What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Listing the problems in society (1 Viewer)

mental health issues - like autism, Down's Syndrome? The cost for care to society?

And there are plenty of people who fit the description of alcoholics and can be productive embers of society. Maybe alcoholism that leads to homelessness?
MHI - that's a good start....  also the discussion as to MHI as it relates to the mass shootings...

Alcoholism - while many can be productive, the behaviors that go with it and then are passed down for generations are rather mind boggling when studied.

My mom was one. Both her parents and brother and sister became one. I didn't, but some of the behaviors that are very destructive were passed down to me and although I rarely drink, I was affecting lives of others even though I'm insanely productive compared to most. What I learned from some counseling five years ago about alcoholism was stunning. I've owned and corrected those behaviors and the results have been very positive for all concerned.

A lot of the problems occurring in society now are from the addictions we all have to all the various things. If people really understood how these behaviors affect ALL of us, a lot of things would get better. 

 
Give me an example
Assisted suicide. The elderly are a drain on society and if they want to end their lives instead of laying in a bed for years, they should be able to. We are getting there, state by state, but it's still not a widely accepted thought.

 
Assisted suicide. The elderly are a drain on society and if they want to end their lives instead of laying in a bed for years, they should be able to. We are getting there, state by state, but it's still not a widely accepted thought.
I would put the reluctance to talking about Assisted Suicide mostly to Religious Beliefs. Is that Political Correctness?

But I really agree with you on this matter. I watched my sister die a very slow and painful death from ALS. There were days when i wanted to go into her room at the Convalescent Hospital  and put a pillow over her face.

And yet I had a dog (13 years old) and a cat (14 years old) that I had to put down because they were in so much pain and were dying. A simple shot to both of them and it was very peaceful

 
I would put the reluctance to talking about Assisted Suicide mostly to Religious Beliefs. Is that Political Correctness?

But I really agree with you on this matter. I watched my sister die a very slow and painful death from ALS. There were days when i wanted to go into her room at the Convalescent Hospital  and put a pillow over her face.

And yet I had a dog (13 years old) and a cat (14 years old) that I had to put down because they were in so much pain and were dying. A simple shot to both of them and it was very peaceful
Ugh...sorry about your sister. I've heard that als is about the worst way to go. I just watched a recent VICE episode on it. Horrible. My wife and I are prepared to move to a state that allows assisted suicide if we ever have to make that decision. I think the political correctness of it is saying that it is a drain on our heath care/ insurance system. It makes it impersonal but it's the truth. Besides the mental toll on a family, it can devastate them financially. We should all have that choice to avoid leaving that burden on our family.

 
I'm going to add:

mistrust of government - yes, it's been like this forever but we have to be at one of the low points in our countries history

the need for acceptance - so many people want to be someone, be seen, heard, acknowledged.

the lack of good music in the mainstream.  - it's out there, but not what tops the charts.

 
I'm going to add:

mistrust of government - yes, it's been like this forever but we have to be at one of the low points in our countries history

the need for acceptance - so many people want to be someone, be seen, heard, acknowledged.

the lack of good music in the mainstream.  - it's out there, but not what tops the charts.
Mistrust of Gov't - I see this as a symptom, not a cause.  What is the cause of the general population mistrusting the gov't?  That is the problem we must address.

The need for acceptance - Purely a 'surface' desire.  This is a two-pronged problem.  One, they are seeking acknowledgement from the wrong people, and/or not getting acknowledgement from the right people(re: family, friends, themselves).  Two, it shines a light on a bigger problem with humanity:  Not enough soul searching/questioning ones self/meditation/exploring philosophical ideals/knowing oneself.

The lack of good music in the mainstream - Mainstream music is much like mainstream magazine sales.  People magazine outsells The Economist 100 to 1.  What magazine will cause inner growth?  An understanding of global movement?  Challenge your understanding of the world?

There is a commonality among these 3:  People are not only unwilling to think for themselves, they are afraid to do it.  

 
Great post Hastur!

I am intending on looking at commonalities in this list once it gets to a certain point but we are far from that yet. So many things have not even been mentioned yet.

 
1) the breakdown of the traditional family. Far too many absentee dads.

2) the continued piss-poor public education system and the related societal apathy about learning in general.

 
What about the issue with those who have higher IQs breeding far less than those who have lower IQs.  I'm not sure if studies have been done, but it's fairly obvious that the intellectuals in our society have far few kids than those with lower IQs.  Yet technology allows everyone, no matter their genetic potential, to survive and thrive.  What happens when the majority of smart people have been bred out of our world?

