being the overlooked half of a celebrity couple.

Keep It A Secret: The model recently hit the headlines when she slammed the Gossip Girl revival for joking about her and actor friend Robert Pattinson (pictured in January 2020).

Keep It A Secret: The model recently hit the headlines when she slammed the Gossip Girl revival for joking about her and actor friend Robert Pattinson (pictured in January 2020).

“Another day to remember that women can also be patriarchy,” she wrote out loud Glamor.

Although Suki was willing to relate to their relationship in order to strike back what she thought was an offensive joke, she and Robert usually keep their relationship out of the spotlight.

They were first linked in July 2018 when they were seen kissing in London, and a source told Us Weekly in August that year that they had been together for months.


Opinion: California’s ban on assault type weapons has labored. It is constitutional and customary sense.

Abrams is a board member of Team ENOUGH, Brady’s gun violence prevention initiative, and a 2021 graduate of Del Norte High School. He is a resident of 4S Ranch.

In April, President Joe Biden did described our country’s gun violence epidemic as “an international embarrassment” and promises to address this crisis.

President Biden was right and he was quick to act – but here in California, our elected officials have long led the nation to find sensible and comprehensive solutions that save lives despite ongoing attacks from the gun lobby and industry. Lawsuits such as those recently attempting to lift California’s decade-long bans on assault-style firearms or the one aimed at lifting our reasonable demand that ammunition purchases be subject to background screening threaten this advancement and public safety.

The disturbing decision by a federal judge last month to lift the offensive weapons ban, which the appeals court later suspended, shows how concerted and dangerous these efforts are. Simply put, this federal judge was wrong. The state’s ban on assault weapons has helped keep Californians safe for over 30 years. It’s constitutional and it’s common sense.

We cannot tolerate these attacks on our constitutional and popular laws – laws that have stood the test of time. The newest Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that the firearm homicide rate in California is 30 percent below the national rate, while the firearm suicide rate in California is 45 percent below the US average. Overall, the rate for all fatalities from firearms is 37 Percent lower in California than the national rate.

It’s not just numbers – lives are saved and communities are spared persistent fear and violence.

That is not to say that our state is without arms. It is precisely for this reason that I am a youth gun violence prevention activist. I’ve seen gun violence in my community here in San Diego. I lost friends to gun violence.

We still have more work to do.

Earlier this month, Attorney General Rob Bonta Approved The latest California gun sales data shows that 2020 broke previous records for small arms sales, an increase of over 65 percent from 2019.

We also know that California, like the rest of the nation, is one top gun violence and homicides last year, which will continue into this year.

That should keep us busy. As Harvard University Professor David Hemenway in a nutshell said Reuters discussed the intersection of increased gun sales and gun violence in October: “It’s pretty clear that more guns mean more death.”

It is precisely for this reason that our elected representatives cannot cease to create strong, sensible, and comprehensive laws and guidelines to ensure our safety.

Earlier this year, Governor Gavin Newsom called for $ 200 million in dedicated funding for CalVIP in his California comeback plan, nearly quadrupling the existing grant program funding. CalVIP funds evidence-based community and hospital-based violence intervention programs that have been shown to help stop violence and heal communities to prevent trauma. It’s an investment in our communities that has only positive, downstream effects. This kind of courageous leadership is why officials in states like New York, as well as President Biden, have similarly called for investment in community violence intervention programs.

Similarly, our state legislature has passed state-of-the-art directives such as a requirement that newly introduced semi-automatic pistols contain microstamping technology, the first such requirement in the country, and a ban on the sale of ghost weapons. These laws are being investigated and emulated in other states as well as in our federal government. California is leading once again.

Our leaders cannot give up on these efforts, and fortunately they have not. Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta have remained steadfast in their defense of our state’s ban on offensive weapons, while advocating the policies and programs our state needs to further reduce gun violence and protect our communities.

