<>The Chinese.

THE Philippines has a large population of people of Chinese ancestry. Chinese in the Philippines have intermarried with Filipinos and largely been assimilated into the population. Data says Chinese mestizos or ethnically Chinese Filipinos comprise 1.8 percent of the population. But that is only 1.35 million out of the total 113.9 million humanity back home. Which is extremely modest or huge miscalculation. Chinese culture’s bloodline influence in the Filipino sociocultural psyche is massive. 

The country of my birth was colonized by Spain for more than three centuries and then, the archipelago was ceded and turned into a commonwealth of the United States of America for 50+ years. Yet although Catholicism dominates the people’s creed, almost 80 percent, and American English is the most commonly spoken language and Washington politics basically “dictates” governance in Manila, the Chinese factor is similar to a cloud of consciousness that hangs overhead. 

       I am not talking about the current Beijing economic bombast in the region (or globally).  Even before Ferdinand Magellan landed in the southern islands, the Chinese were already trading with Filipinos for centuries. Hence, we have a clear understanding of the Chinese mindset. Because they are “within” us. 🇨🇳🥢🇨🇳

THE Chinese back home. The quiet neighbor, painfully careful landlord and wickedly guarded loan giver. The hyper-creative but icy pragmatic restaurant/store owner who never ran out of food and stuff to sell. I even had kin who are Chinese (via marriage) or my blood/vein got Chinese in them as do majority of Filipinos. 

       The Chinese that I know avoid arguments, refuse trouble or didn't take sides in community animosities. But they are willing to serve food while village councils fix quarrels. They even offer feasts of food, free, as long as they are assured fighting would be resolved faster and they could continue business with less hostilities around. 

       A Chinese trade trait that is fascinating? When you go to a Chinese store or restaurant and ask for something that they don't have at the moment, they'd tell you they actually got some. Then the boss sends an assistant to a nearby fellow Chinese store/restaurant to get the stuff. That's how their cultural socialism works. They will convince you to sit tight for a bit and you'll get what you want in a minute as they hand you a bowl of lo mein, on the house. Voila! You are now a regular client. 🇨🇳🥢🇨🇳

HOWEVER, it doesn't mean the Chinese are spot clean. They got the dreaded Hung Society and its more popular Triad, plus the Golden Triangle crime organization. You don't mess with these guys. The CCP can't even contain them. So they struck a deal. They basically operate only in Hong Kong and Macau. 

       Meanwhile, these bad dudes also practice "cultural socialism." You know what I mean? They avoid South LA or Sinaloa kinda gangland shootout. Too messy. Bad for business. In other words, when they waste you it's because you had to be wasted. Pretty much how the Japanese Yakuza operates. Let's do business first and war is the last resort, if ever. In crime, there is respect, honor, and integrity. Uh huh. 🇨🇳🥢🇨🇳

GEOPOLITICALLY, although China's military spending is a lot less than America, China has the world's largest army, mostly concentrated inside the Great Wall. Only 1 military base outside, in Djibouti. Plus a maritime reconnaissance and electronic intelligence station in Coco Islands in the Bay of Bengal near Myanmar.  

       Think lessons of two Opium Wars (1839 to 1860) and the Boxer Rebellion (1900). They were invaded and fought back essentially via kung fu. LOL! But they eventually agreed to open their trade ports to the West. Business. That's how they "fight." Then we talk of Bill Clinton and Jiang Zemin's trade deal in 2000, which paved the way for Beijing to enter WTO in 2001. From that point, China's economic expansionism rolled on in plain sight. 

       No need to fight a physical war or armed hostility. But to outsmart the Chinese, play their relentless game of economic chairs. Same tactics and strategy how they outfoxed the U.S. and Europe. As 21st century marched in, the Chinese played Western styled capitalism sans military bombast and Hollywood-styled talk without losing their business acumen and dealmaking shrewdness. Straight up trade, no chasers in between.  🇨🇳🥢🇨🇳

WOKE: Divide and Rule?

