NP Rank:
I know what's wrong with the world - Everyone should read this
The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints. We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less. We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time. We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom. We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years. We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor. We conquered outer space but not inner space. We've done larger things, but not better things.
We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul. We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice. We write more, but learn less. We plan more, but accomplish less. We've learned to rush, but not to wait.
These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships. These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill. It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.
What do you think?


Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (3)
at 12:26 on July 19th, 2007
Donofat, I think your story has potential but needs some improvement. I've got a few suggestions, and if you give them a try, I'd be happy to remove this flag.
You need to give proper credit for the work you've posted here. Right now it looks like it's your work, which is a form of plagiarism. Please consider downloading and using our Highlight tool, which you can read more about here: http://www.nowpublic.com/highlight. That way you can directly source where you got this from. Some additional context would help as well: Why did you post this? What interested you in this piece?
Here's some context for where this piece came from:
at 13:13 on July 19th, 2007
Kaitlin,
Thank you for your comments. I did not by any means attempt to plagarize this or take credit for it. I was simply posting it for others to read. I did not know the backstory, i.e. who wrote it or what it's original use was for, and honestly, that is not so important. I just wanted to get the word out because I read it and thought it was amazing. Sorry if I offended you.
at 13:26 on July 19th, 2007
Donofat, the fact remains that I am not familiar with Dr. Moorehead's piece, so I assumed it was yours when I read it. It wasn't, so I hope you follow Kaitlin's advice and say so in the article itself. It's just the right thing to do on a website like this one.