Ralph Nader: "Society is in Decay"

Photo by frank mckenna on Unsplash

Anyone who watches American news might be led to believe that the United States is on the decline.  Our ability to negotiate trade deals, form multilateral relationships with other countries is off the table at the moment.  Further, our standing in the world as a leader is currently being questioned due to our elected leader who resides in the White House.  Many ask with regard to the Republican Senate: What are they doing behind the scenes as this clown in the Oval Office tears the country apart?  I do not have the slightest clue.  Although, activists who have been on the front line fighting for regulation and keeping the government accountable might have more to offer.  In which case, I defer to Ralph Nader below.

Ralph Nader lays out the current decay of society below:

Plutocrats like to control the range of permissible public dialogue. Plutocrats also like to shape what society values. If you want to see where a country’s priorities lie, look at how it allocates its money. While teachers and nurses earn comparatively little for performing critical jobs, corporate bosses including those who pollute our planet and bankrupt defenseless families, make millions more. Wells Fargo executives are cases in point. The vastly overpaid CEO of General Electric left his teetering company in shambles. In 2019, Boeing’s CEO got a bonus (despite the Lion Air Flight 610 737 Max 8 crash in 2018). Just days before a second deadly 737 Max 8 crash in Ethiopia.

This disparity is on full display in my profession. Public interest lawyers and public defenders, who fight daily for a more just and lawful society, are paid modest salaries. On the other hand, the most well compensated lawyers are corporate lawyers who regularly aid and abet corporate crime, fraud, and abuse. Many corporate lawyers line their pockets by shielding the powerful violators from accountability under the rule of law.

Physicians who minister to the needy poor and go to the risky regions, where Ebola or other deadly infectious diseases are prevalent, are paid far less than cosmetic surgeons catering to human vanities. Does any rational observer believe that the best movies and books are also the most rewarded? Too often the opposite is true. Stunningly gripping documentaries earn less than 1 percent of what is garnered by the violent, pornographic, and crude movies at the top of the ratings each week.

On my weekly radio show, I interview some of the most dedicated authors who accurately document perils to health and safety. The authors on my program expose pernicious actions and inactions that jeopardize people’s daily lives. These guests offer brilliant, practical solutions for our widespread woes (see ralphnaderradiohour.com). Their important books, usually go unnoticed by the mass media, barely sell a few thousand copies, while the best-seller lists are dominated by celebrity biographies. Ask yourself, when preventable and foreseeable disasters occur, which books are more useful to society?

The monetary imbalance is especially jarring when it comes to hawks who beat the drums of war. For example, people who push for our government to start illegal wars (eg. John Bolton pushing for the war in Iraq) are rewarded with top appointments. Former government officials also get very rich when they take jobs in the defense industry. Do you remember anyone who opposed the catastrophic Iraq War getting such lucrative rewards?

The unknown and unrecognized people who harvest our food are on the lowest rung of the income ladder despite the critical role they play in our lives. Near the top of the income ladder are people who gamble on the prices of food via the commodities market and those who drain the nutrients out of natural foods and sell the junk food that remains, with a dose of harmful additives. Agribusiness tycoons profit from this plunder.

Those getting away with major billing fraud grow rich. While those people trying to get our government to do something about $350 billion dollars in health care billing fraud this year – like Harvard Professor Malcolm K. Sparrow – live on a college professor’s salary.

Hospital executives, who each make millions of dollars a year, preside over an industry where about 5,000 patients die every week from preventable problems in U.S. hospitals, according to physicians at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. The watchdogs who call out this deadly hazard live on a fraction of that amount as they try to save lives.

Even in sports, where people think the best athletes make the most money, the reverse is more often true. Just ask a red-faced Brian Cashman, the Yankees GM, who, over twenty years, has spent massive sums on athletes who failed miserably to produce compared to far lesser-paid baseball players. Look at today’s top ranked Yankees – whose fifteen “stars” are injured, while their replacements are playing spectacularly for much smaller compensation than their high priced teammates.

A major reason why our society’s best are so often last while our worst are first is the media’s infatuation with publicizing the worst and ignoring the best. Warmongers get press. The worst politicians are most frequently on the Sunday morning TV shows – not the good politicians or civic leaders with proven records bettering our society.