WOKE is confused. Or confusing. I read articles, primarily in liberals New York Times and Rolling Stone, that categorically charge that woke or wokeness is a Conservative pitch. A self-righteous Political Right espousal. Yet I also read on Facebook many Left-minded friends self-praise a woke mindset. 

       “Woke" evolved from the Afro American vernacular for alertness to racial prejudice and discrimination. The Left expanded it to other current pop/politics and cultural measures. In all, I think it is simply a ploy to widen the divide. Divide and rule. We can say and pursue goodness with no new one word to describe them. But if we toss the word woke with it, the discourse turns Left or Right. 🥱😴😮

WOKE is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination." Yet political partisanship divides in America got intense and fiery, the eerie implosion slides into an explosion of hate out there, “woke” also assumes a diversity of shapes. It came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities and has also been used as shorthand for American Left ideas involving identity politics and social justice. The notion of “white privilege” and “slavery reparations” for African Americans shatter what remains of little good commonalities between friends, family, and communities. 🥱😴😮

WOKE dates back to the 1930s, historians aver. You may find lyrics by Lead Belly and Erykah Badu that used the word. And then the term reemerged in 2010s, but its meaning was expanded beyond racial consciousness to gender issues and discriminated identities, but largely in the context of American culture or U.S. sociopolitical discourse.

       The 2014 Ferguson protests and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement hugely popularized the word. Then the confusion ensued. Some have criticized the “woke” as cultural appropriation, for example, and so on and so forth. Left and Right or liberals/progressives and conservatives got their own respective takes. And since the internet-savvy millennial and Gen Z generations grab the word as their shirt slogan, “woke” spread internationally. And so, the term was added to the Oxford English Dictionary in 2017. Uh huh. 🥱😴😮

SO where are we now? Wiki: “Opponents of progressive social movements were often using the term mockingly or sarcastically, implying that `wokeness’ was an insincere form of performative activism.” British journalist Steven Poole comments that the term is used to mock "overrighteous liberalism” or “following an intolerant and moralizing ideology.” 

       Per my Facebook Homepage, I read American conservatives sling the word as an insult, exasperation, or a joke. Liberal peeps mostly anchor their musings about a less dark universe by espousing “wokeness.” I may be wrong, right? Essentially, I have no problem with “woke” as a sociocultural standard. It may fall into what I call as ideological overreach in favor of advocacy for more gut-level exigencies that majority of people face.

But the way “woke” is tossed into a joust is dividing us more than ushering us into an open-minded plaza of views towards negotiated unity. As I said, “wokeness” has evolved into a brilliant pitch to fire up “divide and rule,” and we know who hugely benefits. 🥱😴😮

Dangerous Days and Gung-ho Guns

Posted 30 April 2023. By Pasckie Pascua

NEW York Times: “Shooting of Teen Who Rang Doorbell at Wrong House Unsettles Kansas City.” Residents and friends of the victim were searching for answers as the 84-year-old homeowner surrendered to the authorities on two felony charges. / “New Details Emerge in Deadly Upstate Shooting of Woman in Wrong Driveway.” The man who fired on three vehicles that mistakenly drove up his driveway, killing a young woman, had a reputation as a sour character who did not like visitors.

SCARY although I am not frightened sort of. Extra caution is imperative though. We may know our neighbors but we don’t really know. You know what I mean? When I was new in Asheville, maybe year 2000, I experienced a similar horror. As you can deduce (!) I am still here stayin’ alive but I was also shot at on a driveway of somebody else’s house in a common community. 

       Me and my friend Jenni fell of a ditch, I mean the car. I am not sure if it was already cellphone days but I reckon, not yet. So I walked to the nearest house, intending to ask for help or probably use their phone to call the house (our house). Two three steps to the property, a shotgun went boom! Though I was so stunned to realize it was a firearm that was aimed at me. It was also dark. No street light porch, whatsoever.

