how to build a BETTER society (no politics please) ((UPDATED)) - General Discussion Discussion

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73793) 2 years ago

Interesting question but I’d bet this slides off the rails into the political swamp within a few replies.

To keep it neutral I’d like to see a nation wide program to spay and neuter pets, something cheap or even free if possible. The pounds and rescue places are loaded with blameless dogs and cats who may never get a family and a home.

Bob Barker was totally right all those years.

reply

[–] Kowalski (64078) 2 years ago

I FULLY ENDORSE THAT PLAN. NOEMOJI

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

yeah, hoping politics can take a seat and just watch. :)

We have this structure where we are mostly all raised in an education system that trains us for factory jobs... maybe that is changing slowly, and social structure pushing specific regimen: learn to fit in, fight for your money, follow status quo... different than the people of the past: work to LIVE, die...

maybe it is time we look at the entire structure and think through what humans really need and want and how to get there, not how to chase money and die unhappy.

reply

[–] Kowalski (64078) 2 years ago

We have this structure where we are mostly all raised in an education system that trains us for factory jobs

DO YOU THINK THIS IS 1957? NOEMOJI

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73793) 2 years ago

There are really not that many factory jobs left here and farming is a struggle in America and has shifted South. They can can grow all year round in Mexico and South America…Our various American leaders should have kept farming and factories here, it was decent, honest work.

We really fucked up with the Auto Industry as well here.
I still buy only ‘American’ Fords or Chevies but most of the parts are manufactured in Asia and Hunday is a big employer Down South in Georgia.

Our leadership betrayed us and grew fat, Men need jobs to raise families and buy a home to raise them in.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

So what do we need to do?
Can we combine the successful parts from other places into one big stew pot of win?

I guess first we need to identify exactly the parts that go into a society:
- local leadership (yes, governing)
- economy
- food
- healthcare
- employment (purpose, happiness)
- other stuff?

we find who is doing each of those best, and see how to implement it

reply

[–] Wint3rFir3 (6931) 2 years ago

Yes, agree, that's a good one.

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

I think society would be better if people could just care about each other. We don't have to like each other, or agree with other, but if we at least cared about each other I think we could function a little better.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

you bring up a perfect point.
could we identify WHY someone grows up to NOT care about others? perhaps that is an exact symptom of our society off the better rails... society system aiming to make people more self centered?

what would help people be more caring?
different type of schooling maybe? that is a HUGE factor in mose people growing up - spending 15 years within that structure, right or wrong.
Parenting? Maybe less divroces, or single parent homes? just spit balling I don't know the effects of all that, but seems like divorce and single parent increase also follows increase in caring less? maybe

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

I don't think that it's really single parent homes, or schooling. I just don't really think we can discuss it without getting into political or economic issues.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

but your point is a PEOPLE thing, not political. why aren't people just nicer and care for others?

I see people grow up and become criminals, usually had a bad childhood - school/parents - politics doesn't really factor in... unless you think politics IS running all of society? aren't we allowed to raise kids how we wish?

If I was a good parent, I'd be strict enough so they learn lessons, understand their place and authrotiy,
if I was bad, I'd be a jackass, BARELY raise them, they'd see me selfish and assume that is how the world works.
no politics, just parenting

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

Politics is people.

In places where people are taken care of and can afford the basic necessities, crime is drastically reduced. Yes, there still will be crime. Some people are just bad, but over all crime stats are down. So...yeah. It is political and economic.

If a person needs to work 3 jobs to put food on the table and a roof over their head do you really think that they will have time to teach their children anything? If you don't think that the political (politics are different than government) and economic systems don't have anything to do with that then I don't know what to tell you.

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

I saw a cultural shift from the norm of helping and caring about others to the selfishness that exists now. It appeared to happen around the 80s and steadily became worse. I read that it's called "extreme individualism". Cooperation and caring are looked down upon now and Sociopathy is admired.

I disagree it's parenting because the older generation wasn't like this. They sacrificed and looked out for each other.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

ok, but aren't parents the primary people responsible for instilling their children's ideals?

but some modern parents were ignored or over indulged as a child, now doing the opposite to get it right?
my siblings kids were helicoptered and spoiled, and now those kids are a train wreck of entitled, lacking armor, blame everyone else for thier lack of initiative.... some were close to turning to crime. I think the parents failed there.