Ever see Congressman Pascrell (Dem. N.J.) on the Sunday morning news shows? Probably not. He’s a leader who is trying to reform Congress so that it is open, honest, capable and represents you the people. Surely you have heard of Senator Lindsey Graham (Rep. S.C.) who is making ugly excuses for Donald Trump, always pushing for war and bloated military budgets, often hating Muslims and Arabs and championing the lawless American Empire. He is always in the news, having his say.

Take the 162 people who participated in our Superbowl of Civic Action at Constitution Hall in Washington D.C. in May and September 2016. These people have and are changing America. They are working to make food, cars, drugs, air, water, medical devices, and drinking water safer. Abuses by corporations against consumers, workers and small taxpayers would be worse without them. Our knowledge of solutions and ways to treat people fairly and abolish poverty and advance public services is greater because of their courageous hard work. (see breakingthroughpower.org).

The eight days of this Civic Superbowl got far less coverage than did Tiger Woods losing another tournament that year or the dismissive nicknames given by the foul-mouth Trump to his mostly wealthy Republican opponents on just one debate stage.

All societies need play, entertainment, and frivolity. But a media obsessed with giving 100 times the TV and radio time, using our public airwaves for free, to those activities than to serious matters crucial to the most basic functioning of our society is assuring that the worst is first and the best is last. Just look at your weekly TV Guide.

If the whole rotted-out edifice comes crashing down, there won’t be enough coerced taxpayer dollars anymore to save the Plutocrats, with their limitless greed and power. Maybe then the best can have a chance to be first.

American greed seems to be at the height of our country's history with President Trump at the helm.  He is certainly promoting the Plutocrats be not only respected, but actually be compensated - financially - by not holding them accountable for their misdeeds.  Letting the wronged go uncompensated as in crash victims or victims of fraud (i.e. banking scandals) is not right and should be dealt with.  Although, as Ralph Nader points out that the current state of our country is the trajectory based on what happened over the course of history.  See other past articles below.



The United States does have a chance to correct the mishappens which are currently plaguing our society today.  Will we do it?   Time will only tell.  Thankfully, we have heroes like Ralph Nader who take the time to spell out the obvious to us -- American People.   Now the time has come for us to rise up and speak for change of the current status quo.  We were promised greatness by President Trump as a candidate and have received great amounts of disappointment.



Related Blog Posts:


 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

China Raises Ante In Trade War With Threat Of Cutting Off Rare Metals To U.S.

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

Yesterday, the stock market took a dive as economists are growing increasingly worried about the consequences of President Trump's growing tensions with countries regarding trade deals.  According to Politico, the White House had a difficult time getting messaging together to respond to concerns of both members of his own part along with the rest of the world.  Which is worrisome to say the least.



The most damaging consequence of these potential trade disasters (non-negotiations) is the cost to the American consumer.  In the video below, the real potential costs are embedded in what China controls.  Earth metals are a priority for a variety of electronic products sold in the United States along with the rest of the world.  China certainly has the upper hand it appears.

A video from the show 'Velshie & Ruhle' below explains the threat of cutting off the United States from Rare Earth Metals:

Wow! Stay tuned as to the actual outcome of the trade wars being brought on by a President whose lack of understanding could have real (and dangerous) consequences to the well-being of the American consumer.    

Related Blog Posts:

"Trade Not Aid" -- A Shout out from Farmers to President Trump again

Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Soybean Farmers Are Storing Too Much Soybean, Although Chemical Industry Is Greenlighting Trade Deals?


How many cows are needed to generate 50,000 tons of beef exports?


Trade War Hurts Farmers -- From The Farmer's Mouth Directly


"Trade Not Aid" -- The Answer For Trade War!


Parameters: Tariffs Affect Trade In Both Directions -- In And Out Of The USA


Parameters: Steel And Aluminum Tariffs Are Not Isolated - They Are Tied To Trading Of Other Vital Goods

Why Are Scientists So Rigid?

Photo by Lucas Vasques on Unsplash

When I was an undergraduate student, my first impression of a scientist was that of a rigid, serious, and reclusive person. Of course, since then, my view has changed. Especially since I am a scientist. Do I think of myself as a rigid, serious, and reclusive person? No.