       Jenni screamed so I ran. One more shot, I could have been hit. Thank God/dess, no second shot. The owner of the house, didn’t even know if it was she or he or they or nonbinary, simply strode back in like heck it was a damn possum! LOL! 

ON a parallel subject, let me share thoughts that I previously typed up as comment to a Facebook post. 

       

I AM a relative foreigner in America. I covered several coup d’etats in Asia as well as countryside war in the Philippines. I also survived military rule or Martial Law, 1970s-1980s. I started as a police reporter when I was 14. Etc. I saw blood death destruction as an active journalist, community organizer, and Leftist activist. 

       In those days we somehow knew or had ideas where the bomb would blow up stuff or when bullets flew. And So I slept good and enjoyed fiestas and rowdy crowds and basketball in the plaza. Asia is a crowded world, you see. But I wasn't uneasy in public places despite cops in civvies tailing us because we reported stuff or we supported activists. I even knew those cops, regardless they were on civvies as disguise. 

       But in the U.S.  it is so different. Or it evolved this way. Morbid unease. We don't know where and when the AR 15 will mow people down and who these people are. The shooters aren't war combatants or hitmen or gangland soldiers. They can be nerdy kids, store owner who smiles at neighbors,  or a quiet dude with no parking tix ever. 

       So from organizing park concerts and club gigs and many public gatherings here in America for two decadess, I quit. I don't want to usher people to danger. I don't even go out as much anymore. I am cool though. There are still a lot to enjoy in America. 

       Meanwhile, I don't own a gun ever. I am old. I'd rather stay in. Write memories, paint to stretch bones, do gardening, enjoy streaming TV with a dog and two cats. 

This is America. Complex, contradictory, but cool in so many ways. Enjoy blessings. Hope each morning that another mass shooting shudder doesn’t kick off the day.

DIVORCE, love and negotiations

Posted on Facebook, April 27, 2023. Pasckie Pascua.

AS of 2019, both marriage rates and divorce rates in the U.S. are decreasing, with the marriage rate dropping from 8.2 per 1,ooo people in 2000 to 6.1 and the divorce rate from 4.0 in 2000 to 2.7. Hmmm. The current divorce rate in the U.S. is 2.9 persons per 1,000 people. Overall, the rate of divorces in America is falling. However, divorces amongst people aged 50+ years is rising.

       Since I came from a galaxy so far away with no divorce (!) I find the U.S. data fascinating. Sure, the issue is complex. I viewed all these, divorce and separations, on a linear gaze years ago. But then it isn’t really that simple, right? As in single parenthood with 7 kids and unsettled divorce for 7 years etcetera aren’t so simple per law.

       I was thinking that the nasty societal divide ushered by politics and the pandemic-ushered funky inertia would somehow shudder the relationship quotient. Or maybe I am wrong. People are marrying less but divorcing less as well.

       Let’s look back per what I read on Smithsonian, an article entitled “Escape from the Gilded Cage” by April White, adapted or based on her book “The Divorce Colony: How Women Revolutionized Marriage and Found Freedom on the American Frontier.” 👩‍🦳💔👱‍♂️

SOME facts cited by April White on her book “The Divorce Colony: How Women Revolutionized Marriage and Found Freedom on the American Frontier.” Slowly over the decades, divorce laws in the United States followed fundamental shifts. By the 1930s, one could obtain a divorce after a six-week stay in Nevada. In the late 1940s, South Carolina, which had, for most of its existence, no provisions for divorce, changed its constitution to allow unhappy spouses to go their separate ways.

       It took until the 1960s for New York to expand its grounds for divorce beyond adultery. By then, New Yorkers had figured out other creative ways around the law. Some went to Mexican states where a divorce could be obtained in just one day. I thought New York spearheaded this area of legal splits. I am wrong.

       But indeed New York took the thingy to a more commercial level. There was even a cottage industry of actresses willing to play the role of the other woman for couples who wanted a divorce on the grounds of adultery without actually committing it.