What happened in the 80s to ruin society and cause this? MTV? :D no but, serious question. what went south? I don't recall anything, but I think you are right about it.
I thot 80s were the last soft fun era before gangsta rap became a cool thing to emulate in the 90s.

reply

[–] Kowalski (64078) 2 years ago

OH...I GET IT...YOU ARE THEMAN'S SOCK. NOEMOJI

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

Families don't live in a vacuum. They are part of a larger society including peers and culture.

The 1980s was the age of the Yuppie which was defined by making huge sums of money, status, personal success at any cost and selfishness. Greed became good (Gordon Gecko), Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous era, individualism (opposite of society) became extreme. Government and paying taxes were promoted as evil by the super rich. Even Christianity which used to demonize the rich and respect the poor shifted to Prosperity Gospel. People also began to financially struggle more which had them focus on themselves.

Our culture emphasizes money, social status and individualism instead of the Greater Good, therefore we'll have plenty of selfish people doing anything to make money. There are plenty of selfish people who don't listen to gangsta rap. 1+ million Americans died from Covid and nobody cared. Something is seriously wrong. Working together and caring for others move a society forward.

History, politics, economics, values and culture are interrelated.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

all great points.

now, what do we need to actually do to repair this?
how is this reversed back to maybe a simpler life?

I see family unit, education structure, and mass media as PRIMARY life designers. is there more?

Family isn't working great today, in decline for a while... maybe going back to when it worked the best is the best idea.
(my quick google:) https://online.csp.edu/resources/article/the-evolution-of-american-family-structure/

Education has become a joke of agendas, and then costs. dial that back to reality. learn helpful things.

Mass Media... where to begin? I mentioned Rap because glorifying anything negative just adds to the compounding problem. We went from Mickey being so fine, to fuck the police and advertising gangs. maybe it enabled more black voices, but, lets fix the problems, not enable them. :)
But, beyond that, now we have 24/7 constant negative force telling everyone how bad things are and we're doomed. When we were more prosperous and happy, we didn't have this hive mind connection. Yes, it gathers knowledge faster, but while sucking the life from society.
How do we fix that?

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

I believe you're nostalgic for an era which never existed except in fictitious TV shows like The Waltons and Leave It to Beaver.

Family worked best for whom? Majority of that time, powerless women were being beaten, raped and cheated on by their husbands and had no means to escape since they were forbidden to earn money. Children were physically, emotionally and sexually abused with no protection since things like that weren't talked about. Alcoholism and mental illness weren't discussed. And how many marriages ended when an in-the-closet spouse couldn't continue the ruse and left?

70% of rap/hip hop consumers are middle-class whites. American culture has always glorified bad boys including the Mafia, gangsters like Dillinger and Western outlaws like Billy the Kid. Also, most of our entertainment is extremely violent like NCIS and video games. Plus most of the world is horrified at our gun culture where mass shootings have become common, but nothing is done to stop it.

People with power and money benefit by having regular folks remain uneducated without critical thinking skills because ignorant people can be easily manipulated. They can create policies which enrich themselves and trick ignorant people to support them.

Poor people don't really control anything. The rich and powerful own and run our media, news, laws, businesses, religion, etc.. And I believe most of them are narcissists and sociopaths.

Recently, a multi-billionaire CEO said he'll cut costs by laying off workers. Of course, he has no plans to take less salary and financial compensation. That and his paying less taxes than his poorly paid workers have everything to do with less prosperity for common folks.

What historically happens is the rich take too much which fractures society and hurts most common folks. That leads to war or a new Movement which gives society a fresh start. American Revolution dumped the rich monarch, Civil war swept out the rich plantation owners, FDRs New Deal movement destroyed the Gilded Age. That's where we're heading.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

not nostalgic, looking at how the masses feel it works best.

the dynamics of men and women also play into this.... and why/how things are a mess today.

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

I'm old enough to have been around when women were blamed for being raped because they weren't a virgin or their dress was deemed too short. Women were placed on the stand and asked about their sexual history. Convictions were rare... and still are.

Working women had to get permission from her husband in order to get a credit card or bank loan.

Women shelters have only been around since the 70s.

So I'd have to ask, worked best for whom? Keeping half the population powerless and oppressed like they do in Muslim countries isn't an improvement.