I have no doubt that they will prevail in court in our state in defending the ban on offensive weapons. I also know that they will continue to put the interests and safety of Californians first as they work to establish even broader gun violence prevention guidelines. Young people in California lead the way, asking for and supporting life-saving bills. In San Diego, I look forward to our city’s leaders responding to these changes and addressing issues such as the proliferation of ghost weapons head on.

While President Biden is right that our gun violence epidemic is an international embarrassment, the country can rest assured that California is helping to correct this injustice, and we will not let up.

AMC Leisure’s Strikes Make Sense

AMC Entertainment (NYSE:AMC) files to sell 11 million shares, sending the stock down 30%. ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM) loses a proxy fight as an activist firm gains a third seat on the board of directors. Motley Fool analyst Bill Mann, with host Chris Hill, analyzes those stories and FireEye‘s (NASDAQ:FEYE) decision to sell part of its business (and its name) to a private equity firm.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool’s free podcasts, check out our podcast center. To get started investing, check out our quick-start guide to investing in stocks. A full transcript follows the video.


This video was recorded on June 3, 2021.

Chris Hill: It’s Thursday, June 3rd. Welcome to MarketFoolery, I’m Chris Hill, with me today, the one and only, Bill Mann. Good to see you, my friend.

Bill Mann: How are you? How are you celebrating Mark Levin’s birthday today?

Hill: Mark Levin, happy 40th birthday to Mark Levin. Maybe the greatest fake driver’s license in film history.

Mann: You know, it’s only one name, right? Yeah. If you look at the driver’s license, his birth date on his fake ID was June 3rd, 1981. That means that Mark Levin is today 40 years of age. I will be celebrating later. I don’t know about you.

Hill: If you’re looking for a movie to relax with over the weekend, I will just say SuperBad, 88% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Mann: Yes, and the 12% are the ones who found the launch to be a bit much, which I can understand.

Hill: Understandable.

Mann: Yeah.

Hill: We’ve got an energy story that I don’t understand. We have a cybersecurity story that I really don’t understand. But we’re going to start with the mayhem that is AMC Entertainment. People on Reddit are buying shares of AMC Entertainment, but you know who is selling? AMC Entertainment.

Mann: I like the fact that you’re setting this apart and suggesting maybe you do understand this one.

Hill: I understand the optics of it anyway, but yeah, the company came out, they filed to sell more than 11 million shares, and the stock is down more than 30% today.

Mann: Right now, at the time that we’re speaking, it could end anywhere. Even at this point, AMC stock is up more than 100% for the week. The company came out and said, we are going to take advantage of the market and they were very clear in their filing. It was interesting. They said there is no business reason for this level of volatility, there’s no business reason for this price. We are going to sell and we are going to go out, use these proceeds to try and buy up some irreplaceable movie assets, which is great. This is exactly what they should be doing. What’s so funny to me about the meme stocks in general, take GameStop for example, is that the company is almost irrelevant to the story. At no point do you hear, “Hey, the CEO is doing X”, you just don’t hear these things. The only thing that really bothers me about this, Chris, though, is that yesterday, the stock went up, and at one point, it was up 120% on the day, which is a lot, and AMC came out and said we’re going to provide free popcorn and other benefits to investors knowing full well, had to, that they were going to be releasing something today, saying they were selling shares. That to me is just distasteful. Everything else about this I find fine.

Hill: I’m going to go in no particular order, I agree with you. It is distasteful the timing of that. That said, I think everything else that management is doing here makes sense. They are taking advantage of an inflated stock price. … They’re being very clear saying, “Look, here’s why we’re selling that.” If you’re a lawyer on staff at AMC Entertainment, you’ve got to be happy with the way they are handling this part of it.

