Tomorrow Never Comes and Yesterday Never Existed: Both are Always HERE and Now

 

by Elder Wewo Kotokay, Melanesian Conservatoin Elders, Inc.

1. Deconstructing the Phrases

• "Tomorrow never comes" / "Next year never arrives": This is a statement about the ever-receding future. The moment we label as "tomorrow" or "next year" ceases to be that label as soon as we enter it. At midnight, "tomorrow" becomes "today." On January 1st, "next year" becomes "this year." The future is perpetually a horizon we approach but never stand upon as the future. It's a destination that transforms into the present upon arrival.
• "Yesterday never existed" / "Last year never was": This is the symmetrical problem of the elusive past. The "yesterday" we refer to is not a tangible thing that exists somewhere. It is a mental construct—a memory, a record, a trace. The actual lived moment we call "yesterday" has vanished into non-being. It was, but it is not. We only ever have present recollections of it.
• "Yesterday never gone": This is the most subtle and interesting counterpoint. It suggests that the past is not truly lost but continues to exist in its effects—in memories, trauma, history, consequences, and the physical world (a scar, a ruined building, a fossil). In this view, the past is ontologically present in its causal power. It "never gone" because it actively shapes the now.

2. The Philosophical Core: The Paradox of the Present (The "Specious Present")

The tension between these phrases points to the central puzzle: What is the "now"?

• The Mathematical Now: If "now" is an infinitesimal point between past and future (like a geometric point), then it has no duration. We cannot live in, experience, or even point to such a "now." It is an abstraction.
• The Experiential Now (William James' "Specious Present"): Our lived present always has a duration—a few seconds. Within this brief span, we hold the just-past (the echo of a sentence) and the anticipation of the immediate future (the next word). So our "now" is always already containing a slice of what we call "past" and "future."
• This explains "yesterday never gone" psychologically—the immediate past is still present in our consciousness.
• It also shows why "tomorrow never comes"—because the anticipated future is already partially present as anticipation.

3. Philosophical Frameworks for Understanding

• St. Augustine's Paradox (Confessions, Book XI): He famously asked, "What then is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain it to one who asks, I know not." He concluded that past and future only exist in the mind:
• The past exists as memoria (memory).
• The future exists as expectatio (expectation).
• The present exists as contuitus (attention).
  Thus, "tomorrow" exists only as a present expectation, and "yesterday" only as a present memory. They are modes of present consciousness.
• McTaggart's A-Series and B-Series:
• A-Series: Time as past, present, future (subjective, flowing). This is where our phrases live. The problem is that the labels "past," "present," and "future" are constantly changing (an event is future, then present, then past). This seems contradictory—how can one event have all three properties? This is the "unreality" of time for McTaggart.
• B-Series: Time as earlier-than and later-than (objective, static). In this view, 2023 is always earlier than 2024. "Next year" (2025) has a fixed, permanent relation to "this year" (2024). It always arrives in the B-Series, because its position is fixed. The "never comes" feeling is a feature of our A-Series perception.
• Phenomenology (Husserl, Heidegger): They focus on time as the structure of human experience (Dasein). For Heidegger, we are inherently temporal. We are "thrown" from a past, "projecting" into a future, and "falling" through the present. "Tomorrow never comes" because our "projection" always leaps ahead. "Yesterday never gone" because we are our past ("thrownness").
• Zen Buddhism & Mindfulness: These traditions take the paradox as a practical instruction. Dwelling on "yesterday" (regret, nostalgia) or "tomorrow" (anxiety, hope) is a source of suffering because these are mental illusions. The only reality is the eternal present moment. The goal is to fully inhabit the "now" that never moves, thus resolving the paradox through direct experience.

Synthesis and Conclusion

These phrases are not literally true in a physical sense (2025 will indeed follow 2024), but they are profoundly true at the level of conscious experience and linguistic reference.

1. They reveal the fluidity of temporal language. Words like "tomorrow" are indexicals—their meaning depends on the ever-changing "now" of the speaker.
2. They highlight the ontological mystery of time. The past and future do not "exist" in the way physical objects do. They exist as relational properties and mental phenomena.
3. They point to the primacy of the present as the locus of reality and experience. All we ever have is a moving, duration-filled present that carries the ghost of the past and the blueprint of the future within it.

In essence: "Tomorrow never comes" because the future is a mode of present anticipation. "Yesterday never existed" (as a present object) but also "never gone" because it exists as a present memory and causal force. The paradox is the very fabric of human temporality—we are beings stretched between a memory and a promise, forever anchored in a fleeting, yet expansive, now.

 

Evaluating the Implications of Environmental Initiatives on Customer Experience

 Kina Bank’s Introduction of an ‘Eco-Friendly’ Card: Progress or Inconvenience?

By Elder Wewo Kotokay, Melanesian Conservation Elders, Inc.

Introduction

Kina Bank has recently unveiled its gold-branded Visa Debit Card, crafted from recycled PVC materials, accompanied by significant emphasis on environmental stewardship. On initial consideration, this undertaking appears to represent a laudable advancement in the banking sector’s progress toward sustainability. Nevertheless, embedded within the initiative is a consequential policy shift: customers maintaining multiple accounts are now restricted to a single Visa Debit card. This development raises important questions regarding the balance between environmental benefits and reductions in customer flexibility and convenience.