The past wasn't so great. We need to move forward. A good way to do it is to duplicate things we like about other countries and cultures which have proven beneficial for most people. But, I don't see that realistically happening. Our society is too focused on money and selfishness.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

there's also a bunch of silent women sick and tired of noisy feminists wrecking life for them. many want to (and still choose to) stay home and raise kids, let men do their providing thing.

Men love providing, women love being provided for. Always has been, always will.

RAPES ae always brought up and yes it happened, but not a vast majority of housewives were raped. Just some random cases - like always. Trumping up that action isn't legit.

I don't want us to go backward, except where things that worked better fit in.

And I agree money, selfishness, and media telling us all about all the good things WE are missing out on: gold toilets, multimillion dollar CRIBS, expensive cars etc....

Maybe there is still hope for us out there. Maybe AI will come in and correct everything overnight. :)

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

It was always about choices. Nothing wrong with being a homemaker if you can afford it today.

Realistically, one salary doesn't cut it for most people. Both partners need to work in order to pay the bills.

BTW, there are plenty of workers, men and women, who prefer working from home since covid. Their employers are fighting against that.

Rape in marriage was considered legal. Domestic abuse was and is common.

Better for whom? You never replied. And in which specific year?

I'm not blaming media. I'm blaming our culture. Media is a part of our culture.

Sometimes you have to cut your losses by updating your passport and finding a nice peaceful country to retire.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

better for society.
I'm spit balling all of this... just seeking potential answer of gathering the BEST OF bits and creating a better working society. We'll never satisfy everyone, but maybe we can up most everyone's quality of life by restructuring things.

The greed and money thing is the killer.
I've always said "NICE THINGS" are causing most problems, but unseen.
"I want better!" And they make better, but we can't afford that.
I DO want a Lamborghini, but will probably never get it. I wish I didn't know it existed. But I do. Hence, the problem. Being shown nice things we can afford, therefore don't deserve, causes deep issues.

How about happiness, WORKING to provide my meals, having purpose helping others and not chasing money... sounds ideal to me. AND a Nintendo :D

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

"Being shown nice things we can afford, therefore don't deserve"
Who says we don't deserve it?

But, I'm happy NOT working.

I don't mind having purpose WITHOUT working.

I thought an interesting way to radically improve the world would be to make money obsolete. Everything would be free. This paper gets into the details about a moneyless society. I'd like to see a small community be a test subject. I'd volunteer:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39763/1/BRC-Moneyless_Economy.pdf

In this scenario, you can have a Lamborghini.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

I will def read that soon thanks!

I don't deserve a Lambo because I don't make enough money to buy one. I get that. I don't like it, but I understand lambos are made of costly stuff.
therefore, because of the cost, I dont deserve it.
If I made enough money to afford it, I would deserve it.

Oops forgot.
one scenario of no money is: robots doign everything, and I mean everything for us. then money is pointless, and we can go on without it.
Ther would be people who would ENJOY making and upkeeping the robots. I have several friends that would live doing that for free... because... no money. robots get us food, build our houses etc

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

Nah. I would say you can't afford to buy a Lambo. Most people can't. It just means you weren't taught how to make a lot of money. It's something that you have to learn or be taught.

Save up for an old, used Lambo? Or just rent for a few days. Or 1-day race track experience for your birthday paid by others. Plenty of options:
https://www.thextremexperience.com/supercar-track-xperience/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAm5ycBhCXARIsAPldzoXcP78U8KX2b4JqPtdxE3KOrdshFg4jRQ3sL0RYyBB5z2J8uvGkWuEaAlpREALw_wcB
At least you would have the experience of driving one for a few hours.

We already have technology replacing human workers. That only results in higher unemployment. In the Moneyless pdf I linked, people must work X amount of hours in order to get free things. You can do whatever job you want, start a company or sell things. It would promote democracy, human rights, education, end homelessness, pollution, starvation, and war. The concept begins on page 4.

New Lamborghini movie just released. But horrible reviews:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzqwRxorvKE

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

it's just an example. I probably could have gotten a Lambo, but, for local mechanics, I went with a different vehicle made in Stuttgart. ;)
It's always track ready.