Mann: You know, it would be awesome. Unfortunately, these things are bound by legal language. If they said, we’re selling 11 million shares, wouldn’t you? What do you expect us to do? The stock is down quite a bit today. Who knows where it will end up? This is a company that has not traded on its fundamentals. There is no reason that AMC, which lost $4 billion in 2020, which makes sense because the theaters were closed, it lost $150 million in 2019 when they were open. I have no explanation for this other than the market has lost its mind. But AMC is right to go ahead and say, “Well, OK, if you dare us to sell some, we’re going to sell some, and we’re going to keep selling until the price gets back to being in an irrational place, and at which time, we will have a lot of cash on hand.”

Hill: I said this the other day. This is unlike some of the high-flying Cloud-based Nasdaq stocks that have come down 20%, 30%, 40% off of their highs over the last few months, those are at least growing businesses in growing industries. When you look at the business of movie theaters, the most important trend is the fact that for the past 20 years, steadily, year-over-year, incrementally fewer people are going to the movie theater. Now, there are years where the overall box office receipts increase, but that’s due to price increases, that’s not due to more bodies coming into the theaters so unless AMC has a plan to get more butts in the seats, I’m not sure how this has a happy ending.

Mann: Well, not only that, but the way that movie theaters make money is off of concessions, and for movies that have been there for more than three weeks. For the first three weeks and this has been pretty much contractual across the board, the studio gets all of those ticket revenues, they all go and then you start to have some negotiated split. What happened during 2020, and it’s not the movie theater’s fault, is that that relationship was broken. We don’t have any guarantee that that’s going to come back. We had some big hits that literally went straight to streaming. I don’t know. The good news is that I think that the business case for AMC is almost irrelevant for what’s going on, it’s a meme, a $20 billion meme, so good luck, but I don’t really see the business case, but I completely see why AMC will say, “Look, if you give us access to enough money and enough resources, we can maybe build a business case.”

Hill: Let’s move on to ExxonMobil; an Actavis firm called Engine No.1, has won a third seat on Exxon’s Board of Directors, Actavis buying up shares and pushing for change in a given business is not unusual. What is unusual in this case is that Engine No.1 doesn’t have a 9% stake in ExxonMobil or a 5% stake, they have a 0.02% stake in this company. How is this happening? How are they able to affect change, at least in terms of getting people on the board when they own slightly more shares of ExxonMobil’s than I do?

Mann: Not many more. We know you’re a big deal. What a disaster this is for Exxon’s management team, particularly the CEO, Darren Woods. This is the most expensive proxy battle in history in the United States. The amount of money that was spent on competing on the Board slate, the company supported slate of directors vs this renegade set of directors, the activist investors, they had backing from a number of large pension funds which are huge investments including CalPERS, which is the California pension fund, CalSTRS which is the education pension fund for the state of California, New York Common Retirement Fund, a lot of big pension funds also got involved and supported the Engine No.1 Mobil. This is all about the activists believing that Exxon has not done enough, both from an environmental standpoint and from a business standpoint to move itself to carbon-neutral technology. That this is a path that seems obvious to them and if Exxon, with all of its resources moves there first, they will probably be able to compete. That is the argument and that is the theory of the case for these activist investors. Although Engine No.1 is not a big owner of Exxon, these are no mooks. It’s run by a guy named Gregory Goff, who used to be the CEO of a company called Tesoro, which is a oil and gas company, he had absolutely tremendous returns. There was a senior strategist from Google X, former Chief Executive of Vestas Wind Systems. These are people who know the business. This is a really really credible group that’s been put together.

Hill: Yet I’m looking at ExxonMobil stock up nearly 50% year-to-date, obviously. There are reasons for that that have nothing to do with the Board of Directors.

Mann: Oil prices definitely.

Hill: Right. Where do you think this goes over the next six to 12 months? I realize I’m asking you to look into your crystal ball, but in terms of the direction of ExxonMobil’s business, what should people expect?

Mann: Well, a third board seat is a huge thing. Two are enough to be loud. Three is enough to be transformational. I think you’re going to see Exxon move very quickly toward the exact thing that Engine No.1 is speaking of. In fact, you’re already seeing them, they’re coming out with reports of how they’re going to make their upstream carbon-neutral or moving toward those targets. I think it’s going to happen a lot faster. It would not surprise me. This is such a rebuke of the current management team. It would not surprise me if Darren Woods steps down pretty soon. He staked his reputation on winning this proxy battle and did not. There’s going to be some changes, and if that happens, these new board members will be instrumental in picking the next CEO and management team.