       In late 1990s, I worked in a Queens law office. There, I realized “marriage for convenience” or pay was a lucrative entrepreneurial venture. Marry a citizen for a fee, then divorce her/him later for more fee. Business. 👩‍🦳💔👱‍♂️

INFLUENTIAL, famous people got into it since they needed divorce or they were embroiled in those marital shudders. In 1966, New York governor Nelson Rockefeller—whose wife, Mary, had divorced him in 1962 after six weeks in Reno—signed into law a bill recognizing five grounds for divorce in New York, including cruelty and abandonment.

       Then, in 1969, California governor Ronald Reagan, who had been divorced himself, signed the first no-fault divorce law, allowing spouses to separate without a finding of guilt. By 1977, all but three states had such an option.

       But of course South Dakota led this “revolution” in America. In asking for their own freedom, the “divorce colonists” in Sioux Falls were among the first rebels. Collectively, they had, quite unintentionally, set the country down a winding path toward the acceptance and accessibility of divorce.

      “They had rising ideals and a new vision for marriage, and for each of them, divorce was a declaration of independence,” writes April White in her book “The Divorce Colony: How Women Revolutionized Marriage and Found Freedom on the American Frontier.” 👩‍🦳💔👱‍♂️

"With a $2 Billion Factory From China, a German City Lets Others Worry." News adds: "Arnstadt’s embrace of a giant new battery plant for electric cars illustrates Europe’s ambivalence toward Chinese investment: Jobs trump geopolitics." 

Again, despite historical facts and current trade relations, naysayers abound in regards reportage of dealings between the world's biggest economies. Negativity is the nickname of today's journalism? Trade facts: Germany is China's biggest trading partner and technology exporter in Europe, and the amount of German investment in China ranks second among European countries, after the United Kingdom. China is Germany's largest trading partner, superseding the United States since 2017. 

  China/Germany. Truth is, Chinese and German relations, albeit high and low, aren't new. These countries formally established BFFhood in 1861, when Prussia and the Qing Empire signed the first Sino-German treaty during the Eulenburg Expedition. Ten years later, the German Empire was founded and the new state inherited the old Prussian treaty. That time though, the friendship got cold. Germany joined imperialist powers like Great Britain as France carved out influence in the Chinese empire. Remember, the Germans were also part of a Western alliance that tried to crushed the Boxer Rebellion in 1899 to 1901. 
  After World War I, relations improved as German military advisers assisted the Kuomintang government's National Revolutionary Army. However, when Adolf Hitler forged Axis friendship with Japan in the 1930s, Germans and Chinese weren't cool again. Then after World War II, Germany was split in two states: a liberal democratic West Germany and a communist East Germany. Cold War led to West Germany's alliance with the United States vs communism per se. The East hooked up with the Soviet Union and China. But after the German reunification in 1990, sweet relations between Germany and China was again alive. 

  So are the Germans "worried" about Chinese money coming in a.k.a. investments? Let's just say that is a global fact which could be difficult to fathom. Like, many Filipinos, despite our blood as mostly Chinese than Europeans etcetera, still view the Chinese negatively. Ask South Americans like Brazilians, Bolivians, or Argentinians. Not so good. Yet their governments openly embrace Beijing's money. While some 84 percent of the Chinese view Germany positively, only 20 percent Germans are cool with China, says a BBC survey. Yet the fact is: Germany turns to China for business. By 2014 German Chancellor Angela Merkel had visited China on trade missions seven times since assuming office in 2005. 

NEWS. "He’s the President Democratic Voters Don’t Want to Hear Criticized." / "Barack Obama’s Biggest Mistake." 