The Positive Aspect: A Genuine Environmental Commitment

The merit of Kina Bank’s decision to produce debit cards from recycled materials is indisputable. The financial sector contributes substantially to global plastic waste, with billions of cards produced and discarded annually. By transitioning to recycled PVC, Kina Bank aligns itself with international environmental, social, and governance (ESG) objectives and provides customers with an opportunity to participate in positive, environmentally conscious practices.

Moreover, the newly introduced gold-branded card offers a more refined appearance while retaining all standard Visa debit card benefits. For many clients, this constitutes a clear improvement—combining aesthetic appeal with social responsibility.

The Negative Aspect: Limitations of a Single Card Policy

Despite these commendable efforts, the policy’s underlying restriction presents a substantial challenge. Under the new rule, customers are limited to a single Visa Debit card, regardless of the number of accounts held. This arrangement creates difficulties for numerous individuals and small business owners who depend on multiple accounts for a variety of legitimate financial purposes.

• Personal and Business Finances: Many customers maintain separate accounts for personal and business transactions, facilitating clear financial delineation and improved management.

• Budgeting: It is commonplace to hold accounts dedicated to specific savings goals—such as holidays, education expenses, or emergencies—to minimize the temptation to access reserved funds.

• Shared Family Finances: Many households utilize joint accounts for common expenditures in conjunction with individual accounts for personal use.

This policy shift mandates that all such arrangements consolidate into a single card solution, resulting in several notable concerns:

1. Reduced Financial Control: The ability to assign separate cards for distinct financial activities is lost. All transactions, whether for business obligations or household needs, must now be processed through a single card, rendering expense separation and record-keeping more complex.

2. Increased Security Risk: Should the sole card be lost or compromised, all linked accounts are immediately exposed, eliminating any alternative payment method.

3. Decreased Convenience: The ease previously afforded by multiple cards for different financial purposes is no longer available. Customers are compelled to manually transfer funds between accounts to complete purchases, thereby increasing the complexity of routine banking tasks.

Possible Motivations Underlying the Policy

Kina Bank has yet to issue a formal explanation for this policy change. Nonetheless, several plausible motivations can be identified:

• Cost Reduction: The manufacture and management of multiple cards per customer generate additional expenses. Restricting customers to a single card reduces production, distribution, and replacement costs.

• Operational Simplicity: Managing card issuance and account linkage for only one card per customer simplifies processes for both the bank’s technological infrastructure and staff.

• Greenwashing: Emphasizing environmental messaging may serve to mitigate or obscure the less favorable aspects of the new policy, portraying the restriction as an unavoidable component of sustainable practice.

Ultimately, these changes primarily support the bank’s operational efficiency and cost management, often at the expense of customer autonomy and flexibility.

Recommendations for Kina Bank

There is potential to reconcile environmental responsibility with customer satisfaction. The following recommendations may assist Kina Bank in addressing these matters constructively:

1. Flexible Opt-Out or Tiered Options: The single card rule should serve as the default for basic accounts; however, clients with legitimate needs should be permitted to request additional cards, potentially for a fee that covers production and environmental considerations.

2. Virtual Card Solutions: For each additional account, Kina Bank could provide unique virtual debit cards accessible via the bank’s digital platforms. These virtual cards are cost-effective, can be issued instantaneously, and eliminate plastic waste, while allowing customers to manage online transactions and subscriptions separately.

3. Enhanced Digital Card Management: The bank’s digital infrastructure should be upgraded to enable customers to conveniently reassign their physical card to different accounts. While not a complete substitute for multiple cards, this offers a degree of restored flexibility.

4. Transparent Communication: Kina Bank should communicate the business rationale underpinning the policy and actively solicit customer feedback to arrive at solutions that are mutually beneficial, rather than relying solely on positive environmental messaging to legitimize less favorable provisions.

Guidance for Customers

Affected customers are encouraged to engage directly with Kina Bank, providing feedback and requesting alternatives such as virtual cards or opt-in arrangements for multiple physical cards. Clear, constructive communication will enable the bank to better understand the practical consequences of its policies and promote more customer-oriented outcomes.

Another important advice is for all citizens of Papua New Guinea to be clever and claim your rights as the citizens of the country. It is important to understand that limiting the number of debit card is part of limiting your own financial freedom. It appears that the Kina Bank has limited your freedom. Above all, it is important that you move to other banks, that are more widely available now then before. Best, find out if other banks in Papua New Guinea offer 1 or more debit cards per account.

Conclusion

The introduction of recycled debit cards by Kina Bank represents a positive development for environmental sustainability. Nevertheless, the restrictive “one-card-fits-all” approach may undermine customer convenience and effective financial management. True innovation in the banking sector must serve both ecological objectives and client needs. By adopting flexible arrangements such as virtual cards or tiered options, Kina Bank can demonstrate a sincere commitment to sustainability and customer satisfaction, contributing to a more responsive and progressive banking system for Papua New Guinea.