Another first impression which often is repeated back to me is that many scientists live in an academic, intellectual world which is not accessible to an outsider. I have found that this is one of many misnomers (a wrong judgment) of a scientist which is propagated throughout time over and over again. Why?

What is a scientist?

According to Wikipedia, a scientist is a person who researches to advance knowledge:

A scientist is someone who conducts scientific research to advance knowledge in an area of interest. In classical antiquity, there was no real ancient analog of a modern scientist. Instead, philosophers engaged in the philosophical study of nature called natural philosophy, a precursor of natural science.

The above definition does not answer the question as to why scientists are so rigid. What the above description does describe is the fact that scientific inquiry (scientific research) is conducted in a variety of subfields to advance the knowledge of that subfield. Which involves language and procedures which are specific to that subfield. What subfields do I speak of?

Take Chemistry, for example. Within the field of Chemistry, there are subfields: Organic Chemistry, Inorganic Chemistry, Analytical Chemistry, and Physical Chemistry. Each of the above is hyperlinked to their respective Wikipedia page for clarification.

An Organic/Inorganic Chemist is tasked with the synthesis of chemical compounds in a laboratory. Whereas, an Analytical Chemist might be more concerned about exact quantities and the limits of measurement for various analytical (laboratory) instrumentation.

Last but not least is the Physical Chemist who delves deep into the theoretical/experimental aspects of chemistry — from measurement to basic principles from both thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. This entails everything of the energy required for a reaction to the structures involved in chemical reactions.

Each scientific field (or professional field for that matter) has a unique language and methods by which the profession operates. The language is the avenue by which professionals in the given field use to communicate advances in the field. Specific techniques and practices which are used by professionals are unique to the area. Furthermore, the methods are standardized arouond the world.

As I said earlier, the methods and procedures can vary across fields of science. Returning to the Wikipedia page for a Scientist the variety of careers which scientists can occupy are wide:

Scientists are motivated to work in several ways. Many have a desire to understand why the world is as we see it and how it came to be. They exhibit a strong curiosity about reality. Other motivations are recognition by their peers and prestige. The Nobel Prize, a widely regarded prestigious award,[30] is awarded annually to those who have achieved scientific advances in the fields of medicine, physics, chemistry, and economics. Some scientists have a desire to apply scientific knowledge for the benefit of people’s health, the nations, the world, nature, or industries (academic scientist and industrial scientist). Scientists tend to be less motivated by direct financial reward for their work than other careers. As a result, scientific researchers often accept lower average salaries when compared with many other professions which require a similar amount of training and qualification.[31]

Being a scientist is not restricted to each nation in the world. The universality of science rests on the standardization of science around the globe. That is the main avenue by which scientists can communicate new advances and old concepts which needs revisions.

Science is Standardized Around The World

The language and methodology of science (along with other fields) is standardized around the world. Which means that anyone who would like to communicate concepts of science or research conducted in the scientific laboratory needs to speak the specific language. That language is standardized.

The standardization of science tends to limit the language which scientists can use to communicate science to the public. Ask any scientist what he/she does for research and chances are that the answer will involve complicated language. Hesitancy is also a response often encountered by the public when speaking with a scientist about their research. This is a problem.

There are two primary sources of problems in science communication. First, is the obvious. Projects which are worked on in scientific laboratories are typically held tightly in the hands of scientists. Many scientists work hard on projects and are wary of communicating outside of the realm of publishing. Once the work of a scientist is published, the work cannot be stolen. Ideas are documented to the original person. The same is true of a scientist working for a large corporation. Corporate secrets are guarded closely by corporations.

Secondly, the inability of a scientist to properly communicate is due to the specific language which is used on a daily basis in the profession. Scientists might get hesitant when asked about their projects. The hesitancy is often because the scientist does not know how to describe the research project in simple terms to the layperson. Some scientists like Professor Richard Feynman had a natural talent for communicating science. A large number of scientists do not.

The inability to communicate to the public is often translated as too complicated or too complex for the public to understand, which is not the case at all. Although some scientists do not feel comfortable reaching outside the normalized language of science to describe their work. As a result, scientists are perceived to be proud or arrogant or a hermit. This is a major downfall of most scientists. And very often not true at all.