I'm downloading the PDF.
Thank you for responding. I enjoy your opinions much of the time. :) even when we clash :D

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

You're welcome.

reply

[–] Kowalski (64078) 2 years ago

I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH A LARGE PORTION OF WHAT YOU SAID...I DO THINK...

"there's also a bunch of silent women sick and tired of noisy feminists wrecking life for them. many want to (and still choose to) stay home and raise kids, let men do their providing thing."

IS BORDERING ON SEXIST AS FUCK HOWEVER...AS THERE ARE ALSO A BUNCH OF MEN WHO WOULD LIKE TO STAY HOME AND RAISE THEIR KIDS INSTEAD OF WORKING TO PROVIDE AND THAT IS JUST AS VALID A DESIRE.

NOEMOJI

reply

[–] ColumboKate (5375) 2 years ago

Inconsiderate neighbours are the worst! Being loud for no reason, I hate that 😒

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73793) 2 years ago

Agreed. It’s always best to keep it down and be polite.

My immediate neighbors are all really polite, our kids get along, we all keep it down.

I have one neighbor across the back tree line that likes revving ATVs, chainsawing wood in the morning, pulling in and honking the horn all the time and he owns a Rooster that never shuts up…I hope a tree falls on that bird!

We have had words but we’ve kept it peaceful…he’s just terribly annoying.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

Two key elements needed to make a society better is a meritocracy (only the people who are the best at what they can do get the jobs) and keeping the family unit strong. When a society has neither, it eventually crumbles.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

agreed about family unit, but what to do, when women make more money (for nice things??) snaring alimony but breaking up the family and trading up (for more nice things?)? It's like hedonism has taken over everyone.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

If they weren't rewarded for popping out bastard children, there would be way less out-of-wedlock kids, now wouldn't there?

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

a lot of people are in agreement of when and how that happened... why aren't we fixing that? is it a system where too many people are profiting from, on both ends, to pull the plug?
[i know this part is kinda political, but that decision is affecting the failing structure of our society. as long as we dont use names or point fingers, I think we can discuss the CAUSE and maybe RESOLVE for this issue, without gettin all politicky]

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

We also need to understand the language being used by those who claim they are trying to improve society. Actions speak louder than words, and much of the words we're hearing appear to be code for "We don't actually give a shit about society, we're changing it to improve OUR LIVES and screw all the peasants!" I'll bet you can translate a lot of what people in power SAY, versus what they are actually DOING.

A good example would be people trying to fix the environment. So far, not only have the loudest ones made a lot of things worse, they have put a lot of people out of work, and have done nothing about pollution on other parts of our planet.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

like Carlin said,

"They don't give a f*** about you, they don't give a f*** about you, they don't care about you at all, at all, at all."

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

"They're in this club, and you ain't in it!"

reply

[–] Noufa (383) 2 years ago

Meritocracy & family are competing values.

Imperial China was technically meritocratic. The exam system snatched up all the brightest minds, regardless of their station in life. Literally took them away from the family & made them eunuchs. They then used their positions to dream up clever new schemes to increase the state's wealth.

Meanwhile, the Medici family built a patronage network in Florence. Rich weirdos used their position to dole out jobs based on personal taste & face-to-face relationships. It gave us the Renaissance; a flourishing in science & some of the most beautiful art ever produced.

Not a hard choice.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

Let's look at it this way: if you're running a business, do you pick your employees based on what color they are? Or if they can do the job? Do you let kids who failed in school pass the grade just because of their skintone and to save your school's reputation? If you had a limited number of openings at your college, and you let candidates in based on skintone, rather than how hard they worked in high school? Do you think any of that is really fair? And what results are you getting out of that? A more diverse but incompetent group of people, but hey! Nobody's gonna harass you or boycott your business or accuse you of RACISM. But who suffers as a result of choosing the most diverse people over the people who are the best at their craft? Yeah, your customers, who are the ones who PAY you for good service. Are you willing to let society crumble because you and thousands of other businesses chose "diversity" over merit?

And by the way, there's a reason Imperial China eventually crumbled and gave way to communism. It fell for the same reason Rome did, corruption from within, but instead of getting wiped out, a bunch of new, mutant leaders stepped in to replace the imperial court, and we have to deal with them today.

reply

[–] Noufa (383) 2 years ago

Proponents of affirmative action (which I am not) would argue that those candidates are competent. And they're doing you a favor by forcing you to move past your "hate" & hire them, anyway.