Hill: Shares of FireEye are down 15% today because the company is selling its products business and its name to a private equity firm, Symphony Technology Group, for $1.2 billion. The Cloud security network and email products will go to this private equity firm. The remaining cyber forensics business is going to be called Mandiant Solutions. What is going on here? I can’t recall whether it’s this industry or any other industry. I can’t recall ever seeing a story like this where they’re not just spinning off part of their business. What is left and what would you rather be the owner of?

Mann: As we are in the studio for this, the stock is down about 15%. Basically on this news, $1.2 billion sale to Symphony Technology Group, which is a private company. I actually like the deal. I understand exactly why the shares would be down this much. Because when you’re selling that big of a chunk of your business, there are a lot of shareholders who are owning your stock because of that chunk of business. It makes perfect sense to me that the market woke up today, it was like, “What I am going to do is step back because what will continue in place is not what I thought was going to be there.” But CEO Kevin Mandia has been very clear about the opportunity in cyber forensics. We see with these cyberattacks that there are going to be huge opportunities and they’re going to necessitate a coordinated government-led program. He wants to make sure that his company, Mandiant Solutions is best placed so that they can be a part of that conversation. I get why they would make this deal. I also get why the market doesn’t seem to like it at all. But I’ve never seen a company sell its name before.

Hill: We’ve talked before about the growing opportunity in the cybersecurity industry. I think over the last few years, it has definitely moved into that category for individual investors. If you’re building out your portfolio and you’ve got 25 stocks, I think cybersecurity is now in that category where you need to look at your portfolio and say, ”Where do I have exposure to the cybersecurity industry?” If you don’t have it, I think you should go out and find it.

Mann: Yeah, 100%.

Hill: But in this case, it sounds like within that industry, the CEO is basically saying, I’m putting all of my chips on cyber forensics and I’m going to take the short-term hit. This is where the growth engine is going to be.

Mann: Yeah, there’s $1.2 billion in cash that they’re going to have on hand as well.

Hill: Let me just add, for a company with a market cap of $4.5 billion, so it is not an inconsequential amount of money.

Mann: They have some firepower. They have some liquidity that they can do some things with. I think actually with cybersecurity the nature of the business, and we get asked this all the time, what are your favorite cybersecurity companies? I actually would take a basket approach and own several, or if not many of them, and think of them as one, two, or three positions in your portfolio. The reason is this, cybersecurity becomes more powerful the more players there are. In a lot of industries, if you go in as a hacker, that you only have to figure out one company’s protocols, then maybe I don’t know that that creates the same level of security as multiple ones with different levels of expertise. We don’t ultimately know which one is going to win. This is an area where I think it is incredibly important because unfortunately, the jerk element of this world is not slowing down. They are doing some really horrible things that have cost all of us whether we know it or not, a lot of money. I think you have to be involved with the companies that are on the front line in fighting the hackers and the cybersecurity terrorists. I really don’t know what you call them now, but enough is enough.

Hill: You don’t know what to call them, but you appear to have some insight into how they think, which I find a little unsettling. Last thing and then I’ll let you go. You talk about the basket approach, as confusing as I find this story, FireEye/Mandiant Solutions is down 15%, is this one that you look at and say, this is worthy of consideration for a place in a cybersecurity basket? Or do you want to see some of the dust settle from this move?

Mann: The answer is absolutely. I think that this company has a place. This move did not come from nowhere. This is Kevin Mandia, who is a founder of Mandiant, which was actually sold to FireEye, and then he became the CEO. This is his bread and butter. This is the company that he first founded. This is what he knows best. FireEye is a credible competitor in the space. The artist formerly known as FireEye should absolutely be something that you would consider.