NEW YORK Times says it rhymes with "schneo-liberalism." I don't know what is schneo-liberalism. The writer, Farhad Manjoo, defines it as an economic disaster and a political dead end. Yet no Democratic bet has really called out the Obama administration’s policies. He is so cool to diss, I guess. Meantime, what is neoliberalism? Market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing state influence in the economy, especially through privatization and austerity. Uhh kinda cool, isn't it? But does it work? 

True, Obama responded to the recession with emergency measures designed to fix the immediate collapse of financial markets. The recovery from the start of the downturn in 2008 was slow yet it was still a growth. As Obama gave away bailout money to banks and corporations, unemployment was almost 10 percent in 2010. Although the rate lessened from that point, it was slow in the next six years. Obama left office with a 4 percent joblessness rate. It hasn't gone up from that point. Obama's economic team are still saying though that if the stimulus was instead $1.7 trillion, Obama could have done better. Really. Why don't they just accept the flaw and move on to the next strategy? 
I already have a lot of problem/s with Obama's handling of the $800 billion, stimulus/bailout though. His advisers projected it would reduce unemployment to below 8 percent by the 2010 midterms. They were wrong; the stimulus did reduce job losses, but it was far too small to hit the stated goal — unemployment was 9.8 percent in November 2010. But then who knows if he indeed got $1.2 or $1.7 trillion? How could that be when he also upped Defense budget to all-time highs of  $721 billion and $717 billion in 2010/11 from George W's $696 billion. On top of that, Washington also accepted a record number of refugees as economic teams grasp for ways to speed up economic recovery. 

PERTINENT POINT: 

Just in case Obama did up the stimulus package to $1.2 or $1.7 trillion, would that have a dent with his Defense budget/s of $721 billion and $717 billion, all-time highs. Obama also accepted a record number of refugees as he devised ways to speed up economic recovery. His basic fault: He confronted both economy and "security" at the same time with budget upgrades. George W committed that blunder already. 

Life These Days. From Teenage Anxiety to Reality TV and the Russians. Not The Worst. Who To Blame? Is It Really That Bad? Peace Can Be Worked Out

NOTE: Most of the items below are my reaction/comments to daily or weekly news. Some are two years ago or so. Hence many need some updating. Some entries are "old" but still significant, I believe, in relation to current news or issues. But if you have questions, I can try to respond. Thanks!

NEWS. "Why Are More American Teenagers Than Ever Suffering From Severe Anxiety?" Parents, therapists and schools are struggling to figure out whether helping anxious teenagers means protecting them or pushing them to face their fears. Probably because they are confused. The older generations are busy arguing on Facebook, and then these youths read/hear news or listen to teachers, then they go google stuff or go to chat rooms, and there you go. No brainer. Also, we should advise or guide troubled youths with ample time and "real life" attention than continually feed them (internet) links to this and that, fancy meme and that one. Those only confuse them.

NEWS. "What Reality TV Teaches Us About Russia's Influence Campaign." Like a twisted version of the producers of an unscripted TV show, Kremlin-linked trolls used fake personas to provoke very real drama. This is very true but unfortunately those people who haven't stopped sharing links and meme's (supposedly "meant to augment" their partisan politics) refuse to accept. To accept that they've always been fooled. And still, being fooled. One example of a Social Media tactic that actually "worked" (in terms of widening divisions between conservatives and non-conservatives) was the "prayers don't solve crime" thingy that cropped up amidst recent mass shootings. I mean, does this subject even worth 1-minute of talk? People pray, some don't. Period. But people feasted on it like a "novena" is actually an entry in law enforcement eradication. Does "grace before meal" prayer automatically heat up a cold stew? What idiocy. Yet people bit it. (Yes, Putin is laughing.)

I THINK if they take out the word obama in obamacare and trump in trumpcare, for example, and just say healthcare 1 and healthcare 2, arguments and divisiveness will be lessened a bit. You reckon? Then those who know about these issues, really know them, should speak and educate us all about healthcare 1 and healthcare 2. And how things could be worked out in a bipartisan level. Uh huh. "Obama uh huh" or "Trump uh-huh"? 