This is my problem with meritocracy. It gets you bogged down in debates about what merit even means. Imperial China believed that a lack of family would make public servants impartial. Modern America believes that "diversity is our greatest strength". This fixation on certification leads to some really stupid places.

The genius of Renaissance Man was that he didn't care about that. He just wanted to live a life of virtue.

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

The main beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women.

"So it comes as a surprise to many to discover that white women have benefited more from affirmative action programs and policies than any other demographic."
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/affirmative-action-who-benefits

reply

[–] rex (2849) 2 years ago

public executions would get the point across better

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (20777) 2 years ago

More people should have psychedelic experiences.

reply

[–] db20db (16574) 2 years ago

I agree.😉 https://www.amazon.com/Teachings-Don-Juan-Yaqui-Knowledge/dp/0671600419

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

The Rule Of Law would help.

By that I don't mean fascism or oppression, I mean that under The Rule Of Law the law applies equally to everyone, at every level of society. What we have now is a system where the rich are able to get away with anything (and they legalize their own crimes, such as not paying taxes), where the poor are jailed or harrassed by the police when they've committed no crime, and the middle class aspires to be rich so that they can get away with what the rich get away with.

If we were all equal before just laws, and the laws were applied equally to EVERYONE, then society would be infinitely better off.

reply

[–] jriley555 (7248) 2 years ago

amen. But in a capitalistic system, it would take a robust set of laws to keep the playing field fair.

Yours is a great point, because it is so apparent to the have-nots that the rules of the game are so different for the haves, it corrodes respect for law, the virtue of obeying the law. It enables the cynics argument.

To be honest, imlementing that would require a revolution. Because the haves own the the legislators, judges & lawyer guild.

reply

[–] db20db (16574) 2 years ago

This incredible story illustrates your point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gwq7YV30kw4

reply

[–] jriley555 (7248) 2 years ago

Yup. Also the central park rape convictions :

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/25/central-park-five-rape-sixth-man-exonerated

Slinging dope will get you 8-15 years (which I don't necessarily argue with), while tax evasion//embezzling/defrauding people out of many millions will get you months or a year or two in a club fed.

They say we are a classless society. Absolutely nothing could be further from the truth.

reply

[–] db20db (16574) 2 years ago

Yes, I'm familiar with that story also.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

I don't know if it'd take a revolution to start applying The Rule Of Law to the rich, but it'd take honest lawmakers, those who don't need the backing of the rich. And right now, the only lawmakers who don't need the backing of the rich are rich themselves.

BLM and the other people calling for police reform are on the right track, the law isn't being applied justly to the poor, but the fact is that's only half the battle... and the easy half at that.

reply

[–] McQualude (4231) 2 years ago

Additionally, govts have criminalized many victimless activities, often so they can collect money for licenses, fees, penalties, etc. The criminal code has become a tax on the lower classes.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

Once we're done establishing The Rule Of Law at all levels of society, we can work on an equitable tax code!

One where the rich pay their share, and it's no longer a mechanism for making the rich richer and the poor and middle class poorer.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

free health care.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

serious question: where is that working great today? (I dont keep up on things and don't really know)

reply

[–] jriley555 (7248) 2 years ago

Serious answer :

All over the first world. Virtually every European & Commonwealth country, Plus Israel & much of SE Asia has it.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

everyone in america bitches about the tax structure: "OH they'll take 50% of our paychecks for free health care!"
I don't know if that is true or not, but do all these other places have QUICK very effective services, or are the horror stories true? waiting days for emergency services, and lines to make an appointment etc? And at what cost? WHO really pays for the free part?
Right now, I call for appointment and usually get in during the week under company health care. Every walk in or emergency here is a short wait depending on need also.

I know medical is a huge deal for all, just wondering who is doing it best and sets the example of best of class?

reply

[–] jriley555 (7248) 2 years ago

Fair questions. We have a wide variety of implementations to consider if we ever evolve a consensus to go that route.

We sort of missed the boat imo right after WWII, before the medical industry became so massively corporatized and powerful. But even then, the AMA was able to hold the effort off.