Most Scientists are Curious and Talkative

Not all scientists are outgoing. Some scientists are introverts, whereas a large number of scientists are extroverts. A scientist who is an extrovert can be perceived to be not serious — which again is far from the truth. Scientists tend to be very serious about being taken seriously by their colleagues. Still, this behavior is not suitable for society or the public to see this acting on the part of the scientists.

Scientists need to emerge from their comfort zone and go out to interface with the public at events. Only then will the true nature of scientists become better known. Most scientists I know, are friendly people. And they are more talkative than they would like to lead on in the public eye.

Last but not least, scientists tend to think that time spent in the laboratory is indicative of how serious of a scientist they genuinely are. Which again, is not the case. Yes, the time spent in the laboratory is significant. Although performing good science is not merely accomplished by spending a considerable amount of time in the laboratory. Spending quality time thinking and conducting research is of utmost importance. Ensuring that each step of the scientific process is being accomplished correctly and recorded correctly is the absolute most crucial part of practicing science.

Scientists are often misjudged by the public.  Part of that lies on the shoulders of scientists.  The other part is on the shoulders of the public.  Public engagement in science is a two-way street.  Which is to say, it takes two to tango.  Yes, scientists should make a better effort to reach out and engage with the public.  I will not deny that.  On the part of the public, there could be vast improvements as well.  Notably, instead of perceiving that science is inaccessible due to the narrow language and methodologies used in the profession, each member of the public could do due diligence and try to learn about science.  That way each party can meet each other halfway.  We might have a long way to go in closing the gap.  Although, starting the discussion into the gap and a solution is the first step toward finding a solution. 

Related Blog Posts:

How Do Scientists Think?

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Questions Drug Manufacturer Over Excessive Prices On Drugs

Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash

One of the top issues facing the average American today is the prices of drugs (i.e. medications).  Drug manufacturers have made money hand over fist at the expense of the American taxpayer.  And this is accomplished without little regulation from Congress.  With the change of the House this year, we are finally seeing difficult questions being asked of drug manufacturers at Congressional hearings.



In the video below, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez drills Gilead Science CEO on excessive prices on drugs in America in comparison to the same drug price overseas:

Nice.  Finally, someone is willing to press the CEO's of America's major pharmaceutical companies about drug pricing in different countries.



Here is the video of the full Congressional Hearing:

The drug manufacturers have very little interest in lowering their bottom line (profits) to their shareholders.  Which is why such Congressional hearings are so important to tease out the real problems with our nations exceedingly high cost of medications.  How to solve the issue is beyond the scope of this blog post.  Although, bringing the public's attention toward a hearing where questions are being entertained is one step closer toward arriving at a solution.



A solution which is bipartisan and results in a better and healthier United States of America.  Drug prices surely do not need to be so exorbitant that a resident of the U.S. cannot afford to get treatment.  Especially, when the government provides different forms of subsidies and tax breaks to such large corporations.  The time to take action is now.



Related Blog Posts:


New Drug Design Strategies - Consider the Patient during the Design Process


Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Food is not addictive, but is filled with Addictive Drugs -- Engineered Chemicals to Elicit Addiction


"Just Make A Generic (Cheaper Version) Of The Drug"? Not So Easy...


Update: On FDA's Policy Agenda For Combatting Opioid Crisis


The future: Making Medicines in your kitchen?

Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"

Photo by John Cameron on Unsplash

Two years into President Trump's first term in office as President of the United States of America, people are still scratching their heads and asking: "How did Trump become President?"  Answers vary from the people of the Republic seeking a change of the status quo to choosing between two bad choices (Trump vs. Hilary Clinton).  According to Ralph Nader, the answer lies in earlier Presidential history which reaches back a few administrations.  Below, he writes a letter to the public about the issue at hand.



Ralph Nader writes a letter titled "What and Who Gave Us Trump?" in which he provides the context for the current crisis:

What and Who Gave Us Trump?

Donald J. Trump’s presidential ambition has simmered for decades. He was and is a regular TV watcher and saw the changing political landscape. One by one, previous presidents diminished the integrity of the presidency and violated the rule of law, paving the way for Trump’s candidacy.