NOT THE WORST. Trump and Obama people, or Sanders and Clinton people still whining over their loss, should calm down. Barack Obama and Donald Trump aren't really the worst presidents the US ever had. Trump hasn't served a year of his 4 yet so let's see how he performs in totality. Like you, I can't stand how he talks (dating back to his TV days) but I am not and never paid attention to blahblahs. I check data and facts. 
          According to analysts and observers of US politics in years, the three worst American presidents are: James Buchanan, Warren Harding, and Andrew Johnson. Their term/s were in 1800s and 1900s. Johnson (1865-1869) survived impeachment after opposing Reconstruction initiatives including the 14th amendment; Harding (1921-1923) was an ineffectual leader who played poker while his friends plundered the US treasury; and Buchanan (1857-1861) refused to challenge the spread of slavery or the growing bloc of states that became the Confederacy. 

          So maybe people are just imagining stuff. Cost of gasoline is still one of the lowest among nations. Even lower than that in my home country, the Philippines. Out there, it's something beyond $3 a gallon. Tennessee has been enjoying an influx of jobs etcetera. Fact: As of second quarter of the year, 12.4 million Americans worked in manufacturing, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s up by about 25,000 jobs from a year prior, and almost a million from early 2010. But it’s still down by about one third, or more than six million jobs. But investments from China, Taiwan, Japan, Russia, and Germany keep on coming, so let's be positive. Saudi Arabia has also been diversifying (from oil) and spreading out investments globally. 
         But if we want an America that is still the sole Master of the Universe, then true, we should be depressed and stressed. Because that isn't going to happen. Uncle Sam and Aunt Samantha simply have to share some pleasures with the global community somehow.

I JUST read a heated exchange in my Homepage that basically revolves around the wild assertion that a president is at fault for all the mass shootings these days. That'd be Donald Trump. Although I don't personally like President Trump, I am just so sick and tired of all the bashing that border in sheer hatred than hard facts. I believe that there are many reasons why people go bonkers and shoot others randomly--and it is not mostly economic (study all mass carnage and serial killings). And it is not Trump's fault either. In fact, there have been more mass shootings under President Obama then the four previous presidents combined?

         Check this out (mostly Mother Jones data from FBI records). Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents. [1] Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings; George H. W. Bush: 1989-1993 (4 years) 12 mass murders; Bill Clinton: 1993-2001 (8 years) 23 mass murders; George W. Bush: 2001-2009 (8 years) 20 mass murders; Barrack H. Obama: 2009-2015 (in 7th year) 162 mass murders (incidents with 8 or more deaths, 18). Trump assumed office last January. Should we count deaths and then celebrate that he beat Obama on that regard? That'd be insane. 
        Instead of pointing fingers at governments, let us figure things out ourselves. The people or citizenry also has a huge responsibility, I believe, in keeping our community safe. But we are not going there, instead we tend to traverse the contrary, if we continue hitting and blaming the Right (or Left), this president and that president, or their political party and not ours. I can understand the political slurs, coming from frustration, few weeks after the Nov outcome. But this hasn't stopped. It has become so disgusting and boring. And dumb.

         I corrected myself in re data. The US has more guns per capita (than any other country), 112.6. But Venezuela, El Salvador, Swaziland, Guatemala, Jamaica, Brazil, and Colombia ranks a lot higher in terms of gun-related deaths (10). But the scarier part is the US is number 2 in terms of mass shootings behind Yemen which has experienced more than 40 mass shootings per 100 million people, compared to the US which has had less than 30 per the same study size. But then how do we compare the US with Yemen? The one major issue that is bothersome is the fact that the US tends to police the world in every aspect of societal governance, including peace and order and crime-eradication, yet it couldn't really police its own people.