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

Don't people in the US have wait periods too? I have a lot of family there, and even having good insurance or paying for things, depending on where you are, there are still wait periods. Especially in Emergency departments.

My opinion, and it's not worth much, is that US healthcare could be more affordable if you all would stop suing doctors, and hospitals for every little thing.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

I mean, there are times to schedule operations and such, maybe a month or three out, IF it can wait.
Walk ins, I get in in like 45 minutes tops. Emergency has a wait unless you are bleeding out, maybe an hour or two depending on how busy.
scheduling my doctor is easy. last time I did, my doc was out for a week, so I simply went somewhere else to get tested for my illness to be sure it wasn't covid and other checks. Called over lunch, got in after work, no problem.

I do feel everything is priced insane - maybe because insurance covers it all? I pay 10% only and company covers the rest with that insurance....

Price of medicine seems insane. $8000 4k TVs have benefitted by mass production, and are now $400 or less. why are tiny pills still $800 for 3 months supply? very much gouging going on there. BUT I only pay my 10% or whatever

So, how do we fix it?

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

I think that those wait times all depend on where you are.

Right now in Canada we have a different issue, where a lot of our provincial governments are trying to dismantle public health care and implement private, so we have issues here, but I'd still rather be here than in the US with my health issues.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

so, sounds like they are trying to implement what we in US did for higher profits? That sucks.

I have friends from other countries, and they state health care in canada is not as bad as the (bought) press says it is: wait lines for hours and hours for inferior service... where my friends call bullshit and say its faster and better than in america. they live here in US now. maybe it depends on where they were living.
It's hard getting real info from media - where as platforms like this could be more believeable if we are all being real about it.

reply

[–] sslssg (30497) 2 years ago

It also depends where in Canada you live. Health care in Canada is controlled by the Provinces. Prince Edward Island has a waiting list that's around 25000 for people who are without a doctor. Doctors are retiring, population is growing, and new doctors aren't being recruited fast enough.

I need yearly MRIs. Because it's routine for me, I usually have a couple of months wait from when my doc puts in the req. But I also was able to get in in 2 days when I had an issue and needed one quickly. I have heard of stories where people don't get scans in time and cancer is advanced by the time they do get one, but again, it's not the experience of anyone I know who has had a cancer diagnosis.

reply

[–] Keelai (32794) 2 years ago

I've talked to people from countries, including Canada, with national healthcare and they're very happy with it. I know an American who needed to go to the hospital in Europe during his trip and he didn't pay any money. The horror stories are promoted by selfish and greedy rich people. Our system means you lose your house, job and your life savings if you become seriously ill.

reply

[–] tcrum (30579) 2 years ago

I agree on that. If you get really sick in America its likely you'll lose your house, or go bankrupt. Who has 100,000 lying around for a weeks stay in the hospital.

reply

[–] db20db (16574) 2 years ago

I once ran into a former coworker/friend who told me his wife had recently had a stroke, wound up in the hospital for a similar amount of time, and now they were over $200,000 in debt! I was stunned, didn't know how to respond. And this couple was younger than me.

reply

[–] tcrum (30579) 2 years ago

There is a huge mental health crisis that started well before Covid, and now is reaching a boiling point. We need a Walmart, warehouse size, free mental health facility, in every major city.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6502) 2 years ago

Maybe.... stay with me here, I mean this in all seriousness.... maybe our societal structure IS the leading cause of our mental unhealthiness going on. Maybe reverting life back to real things would fix an underlying cause for anxiety, mental health issues, the shootings and everything.

You bring up a very large, and important part of the problem that lead me to ask, "How can we fix society, who's doing it best, and can we apply those practices?"

reply

[–] McQualude (4231) 2 years ago

I agree with you. Mental illness is a result of our modern society: overstimulation, excessive communication, lack of real boredom (downtime that forces us to be creative or self-reflect), separation from reality and nature.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12918) 2 years ago

I read that one reason our homeless population got larger was because there was some ridiculous plan back between the 80s and the early 2000s to temporarily empty out mental hospitals all over the US, improve them, and then get all the patients back. The plan got as far as emptying the mental hospitals before funding fell through, and now we have all these deviants on the street.

reply

[–] chilidoggg (13420) 2 years ago

"A state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by themselves or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Connor_v._Donaldson

1975 Unanimous decision by Supreme Court.

reply