I don’t quite know why recently cereals are endowed with this starchy ingredient. As I try to chew, I wonder what the reason might be. Maybe copying oatmeal is not easy (at least for now)? Maybe they were able to produce real oatmeal but it cost them more than foreign brands? Maybe they discovered a substitute-ingredient?
Its like the cereal substance has refused to acknowledge the milk or even come in terms with it. After chewing further it becomes …sandy: The larger core parts could break down into still smaller particles (maybe this is an appropriate time to discuss infinite divisibility). Perhaps the sandy stuff are good for grinding and shining of the teeth… I don’t know. or perhaps I should be grateful not to go hungry or perhaps I should starve?.
As the gun debate continues in America, I get high school flashback from the ethnic violence in Grant High School and the columbine shooting having destructive effect in my trust in the world. Just like kids the nations have been involved with nuclear disarmament and preemptive wars as well. I can’t help but to see the role of the gun whether in a mass scale or shooting spree.
The t is widely held that when you kill someone, you are killing part of yourself; that violence cannot effectively end suffering. But as the weapons advance and evolve, the red button potentially creates devastation on such a large scale that blurs the distinction between aggressor and defender. We don’t need any more karma than this. The question is whether this would be a deterrent? (judging from what happens in traffic jams the answer is no). But the only logical conclusion is slowly becoming that it is not people that kill people…
Seems like money was a way to trick people and take more of their assets. The idea of printing more to cover up the missing assets. The idea of giving false sense of security by a sort of signature and number. A currency that can go poof overnight… can anything like this happen to gold?
One group wants the power in the hands of a few and the other wants it for the many. The winner of the first group makes it stronger each and every time, while the winner of the second may not be easily serve the interest of the many. In short a small group of people are much closer to power than majority which threatens democracy itself.