 
What about the issue with those who have higher IQs breeding far less than those who have lower IQs.  I'm not sure if studies have been done, but it's fairly obvious that the intellectuals in our society have far few kids than those with lower IQs.  Yet technology allows everyone, no matter their genetic potential, to survive and thrive.  What happens when the majority of smart people have been bred out of our world?
I look forward to the President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho administration.

 
A few I've thought of before:

The fragmentation of the world into various nation-states where globalization intersects cultures.  I think, at some point, becoming a more connected world where global governmental bodies (with teeth) could unite nation-states and give way to a population that saw themselves as "world" citizens would go a long way to phasing out some long-held prejudices and stereotypes that are variant and found within the borders of states, existing through historical events, religious beliefs, or other sources and perpetuated in part from state isolationism.

I forgot the other one while posting the above.  So maybe forgetfulness?
LOL The problem with globalization again is that it goers against our nature. We are social people, but in a tribal or pack sense. We want our own territories, our own kind. Instinctively we seem our tribes as a possible threat: someone that would take from us our hinting grounds, our women (speaking older cultures here) or our way of supporting our families or our culture. We divide into us and them, usually based on some random factor be it hair color, skin color, language or whatever. Then we see "them" as a threat.

Where globalization has failed to overcome this tendency is that rather than raising all boats up to a relatively common level, it has raised some boats while sinking others, and has tried to raise some boats which do not have the same values as the boats that sit higher in the water. Globalization almost requires one people, some culture. If Greece and England are too different for the EU to happen, how can the West and the Arab world ever achieve common goals?

 
It's basic human instinct.  It's never going to be curbed.  The best society can do is create a system in which most of its members believe they can better achieve those goals through participation and peaceful coexistence.
I'm not smart enough to design that system. Neither has anyone else been.

 
There are plenty of ideas. The problem is we do not try them. When finding solutions to problems, debate is not a good method. Trial-and-error is better. There are undoubtedly ideas that will work but will never get tried because they cannot pass the debate phase. Someone will always shoot them down in debate. 
Let's hear these ideas and how you would try them.

 
No, but I can see why my post might lead you to think that.  My main point, that I missed, is that I think humans need to see themselves as world citizens, as opposed to citizens of their country or state, and that one of the main ways I think we could achieve that is to have some kind of global government that unites nation-states (something more sinngificant than the UN).  I'm not imagining an oppressive government, like some out of Orwell's 1986, but something that can start tackling economic, social, and environmental issues at a global level.  I do think cultures would become more homogenous overtime, which is certainly a negative outcome, but I think there would be so many more pros that would vastly outweigh that.
It was 1984 HTH

 
One big problem we have is that people complain too much and don't enjoy all the greatness we have and all the progress we've made the last 100 years or so.   We're on a pretty good trajectory, probably the best (and easiest) time to be alive ever.  Enjoy the ride. 
Lots of people everywhere struggle to adapt to change but I'm optimistic. I like the overall direction we're heading, new generations are examining old traditions and rejecting the ones found wanting. The biggest opponent to positive change is inertia and, little by little, we're addressing that, too.

 
LOL The problem with globalization again is that it goers against our nature. We are social people, but in a tribal or pack sense. We want our own territories, our own kind. Instinctively we seem our tribes as a possible threat: someone that would take from us our hinting grounds, our women (speaking older cultures here) or our way of supporting our families or our culture. We divide into us and them, usually based on some random factor be it hair color, skin color, language or whatever. Then we see "them" as a threat.

Where globalization has failed to overcome this tendency is that rather than raising all boats up to a relatively common level, it has raised some boats while sinking others, and has tried to raise some boats which do not have the same values as the boats that sit higher in the water. Globalization almost requires one people, some culture. If Greece and England are too different for the EU to happen, how can the West and the Arab world ever achieve common goals?
I know this might sounds nuts, and it very well maybe be crazy, but I think when (not if, IMO) we discover sentient life outside of Earth, and if that species is significantly more advanced than ours, that this will be a perceived threat and allow us to look past our bitter and illogical prejudices and become more united globally.  And I think that will be for the better.