Bill Clinton was exposed for serial adulteries and abuses of women and lied under oath. This perjury led to him being impeached in the House (though he was acquitted in the Senate). “Hmm,” thought Donald, a serial abuser of women, “Clinton got away with it and was elected twice.” One potentially career-ending violation no longer had the weight it once did.

Then came George W. Bush – selected by the Electoral College and a Republican Supreme Court. “Hmm,” thought Donald to himself, “Even though Gore won the popular vote, Bush won because of Electors in swing states.”  Despite Gore’s crushing loss, the Democratic Party refused to support ongoing Electoral College reform (see nationalpopularvote.com). Once in office, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney lied repeatedly to start an unconstitutional illegal war with Iraq, which caused huge Iraqi and U.S. casualties and wreaked havoc on the U.S. budget. Bush and Cheney not only got away with these atrocities, but were reelected. A majority of voters believed their lies.  Violating the laws did not matter. “Hmm,” thought Donald to himself, “The President is above the law.” Positions of power and the trampling of laws appealed to Trump, a lawless, failed gambling czar.

Then along came Obama. He too got away with all kinds of slaughter abroad without authority of the Constitution, statutes, or international treaties. He too was reelected. Domestically, Obama did not prosecute any of the big Wall Street crooks that brought down our economy in 2008-2009, even though a vast majority of the population loathed these reckless financiers. With all of these misdeeds and violations of law on full display, Trump a big business crook himself, must have thought that he would not be held accountable. Even better, he knew how to use television to manipulate the media to his advantage. These examples are just some of the major ways that past presidents, Democrats especially, handed Trump his opportunity. I describe these and other presidential abuses of power in my recent book, To the Ramparts: How Bush and Obama Paved the Way for the Trump Presidency, and Why It Isn’t Too Late to Reverse Course.

Given these inoculations for breaking social norms and laws, Trump felt he could break additional norms and laws and still secure the Presidency. It almost didn’t work – Hillary Clinton’s campaign bungling lost three key states, which provided Trump a path to the White House. The crazy, antiquated Electoral College sealed the deal.

Trump has always known how to use power to get more power. He went after his opponents with harsh nicknames, repeated verbatim by a supine press. The name calling stuck and influenced voters. Democrats did not reciprocate with nicknames like “cheating Donald,” “corrupt Donald,” “Dangerous Donald,” etc.

Emboldened, Trump, with his television knowhow, grasped that many people prefer fiction to non-fiction. Fantasy is big business and it can serve to distract from grim real-life injustices.  Day after day, the mass media proved this point by giving huge time to entertainment compared to news and civic engagements locally and nationally.

Donald, through his daily tweets and assertions, shaped a story – true or not, that would help him win the White House. Reporters have collected over 10,000 of Trumps lies and seriously misleading statements since he became President (see the complete list here via the Washington Post).

But Trump, with his 50 million Twitter followers, has his own media machine, which grows because the mass media replays so many of his fictions as if they were real.

Still, the Democrats should have defeated him handily and, failing that, should have since driven his poll numbers below 40 or 42 percent, where they hover.

Democrats having lost the crucial election of 2010 in Congress, most state legislatures and governorships, Democrats lost the gerrymandering battle. This set the stage for Republicans to seriously suppress the vote in many ways documented by the League of Women Voters and the Brennan Center. Some of this suppression occurred in key swing states like Wisconsin.

Today, Trump seems impervious to the many accurate accusations of corruptions and impeachable offenses. He ruthlessly scuttles lifesaving health/safety protections for the American people, undermines law enforcement, and breaks his repeated promises to provide “great” health insurance, “pure” clean air, and jobs for workers displaced by globalization. The norms that restrain politicians and their constitutional duty to “faithfully execute the laws” have been deeply eroded.

Trump is undeterred by the hundreds of syndicated columns and the regular television commentary by leading conservatives who despise him. George Will, Michael Gerson, Max Boot, David Brooks, Bret Stephens, and others have gone after Trump repeatedly. The attacks on the Prevaricator in Chief are like water off a duck’s back. Even Trump’s trail of broken campaign promises is routinely overlooked by the press and the Trump base.

Next week my column will address what to do to make Trump a one-term President. Only a landslide defeat in 2020 will keep Trump from tweeting “fake election” and demanding a recount.