Hill: That would be a better name than Mandiant Solutions. Bill Mann, great talking to you, as always, thanks for being here.

Mann: Thanks, Chris.

Hill: As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against so don’t buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. That’s going to do it for this edition of MarketFoolery. This show is mixed by Dan Boyd. I’m Chris Hill, thanks for listening. We’ll see you on Monday.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the “official” recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. We’re motley! Questioning an investing thesis — even one of our own — helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

Marc A. Hebert’s ‘Cash $ense’: When your little one asks for a mortgage, must you say sure? | Cash Sense

Marc A. Hebert's Money Sense column sig

When you are a parent, you have done so much for your children from the day they were born. If your children have already finished school, they may be alone at this point. But are they really independent? Everyone needs help sometimes, and that includes adult children. If you can provide financial assistance, should you help your adult child when they ask?

Your first thought might be to pull out the checkbook. But it might be better to examine the cost first, both financially and emotionally. Here are some of the questions you might want to ask.

kAmxD E96> @? 6J 36 😕 8 8: G6? 7 @ C 2 C62D @ 23 = 6 AFCA @ D6n p 32 <2D@? 6J: D 8 @ 😕 8 E @ 36 FD65 7 @ C 2? 5 J @ F D9 @ F = 5[ E@@] x7 J @ FC 49: = 5 4 @? DE2? E = J 3 @ CC @ HD> @? 6J @ C: D 2 3: 8 DA6? 56C[ AC@G:5:?8 255:E:@?2= =6?5:?8 >:89E ?@E 36 E96 36DE 564:D:@? J@F 4@F=5 >2<6] * @ F>: 89E 36 6? 23 = 😕 8 A @@ C 7:? 2? 4: 2 = 3692G: @C]x7 J @ FC 49: = 5: D FDF2 == J 8C62E H: E9> @? 6Y[ E96 42=4F=2E:@? 4@F=5 36 5:776C6?E]k ^ am

kAmxD E96 = @ 2? H: E9 😕 J @ FC> 62? Dn q67 @ C6 8: G:? 8 J @ FC 49: = 5 2 = @ 2?[ E2<6 D@>6 E:>6 E@ 4@?D:56C 9@H :E H:== 27764E J@F] r2? J @ F C62 == J 277 @ C5 E @ = 6? 5> @? 6J E @ J @ FC 49: = 5n (92E H: == 92AA6?: 7 J @ FF? 6IA64E65 = J? 665 E96 7F 5Dn (92E: 7 J @ FC 49: = 5 5 @ 6D? ‘E A2J J @ F 3246? E 2? 5 4 @ F? E:? 8th @? E96> @? 6Y[ :E 4@F=5 AFE J@FC C6E:C6>6?E 😕 ;6@A2C5J] xE>: 89E 36 36DE E @ @? = J = 6? 5 H92E J @ F 42? 277 @ C5 E @ = @ D6]k ^ Am

kAmx? <66A: 8 H: E9 E9: D.[ 9@H H:== =6?5:?8 >@?6J E@ J@FC 49:=5 27764E 9:> @C 96C 😕 E96 =@?8 CF?n x7 J@F DE6A 😕 E9:D E:>6[ H:== J@FC 49:=5 6IA64E 96=A 5FC:?8 E96 ?6IE 7:?2?4:2= DECF88=6n xE >:89E 36 E:>6 E@ 8:G6 J@FC 49:=5 E96 492?46 E@ 7:8FC6 @FE E96:C 7:?2?46D @? E96:C @H?]k ^ am