IS IT REALLY THAT BAD? Here are the facts (if you care to read, that is). If we set aside partisan dislike of the dominant politics and sheer abhorrence of President Trump, and just turn to facts? No, it's not really that bad. Markets are up and unemployment is down. Although Trump is known to bloat data and exaggerate matters in his press blurbs and tweets, he isn’t wrong about the stock market’s record heights. The Dow Jones industrial average passed the 22,000 mark for the first time in his term, and other market indexes are at or near highs. 

          Meantime, gross domestic product, the primary indicator of a country’s economic health, had expanded at an annual rate of 2.6 percent in the second quarter. Truth is, America has somehow gotten over the Recession of 2007-09 ushered by a housing market crash and the failure of several investment banks due to overextended credit and risky mortgages. But credit goes to Obama for fixing a failing economy in his exit; though such a problem jumped up in his term as well. Trump so far keeps it on check. 
          True, US economy hasn't been in heaven as it did in the 1950s and 1980s but it isn't so bad either. There was an explosion of economic growth in the 1980s: GDP grew an average of 3.85 percent annually, the largest peace-time growth in US. history. American millionaires soared from 4,400 in 1980 to more than 63,000 in 1990, a 14-fold increase. But contrary to the claim that the “rich got richer and the poor got poorer” in the 80s, the group which benefited the most from the economic policies of the 1980s were African Americans, who enjoyed the highest percentage wage gain of any group, and who for the first time had a plurality of its members in the middle class. Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush did a fine job with the economy, totally negating Jimmy Carter's relative failure as an economic-minded president. 
          Meanwhile, most of the simmering down of America's economy was due to the advent of China, and the resurgence of Russia and South/Southeast Asia, distributed economic wealth around but that doesn't make Americans one of the poorest in the world. Perhaps two of the more recent hard life in the US happened during the recessions of 1973 and 1981 recession. Lasting 2 years, the quadrupling oil prices by Arab exporters resulted in stagflation (high inflation amid stagnant economic growth) and a stock market crash. This had an impact in the 1981 recession where rising inflation from the 1970s resulted in tightened monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, while regime change in Iran led to rising oil prices. Amid these crosscurrents, the US found itself with falling inflation but rising unemployment by the early 1980s. Yet it didn't take long for the Reagan administration to fix the problem. 

         The US has been through worse economic life in the past: The panics of 1797, 1957, 1873, 1893, and 1907--brought forth by European deflation and a yellow fever epidemic that closed ports, banking failures, stock market crash from a railroad boom and cost of copper etc. And of course the 12 years Great Depression, the worst of times when economic production fell by 50 percent, and unemployment surged to 25 percent.
         Yet despite all these, current-life Americans are still very stressed and problematic. According to the American Psychological Association’s annual Stress in America survey, some 59 percent of Americans believe the country is in the lowest period they can ever remember, including respondents who lived through Pearl Harbor and World War II.
Sixty-three percent of respondents consider the future of the US a source of stress, while 62 percent feel stressed about money and 61 percent about work. And as you might expect, 73 percent of Democrats are worried about the country’s future. But more conservative folks aren’t exactly at ease about America’s path either; 59 percent of Independents and 56 percent of Republicans said they’re stressed too.
         “We’re seeing significant stress transcending party lines,” said Arthur C. Evans Jr., the Survey's chief executive officer. “The uncertainty and unpredictability tied to the future of our nation is affecting the health and well-being of many Americans in a way that feels unique to this period in recent history.”

         These elevated stress levels could be having a negative effect on people’s health. Lying awake at night during the previous month is up 5 percent from 2016 to 45 percent, and a third of Americans said stress is causing them to feel nervous, anxious, irritable, angry, or fatigued. Most likely, Americas are on Facebook reading links and memes and anger and fighting. Hence the paranoia of the future. Yet it isn't really that bad. Dig? So chill. 