 
Political Correctness is an attempt to manipulate the natural order of things. The more attempts that are made to hastily, or artificially manipulate the natural order of things, the the more, and more effectively (and at times, with brutal efficiency), the natural order of things causes a correction, and re-asserts itself, and it's own inimitable schedule. In my opinion, over time, I think my theory has proven itself out. Human beings are human beings, and there are thousands of years worth of genetic imprint that make us the way we are, and at a base level, do the things we do, both good and bad. Over time, as a species, we have 'improved', and will continue to do so, but we have little control over the rate of that improvement. In my opinion, no matter how advanced our civilization continues to become, it will take certain issues, at the very least, hundreds, of years for the natural order of things to move in a different direction on it's own. Centuries-worth of human beings have attempted to bring about societal change in relatively short periods of time (some of which, I think, the impetus is due to our relatively short life span), and yet many behaviors we might find objectionable continue to manifest themselves, largely due to human nature, which operates on it's own clock, and, in my opinion, takes a very long view of time. Much longer than we humans are comfortable with. Much unpleasantness in life, in my opinion, is the result of history repeating itself again and again. Human beings, I think, would be much better served, to accept our humanity, as unpleasant as some of us might find it, and just individually do our best to be the best human beings we can be, within the limits of what we are capable of being, and in the process, advance our humanity in as many inches as we can in the time we're given, and stop trying to accomplish feet, yards, miles. I'm not saying we have a hard ceiling, or that change isn't possible; just look at our history...but rather that some changes (not all) happen over centuries, not days, or even years, and within our relatively short lifetimes, only so much change is capable of happening. Change isn't going to happen (overnight) just because we want it to (overnight). It takes more than wanting it, and it takes plenty of time. An enlightened approach would be to realize that much of what we want to happen isn't going to happen in our lifetimes, and instead of trying to force everything to happen now!, now!, now!, we would be better served to move the inches we are capable of in our life span, knowing down the road that over time, inches eventually grow into feet, feet eventually grow into yards, and yards eventually grow into miles. A big action is the result of many little actions, and history has proven that little actions are what the human life span is capable of. The 'unique little snowflake' crowd wants so desperately to be the ones who actually make the change, or to be there when changes happen. Unfortunately, the natural order of things doesn't work that way. The important inches that lead to change are accomplished by millions of people who's names and contributions will be forgotten, but are crucial to change happening, nonetheless.

Inch by inch, life is a cinch. Yard by yard, life is very, very hard. We make life harder on ourselves by trying to accomplish too much in the time we're given. Do your part, and set the table for the next man up. That's how runs are scored - one inning at a time. Focus on the quality of your contribution, not the quantity. Heroes are few and far between. Not everyone is going to get the praise and attention of the hero, but in order to win the game, everyone needs to do their part, and even if their contribution is small, when accomplished, and accomplished well, it's still critical to achieve the goal of a winning Season. Such is life, and in my opinion, there's not much room for negotiation.

 
PTSD of returning veterans - 20+ committing suicide every day!
I hate to actually get serious on the board, but the overall handling of our service men and women has been horrific.  They are paid abysmally, put in nightmarish situations on a regular basis, and face a stunningly ineffective VA after they've been discharged.

The whole thing is a disgrace.

 
bueno said:
LOL The problem with globalization again is that it goers against our nature. We are social people, but in a tribal or pack sense. We want our own territories, our own kind. Instinctively we seem our tribes as a possible threat: someone that would take from us our hinting grounds, our women (speaking older cultures here) or our way of supporting our families or our culture. We divide into us and them, usually based on some random factor be it hair color, skin color, language or whatever. Then we see "them" as a threat.

Where globalization has failed to overcome this tendency is that rather than raising all boats up to a relatively common level, it has raised some boats while sinking others, and has tried to raise some boats which do not have the same values as the boats that sit higher in the water. Globalization almost requires one people, some culture. If Greece and England are too different for the EU to happen, how can the West and the Arab world ever achieve common goals?
Globalization is a direct consequence of short term thinking in corporations. The profit next quarter is more important athan a sustainable (not in an eco sense necessarily) business model and long term Creating Shared Value. I see Globalization not as an end stage but a stage in the evolutionary journey.

Over the longer term I could see it somewhat rolled back on the manufacturing side by localized 3D printing on basis of common design specs or rented design specs.

Having similar and similarly enforced IP rights in nation states (which is something that the trade agreements usually try to install) would go a long way to make that possible.

 
I think too many people take themselves too seriously.  Too many people can't laugh at themselves.  Laughter lightens intense situations and brings people together.  When people are too serious (political correctness is an example) things get escalated. 

If everyone could laugh at themselves and not think someone laughing at a situation is laughing at them it would go a long way.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top