TaN (update): In today’s (November 20 post of an) article in Natural News titled “Marijuana farmers are destroying natural ecosystems as quest for profits outweighs green agricultural practices” (by a certain Isabelle Z, URL: https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-20-marijuana-farmers-are-destroying-natural-ecosystems-as-quest-for-profits-outweighs-green-agricultural-practices.html as of 11/20/17), it goes to show that even good things can easily be turned bad by evil, especially by greed and inconsideration and total disregard for everything else (or selfishness).
What I am referring to is that there are increasing evidence and news marijuana is a “miracle” weed — because it reportedly has many health benefits (ranging from simple treating of skin rashes and issues to totally eliminating (certain) cancers, as of this writing), beneficial to the land (in terms of natural fertilizer and as soil erosion prevention and carbon-arresting, among others), and industrial uses (such as its high insoluble fibrous content for fabric, insulation, interior decor like rugs, mats, and drapery, and construction material reinforcement and support).
The sad thing is that something with such a wide and varied range of applications (for both man and environment) can be and is being twisted into something detrimental due to man’s — at the “prodding and goading” of MODERN corporate profit-driven and -centered business — unnatural desire to make huge but unnecessary and non-vital profits and usually at the expense of the environment and in order to benefit themselves more than others.
Just like the so-called military-industrial complex that the late USA President Dwight David “Ike” Eisenhower (according to URL: http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-warns-of-military-industrial-complex and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY as of November 21, 2017) reportedly warned of in his farewell speech decades ago, modern corporate business and unscrupulous profit-seeking individuals have adapted the same malicious and vile motto and business “mission-vision” for the sake of the almighty money god.
In everything we do, we must act responsibly because only man can be good or bad, bring benefit and hope or cause damage, make or break — because only man is (supposed to have) free will and it is due to free will that only man can be good or bad, because he has or can make a choice.
In conclusion, it appears (and unfortunately so) that evil can arise from good but (fortunately) no good can come from evil.
TaN: One can determine what kind of business philosophy a company has by the advertisements and marketing campaigns it puts out or approves. It is very insulting that businesses take the viewers’ intelligence for granted — that they think just because their commercial advertisement has celebrity endorsers and youthful and good-looking people and glamor that consumers will naturally and instantly patronize their products.
Businesses that rely on famous endorsers to market their products should be boycotted because this implies that the product has little or no redeeming value. Using good-looking nobodies are another way of enticing the shallow or simple-minded into making unnecessary purchases, especially if the product makes promises that are natural for young people. A case in point is youthful looking skin or and strong hair are expected among the young so young endorsers “promising” good-looking skin or strong hair are making empty promises.
Moreover, celebrity and public figure endorsers who “prostitute” their image for a certain product they should or have no business endorsing should be shunned. These people have no scruples and would not hesitate to sell their dignity and integrity for money.
In addition, there are those who endorse products they never use. These frauds reveal their how greedy and dishonest they can be…for the right price. They can be bought and without a moment’s hesitation.
In conclusion, due to the increasing emphasis on profit, businesses have “evolved” ethics out and replaced it with an overwhelming desire to make as much money while throwing all morals into the wind. These companies would stoop so low as to approve any and all commercial advertisements, no matter how insulting they may be to the consumers, just to make money.
TaN: One of the principal and most irrefutable argument as to why the Philippines will forever be a developing nation is a great majority of its (consuming) population is ignorant of the proper use of money. Instead, they are victims or slaves of money — i.e., they are being used by money and not the other way around.
The wealthiness of a person correlates directly to his/her being either the master or slave of money — in other words, the “love of money” (as written in 1 Timothy 6:10) and not money itself or per se. If one is the master of money, it is we who determines when we will spend it and when not to, whereas if we are impulse or indiscriminate spenders then we are the slaves.
Being the master of money means that we spend only when it is necessary — i.e., to purchase essentials such as basic and nutritious food and those being marketed as “essentials” such as cosmetics, private cars, gourmet and junk foods, and other indulgences.
We are slaves when we “give in” to the temptations of impulsive buying and making unnecessary expenditures for things that either give little or (true) momentary pleasure and satisfaction or possesses herd mentality (i.e., just because others are doing it, never mind whether it is actually needed or not or if there is some rationale to it) or have been convinced by clever and sly (money-saving) marketing schemes as in “get 2 for the price of 1” when only one is needed.