Until Next Time....Have a good day!


Related Blog Posts:


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

It’s Difficult to Drive Forward While Looking in the Rearview Mirror

Photo by Stefan Cosma on Unsplash

Have you ever tried to drive a car down the road (forward — in the drive) while staring in the rearview mirror? I find the job of driving a car forward while looking in the rear view mirror extremely challenging, if not impossible. The analogy for making a change in your life, followed by searching (focusing on) the past for answers rather than maintaining a forward-looking focus on improvement.

Whenever we make changes to our lives (personal growth, improvement, healthcare changes, etc.), why do the majority of people want to focus on the past rather than looking toward the future? The process equates to driving forward while looking in the rearview mirror. And the process is not healthy over time.

Change Is Tough But Rewarding

Any type of change in lifestyle is difficult for anybody. For a few people, the process might be more comfortable than for others. Depending on a person’s level of frustration with their current lifestyle (which is not working) on top of the desire to change equates to a rather smooth transition. The transition is propelled (in the short term) by frustration and the desire to change.

Although, over time, while the new routine sets in, the desire to return to our old habits might creep in. During these brief periods of mental relapse, a short visit into the past to remind yourself why the change is rewarding is worthwhile. What is not okay is dwelling in your past, while hoping answers will appear as to how to move forward and make progress happen daily. I will use alcoholism as an example.

Dwelling In The Past For Too Long Is Damaging

About six years ago, I decided to take a break (stop drinking altogether) from drinking alcohol. Anyone who has tried to give up drinking, which is used to habitually day-to-day drinking will testify to the difficulty. Upon giving up alcohol, I found the process rewarding immediately with little trouble.

The reason being was that I had reached a point where I was frustrated with my life. I had an excellent job and great wife along with a drinking habit which prevented me from engaging in life outside my house to a large extent. Any venues which I agreed to go to had to serve alcohol. What kind of life is this?

Over time (years), I realized that the amount of anxiety which I had in going to participate in any activity was paramount due to my drinking habit. Not significant, to say the least. When I reached for sobriety, I felt like a weight was lifted off of my chest. I did not have to worry about my next step in life revolving around alcohol and other vices. Awesome!

The first part of sobriety was natural for me. Since I am in education, I do not mind engaging in educational programs which help alcoholics. Therefore, I do not have to be ashamed or worried to admit that I love (and enjoy) attending Alcoholic Anonymous meetings on a regular basis. Education is the key for me to sobriety.

When I reach a point — say a lazy Sunday afternoon when I drive or ride (a bicycle) by a bar and look at the people having a good time — I visit the past. I remember that if I were to go into that bar, I would not come out of that bar for the remainder of the day. I would drink, play billiards, have a great time. And I would achieve nothing that I have worked so hard to accomplish in sobriety.

I am an extreme person, along with my wife. She is in the program too. Once I realize that I would be inside the bar and have a higher amount of anxiety than I do without drinking, I can keep going about my day and remain calm, collect, and no hangover — no sickness — while keeping up with my responsibilities. That is an example of visiting the past shortly, then moving on forward.

Forward-Looking Ensures The Greatest Success

As I have mentioned above, visiting (and I emphasize visiting briefly) the past is not bad at all. Your current achievements are built on the successes (or lack thereof) in the past. Not every memory is terrible. I enjoyed a large number of social events in my history, even with drinking. A little too much I might add. But spending (or romanticizing)the past too much is not great for success in moving forward.

I like to look forward and focus on day-to-day achievements now with the past in my rearview mirror. The past must be accessible. The past provides the foundation for the future. Success is, therefore, intimately linked to each of our past life events — good and bad.

Embrace the past while looking forward to a bright and prosperous future. Take each day — one at a time. Live and laugh about the past while moving (or driving) your mental car forward — best of luck in your journey. Cheers!

The article was originally published in 'The Ascent'.

Related Blog Posts:


1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

Does Your Facebook Profile Resemble Real Life?

Photo by William Iven on Unsplash

Have you ever been perusing Facebook wondering how certain friends are having such a great life? Only to find out that after visiting with them in person (or through friends) that life is not so great as it appears on Facebook. That was a recent experience for me.