PEACE CAN BE WORKED OUT. Or just being conscious of the unconscious (social media) peddling of hatred. Facebook, Twitter et al are very helpful tools to unite people via steady and fast communication and sharing of valuable/useful info toward better life and living. But it seems these awesome devices are not veering toward that beautiful end. Still though they serve many positive work. However, I can't help talk/write about social media's impact on current violence or mass shootings out there. Most of these misguided souls are moved or coaxed or blinded by anger or hatred more than they are acting under supervision or control of organized terrorism (such as ISIS, Islamic State, or other terror groups). Most are lone wolves (like this latest one in Manhattan) who seemingly acted alone but motivated or inspired by the bigger hate (eg terrorism) or simply hatred for other people/culture. Hence some attribute their crime/s to or with the larger power when it is very likely that their anger is rooted from very personal woes or frustration/s. 

         According to official sources, the breakdown on the number of deaths caused by individuals of different ideologies, follow: 95 by jihadis (or Islamic militant), 68 by far-right, and eight by black separatist/national/supremacist. A jihadi or "fighter against the enemies of Islam" doesn't necessarily come from where the The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS or simply the Islamic State) is mostly based. As per latest data, some 15,000 jihadis joined ISIS in 2013 and 2014 yet the documents analyzed represent approximately (only) 30 percent of those. There are more. The average age of the recruits is 26 or 27 years of age but the ages range from 12 to almost 70 years. Some 400 were aged under 18. The foremost group of nationals was Saudi (579), then Tunisian (559), Moroccan (240), Turkish (212), Egyptian (151) and Russian (141), and quite a number from Europe. 
         Belgium, for example, now has more citizens fighting in Iraq and Syria per capita than any other European country (40 for every million people). In fact, the total number of fighters Belgium has sent overseas (440) is not far behind the numbers of much larger countries like the U.K. and Germany. The next two European countries with the most foreign fighters are equally surprising: Denmark (with 27 fighters for every million people) and Sweden (with 19). I mean, Denmark and Sweden! 

        How do we figure out if one is a jihadi (or terrorist) or not. We can't or it's hard. More so, large-scale violence in the US isn't majority radical Islamist, anyway. Since 9/11, white right-wing terrorists have killed almost twice as many Americans in homegrown attacks than radical Islamists have, according to research by the New America Foundation. Some 48 people were killed by white terrorists, while 26 were killed by radical Islamists, since Sept. 11. The Las Vegas carnage was perpetrated by a seemingly ordinary white gambler with money but with no known hardline political affiliation, for example. 
        The Manhattan perpetrator (or suspect), a native Russian by way of Uzbekistan, is apparently a lone wolf who brandished ISIS adherence. Although it appears that Sayfullo Saipov, 29, had online link/s with people who were subjects of terror investigations via his social media activities, he was not part of a terror cell. His green card came via a government program called the Diversity Visa Lottery, which hands out about 55,000 visas per year. He lived in Ohio before moving to Tampa, Florida. He then moved to Paterson, New Jersey, where he has lived with his wife and three children for several years. The guy also held business licenses for two Ohio-based trucking companies, and worked as an Uber driver, and passed a background check and recorded over 1,400 trips in six months. I mean, Saipov was pretty much an ordinary guy. But we didn't know who are these people he's communicating with and possibly sharing some "news links" and memes? As we don't know exactly where our favorite "political humor" video or poster came from. 

        So how do we know. We don't. That deadly person could be the smiley-faced neighbor with a friendly dog or the dude who delivers your mail or the woman who's behind a retail store counter. Who knows. Anger is not necessarily exploding here and there like a Wolverine rage. These days people implode more than they explode. 
        Yet we could help by being more peaceful than argumentative online. And please before we send out memes like Holocaust is here again or Hitler is back, think again. Hatred is cultivated from a dirt farm of anger. Anger that is not addressed or communicated to/with a pacified community. Anger versus anger doesn't work. But we can start in this universe of a one-click box where we loiter, wander or navigate. Or better be, let us try to know who the person we call "cool" or "humane" or "sweet" are. Meet them in person. And slow down with the one-click sharing. Or can we try not to argue sometimes?