Even until today, despite knowledge of it, the average Filipino man-on-the-street is still “trapped” in the “one day millionaire” mindset. In fact, on many an occasion, people have been heard to say that, when they come into money (even just a tiny amount), they cannot resist or are just itching to squander it away. What the money will be spent on does not matter for as long as it is spent. This is one of the principal reasons why Chinese love to do business in the Philippines and, likewise, the reason for the development of the “tingi” (or the smallest viable quantity for retail, like sampling portions) system of retail selling.
Unless and until Filipinos “grow up” in their spending behavior, the Philippines will forever be in the doldrums of a developing country. The wealth gap will grow into a wealth chasm and corruption will be an eternal scourge.
TaN: A couple of months ago, I suddenly had a realization that there are multiple parallels between the books of the Holy Scriptures, especially Genesis, and Greek mythology. I know many others may have taken note of this already much earlier that I but it is interesting to study the parallels.
And to think that the ancient mythologies — which among themselves have likewise many parallels differing only in names and some specifics — pre-date the Holy Scriptures by as much as a millennium or so. It makes one wonder whether the Holy Scriptures were taken from them or were the mythologies previously given in preparation for later consolidation, validation, and/or fulfillment — or what. To name a few parallels:
 Greek mythology (creation of golden race which were said to be prosperous (Chinese are known to be among the earliest and for being wealth-savvy), then the silver race (Caucasians are known for being technology-savvy), then the bronze race (dark-skinned are known for being skilled and multi-talented);
 from almost all cultures (even among Native Americans like the Hopi and aborigines of Australia), the Great Deluge or Noah’s Flood;
 from almost all mythologies, gods or supernatural beings intervening and even siring children with daughters of Adam and bringing knowledge and technology to improve man’s lives — like fallen angels in the Holy Scriptures, heroes and Olympians in Greek mythology, gods in Egyptian mythology, frost giants in Norse mythology, and giants of varying sizes and demeanor in early Celtic and early settlers of British isles; and,
 appearance of giants, like Goliath and the Nephilim in the Holy Scriptures, Titans in Greek mythology, in Gaelic, Hindu, British, Chinese, Jewish, aborigines, African, South American, Japanese, Philippine, and even Paul Bunyan.
How strange and coincidental that such events occur among cultures that are not only far apart geographically but existing during different times as well — although some, such as the Greeks, have some contact with Egyptians but China is totally “another world apart”.
Moreover, there are certain events, like the Star of Bethlehem, that was witnessed and recorded by different cultures remote from each other — for it was reportedly recorded in by the Egyptians, the Chinese, and even by Native Americans.
In addition, if the accounts were intended for the Israelites, why were they given (or “shared”) with other cultures? And were given long before the emergence of Israel. Anyway, just a thought.
TaN: The sincerity of a (financial) donation should be viewed from how affordable is the sum with respect to the overall wealth of the donor. In other words, how much will the amount “hurt” the wealth of the donor.
Most people simply look at the size of the donation not realizing that the amount may just be pittance to the donor but the beneficiary is expected to be (eternally) beholden and grateful to the donor — as if the donor has done them a great favor.
It must be realized and understood that the wealth of anyone is or was taken from the masses — i.e., as elaborated and discussed in previous TaNs, wealth is generated from surplus labor (meaning, the unconsumed and/or unsold excess from what was produced by labor) and converted into a medium of exchange.
Moreover, it must be realized and remembered that any donation from any wealthy individual — be they sincere or not — was sourced from the masses. The beneficiary/ies of donations, especially from wealthy businesses, do not really have to feel any gratitude when receiving donations from the rich, after all the money they are donating may have originally come from the beneficiary/ies him/themselves. It is just a matter of simple courtesy for the beneficiary to, at least, feel or show some gesture of appreciation for the donation — but not obligatory.
In addition, it is the social responsibility of the wealthy to give back to the community from whence his/her wealth originated because if it were not for community, s/he would not have accumulated such wealth. The rich owe it to the poor his/her entire wealth.
In conclusion, remember, the only reason why there are rich people is because wealth is not evenly distributed. They gravitated to the wealthy. Moreover, if there were no poor people, there would be no rich people — there would be no one to compare the amount of wealth against. Imagine of every person has the same amount of money, there would be no rich neither would there be poor. The rich owe everything to the poor and donations are but one of several means of redistributing wealth so please do not skimp otherwise the donation is meaningless — and by “skimping”, I mean that the amount per individual should be large enough as to have some significant impact on the quality of life of the beneficiary/ies.
In addendum, donations as a form of dole out is actually counterproductive, especially when the beneficiary/ies or recipient/s possess no skill or capability of managing it and will simply just squander it away. This is one of the principal reasons why the poor remains poor.