I am not the vindictive or cruel type of person. Nor do I wish a particular person a miserable life. Although, I find with Facebook that the possibility of jealousy and resentment is all too possible through viewing the lives of others on the social media platform. I call this the curse of Facebook.

Don’t Spend Too Much Time On Facebook

Type into the search engine on the website ‘Psychology Today’: “Social Media” and the responses below will range from the dangers of late night engagement with social media to what content to put online. The research has been exploding on a variety of academic areas of investigation regarding the effects of social media on the average person. The most common finding is that there are dangers associated with spending too much time on social media — mostly with self-esteem, confidence, and depression. Why?



Just spend a little time viewing the lives of your friends on social media, and you may be led to believe that your life is not as fulfilling as others or exciting for that matter, which is extremely dangerous. I had a recent visit with a friend that revealed that I was too involved in believing the life of a high school friend was much better than mine. Yes, I fell into the trap also.

Does Your Facebook Profile Resemble Real Life?

Recently, I had a visit with old friends. I was invited to see a few old friends from high school, whom I have not seen in quite a while — years to be exact. Although, I am on Facebook and keep up with each of them, in person, the story is always slightly (or more) different. The present case proved this to be right once again.



I went and visited with friends at a house which had just been purchased by one of my friends younger brother. The occasion was a house welcoming party. Well, during our visit, we stood around the garage telling stories about old times — parties, girls, and concerts which all of us attended. Then the conversation moved onto the current status of each of our friends. How could it not? This was a reunion of sorts.



Well, after a while, I asked about a specific friend in question. I will not go into too much detail. But I will admit that I was curious as to what line of work this friend (I will call him — Joe) was doing. He was married and lived at the beach. Although, I knew him in high school to be a questionable person at the time. Now he is married to a beautiful lady and has two children.



Did I want Joe (and his family) to fail to make myself feel better about myself and my life? No, but the curse of Facebook was talking, and my mind was telling me that I must prove that life was not as good as his profile on Facebook led me to believe. What is wrong with me? I call this feeling — the curse of Facebook.



Anyways, during our visit, I managed to slip the person’s name into the conversation. At that point, the conversation split into two different discussions. One with myself and one friend. While the other was the rest of my friends continuing to check friends off of the list.



My conversation revealed that Joe’s lifestyle is made possible by credit. Further that Joe and his friends were running a ‘Ponzi scheme’ on wealthy residents of the beach. He was taking money from wealthy residents who had wealth by proposing fraudulent investment schemes. Wow — I did not see that one coming.



Upon finding this out, I was disappointed than feeling great about myself. The curse of Facebook can cut both ways. While knowing the truth should have been reaffirming to my initial suspicion. Instead, I felt worse. My overall feeling was of sadness for Joe and his family.



I am an optimist. Further, I wish people the best life possible. How did I fall into the trap of Facebook? I now believe that the time spent on Facebook (not to mention my state of mind at the time) is directly proportional to my feelings about my life and the life of others, which can be dangerous. Lesson learned: Be careful how long and what information I take away from social media. The grass appears to be greener on the other side.



I started to realize that Facebook and other social media platforms can be potentially dangerous. The ‘curse of Facebook had struck again. I say again since I had been cutting back on my engagement over the last couple of years.

What About My Profile?

My Facebook profile says little about me. Although, I have tried to be transparent to the extent that I can. My wife is the type of person to snap pictures at any moment in time — then immediately post. Which means I typically get a few comments such as: “Wow beautiful picture — not,” or “Could you not have posed differently?”



She believes that all photos are equal. I have had requests to take pictures down because of the candidness of the photo. One family member asked not to show a particular image because of the way the shot made him look (I guess to large). We have videos of old drinking parties where you get an upfront look at Mike before sobriety.



Still, I believe that the profile does not do my life justice that is for sure. Not everyone is interested in each activity that each of our friends is doing at any given moment. Which again begs the question: Does your Facebook profile resemble your real life?



I am going to stop at the conclusion that the possibility does not exist to have a real resemblance of our lives on Facebook. The reasons for these differences will remain a mystery for now. What I am sure about is that the curse of Facebook is definitely part of the problem.



This article originally appeared on 'A Scientist Made Simple'



Related Blog Posts:



1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!