fight? @ E96C 724E @ CJ @ F>: 89E H2? EE @ 4 @? D: 56C: D 72>: = J E6? D: @?]X7 J @ FC 49: = 5 42 ?? @ E A2J J @ F 324[ H@F=5 E9:D 4C62E6 4@?7=:4E 36EH66? J@Fn x7 J@FC 49:=5 7@C86ED 2 A2J>6?E @C 42?’E A2J 7@C E96 >@?E9[ H92E H:== 92AA6?n (:== J@F 766= @3=:82E65 E@ 364@>6 :?G@=G65 H:E9 J@FC 49:=5’D 7:?2?46Dn s@6D J@FC DA@FD6 28C66 H:E9 E96 =6?5:?8 564:D:@?n x7 J@F 92G6 @E96C 49:=5C6?[ 9@H H@F=5 E96J 766= 23@FE E96 =@2?n %96 6>@E:@?2= 4@DE @7 E96 =@2? >2J 36 8C62E6C E92? E96 7:?2?4:2= 4@DE]k ^ am

kAmp7E6C E2<:?8 2== @7 E9:D :?E@ 4@?D:56C2E:@?[ =6E’D D2J J@F 564:56 E@ D2J J6D 2?5 =6?5 J@FC 49:=5 >@? 6J]x7 E9: D: D E96 42D6[ :E 😀 E:>6 E@ 364@>6 2 =6?56C] xE’D D6C: @FD 3FD:? 6DD]! FE 2 == @ 7 E96 = @ 2? E6C> D:? HC: E:? 8]$ 6ED @> 6 6IA64E2E: @? D]$ 6E:? E6C6DE C2E6D[ C6A2J>6?E D4965F=6D[ A2J>6?E E6C>D[ 2?5 4@==2E6C2=] * @ F>: 89E 6G6? H2? EE @ D6E FA 2FE @> 2E: 4 = @ 2? A2J> 6? E EC2? D76CD 7C @> J @ FC 49: = 5’D 244 @ F? EE @ J @ FCD – J @ F 5 @? ‘E H2? E 563E 4 @ == 64E @ C:? J @ FC; @ 3 56D4C: AE: @?]K ^ Am

kAmxE 2 = D @> 2 <6D D6? D6 E @ EC62E E96 = @ 2? :? 2 3FD:? 6DD =:<6 >2 ?? 6C E @> 66E D @> 6 x # $ C6BF: C6> 6? ED]| 2<6 46CE2:? E96 :?E6C6DE C2E6 :D 2AAC@AC:2E6 2?5 2E =62DE 6BF2= E@ E96 2AA=:423=6 7656C2= C2E6] %9:D 4@F=5 96=A J@F 2G@:5 92G:?8 E96 =@2? 4@?D:56C65 2 8:7E H:E9 E96 C6DF=E:?8 8:7E 2?5 6DE2E6 E2I 4@?D6BF6?46D] x7 E96 >@? 6J: DE @ 36 FD65 E @ AFC492D6 2 9 @> 6[ >2<6 DFC6 E96 =@2? >66ED E96 C6BF:C6>6?ED D@ J@FC 49:=5 42? 92G6 2? :?E6C6DE 6IA6?D6 565F4E:@?] xE 4 @ F = 5 36 96 = A7F = E @ 5: D4FDD E96 E2I 4 @? D6BF6? 46D @ 7 E96 EC2? D24E: @? H: E9 2 E2I 25G: D6C]k ^ Am

kAmx7 J @ F 564: 56 E92E J @ F; FDE 42 ?? @ E = 6? 5 E96> @? 6Y[ J@F >:89E H2?E E@ @776C @E96C 96=A] u @ C 6I2> A = 6[ J@F 4@F=5 @776C E@ A2J 2 A2CE:4F=2C 3:== 7@C 2 D9@CE A6C:@5 @7 E:>6] x? E:> 6D @ 7 DECF88 = 6[ 2== 96=A 😀 H@?56C7F= E@ 92G6]k ^ am

kAmu 😕 2 == J.[ 5@?’E 766= 8F:=EJ :7 J@F 5@?’E =6?5 E96 >@?6J] * @ FC 7:? 2? 46D 2C6:> A @ CE2? E.[ E@@[ 2?5 J@FC C6=2E:@?D9:A H:E9 J@FC 49:=5 >:89E 36 36EE6C 7@C :E]k ^ am

Marc A. Hebert, MS, CFP, is an executive member and president of asset management and financial planning firm The Harbor Group of Bedford. Email questions to Marc at mhebert@harborgroup.com. Your question and its answer may appear in a future column.

The Cash Does not Make Sense for Pittsburgh Steelers to Minimize Vince Williams

PITTSBURGH – The Pittsburgh Steelers started their salary cap this week, restructuring defensive captain Cameron Heyward’s contract, saving the team around $ 7 million for the 2021 season.

It’s a start, but the Steelers are not balanced yet. And as they near the March 17 deadline, they’ll need to save another $ 15 million to meet the NFL’s current salary cap of $ 180 million.

First, the league is expected to increase that number. While teams are grappling with a difficult off-season in terms of money, the salary cap should increase to around $ 185 million or more.

Which one will help the Steelers.

However, you still have no problems. Pittsburgh needs to find ways to speak up and step down some of its 24 free agents. They’ll also consider turning a contract on to TJ Watts and want to dive into the free hand and secure a small signature or two to help with the depth.

Before that, they’ll consider cutting players. In the past few years, the Steelers lived and breathed restructuring contracts and used players as cap victims. And this year they’ll keep the same mentality.

“We are very pleased with this approach,” said General Manager Kevin Colbert. “It was much more successful for us than it was unsuccessful. I think we will continue to do that.”

So who is on the list of possible cuts? One name buzzing around Pittsburgh is linebacker Vince Williams.

Williams, 31, is slated to earn $ 7 million in the final year of his contract in 2021. If the Steelers decide to deviate from the seasoned linebacker, they will save $ 4 million in cap space.

That number sounds appetizing. The Steelers could get closer to the $ 10 million mark by removing Williams and looking for alternative options. Some have already played it.

The reasons for cutting Williams would be the money and the increase in production behind him. The Steelers will get Devin Bush back this season, who will immediately take the lead in the linebacker.

Robert Spillane, Avery Williamson and Marcus Allen all played well in 2020 and were comfortable in the starting roles of defense. So why not ditch the vet and keep one of the younger options?

The answer is simple – because it doesn’t save anyone money. Or at least not enough money.

The Steelers had to sign which of the three they wanted to keep. Outside of everyone, it means they’re likely to hand over a $ 3 or $ 4 million contract to anyone who stays close.

Yes, Spillane and Williamson put youth in the position, but both don’t seem like the long-term solution alongside Bush that is adding to Williams’ case.

Williams is the heart and soul of the Steelers’ locker room. Pittsburgh will do without Maurkice Pouncey, which means they need that true “doggie” mentality.

Williams brings that mentality.

Without saving a lot of money, it makes sense to keep the 31-year-old. The Steelers need to find depth, but could solve their short and long term problems by using the NFL draft to find an insider behind Williams and Bush.

It just works better if the Steelers stick with what they have and explore other options to make room for the cap.

Noah Strackbein is a publisher at AllSteelers. Follow Noah on Twitter @NoahStrackand AllSteelers @si_steelers.

Frequent sense or cash | Information, Sports activities, Jobs


In these troubled times, I have to wonder which of the two titles is used the most. I see that small businesses fail on a daily basis and still large stores can continue to sell and play soccer games, soccer and basketball. Our local restaurant has followed all of the protocols set by the CDC and the governor. They all wore a mask and disinfected every table, menu and spice jar after someone touched them. They shut down tables to force social distancing and yet they shut down. Why?

I think it was because money speaks. With the efforts of the owner and staff of our local small businesses, they could have stayed open. The big businesses and sports have the revenue to push them through, even though you can see the sports are played without a mask or social distance. The big stores need a mask, but they don’t enforce social distancing. What did this state and this country come for? Myself, and others I have spoken to, feel that common sense has pushed the almighty dollar into the background.

Rodney Phillips


Latest news and more in your inbox