Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Stressing out over minor things losing possessions and economic downfalls?

  1. Sep 11, 2009 #1
    why do people get stressed out over things like plunging financially down the debt hole or the unemployment rate rising ? Those things are bad, but I would not considered suicide or sink into deep depression if I lost my job or all of my possessions like many people do . Things like losing a job or losing all or most of your possessions are material things that most of the time , are replaceable , well except possessions that were past on from previous family generations. Things worth truly getting stressed out over are things like getting cancer or AIDS or being in a situation where your life is about to immediately end,such as when a maniac hijacks a plane and announces that he will ram it into a building and you are on it. Our society has created an environment where we should take these kinds of things seriously and be very upset over. I would find it interesting to see how people would react in a scenario where the government and economic institutions start to fall down like dominoes. I am not talking about a tragedy where a meteor/asteroid was heading towards the earth or a nuclear holocaust. I am talking about a scenario similar to the plot in Lord of the Flies where the boys had to actively be resourceful when stuck on an island if they wanted to survive. Do you think people be prepared if our government and economic institutions collapses; I don't think people would react very well and I think suicides would rise exponentially
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 11, 2009 #2

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    How many people depend on you for the food and shelter?
     
  4. Sep 11, 2009 #3
    Well I depend on a lot of people for food and shelter , but the reason why I depend on people for food and shelter because I live in a society that puts an emphasis on reliance (not self-reliance) rather than resourcefulness. If people took the initiative to grow their own food and build their own houses, we would not have to rely on other people for those needs and wants.
     
  5. Sep 11, 2009 #4

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I think there can be many reasons people get very stressed about financial problems.

    If you have financial responsibility for your family, it would be extremely difficult to be seen as incapable of supporting them.

    Also, in my experience, any sort of stress seems to cause people to stop being creative and see new solutions to problems. Financial stress is overwhelmingly powerful, as anyone who has ever experienced it knows. So if the problem is "I suddenly have a lot less money," it may not be obvious that the solution is, "I need to be frugal now."
     
  6. Sep 11, 2009 #5

    Wax

    User Avatar

    Go for a year on unemployment benefits and come back to tell us if you feel the same way. I can tell you right now that your stress levels will be up to your eye balls trying to pay for your rent, car, health care, gas, and food. On top of that, you could have kids.

    How would you feel if you had to tell your kid that you couldn't afford to feed him 3 meals a day?
     
  7. Sep 11, 2009 #6
    What if the suicide rate would be higher among societies that put more emphasis on reliance?


    How was it before 1900s or so? There are many societies like that even now, I think you wouldn't want to live with them.


    Personally, I think getting AIDS/cancer <30 or >60 would be better than getting it between 30-60
     
  8. Sep 11, 2009 #7
    You are probably right. I get extremely upset when my laptop stops working or inconveniences me, but I shouldn't , we all shouldn't. But I have been conditioned to be upset over such things. Gas and cars , and even having jobs are not needs; they are wants. Things like food and water, and maintaining a healthy life are needs.Food is attainable. It is all around, not just at restaurants and grocery stores . You don't just buy food, we do come from a long line of ancestors who were hunters and gatherers. I don't prefer that way of living to our modern way of living.
     
  9. Sep 11, 2009 #8

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    noblegas, I think you just hit on the Zeitgeist of our time: discerning a want from a need.
     
  10. Sep 11, 2009 #9

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Since you depend on others for food and shelter, losing a job isn't a big deal for you. If others depended on you for food and shleter and you lost your job, you could be left homeless and your family starving. That would be a really big deal.
    That's wildly naive. People don't have enough time to do such things for themselves, nor can people be experts at enough different skills to be able to do such things for themselves.

    Your way of thinking works reasonably well in an ancient hunter-gatherer society, but hasn't been the way things have worked for perhaps thousands of years.

    How old are you anyway? These sound like the musings of a discontented teenager who hasn't yet had to deal with the realities of living and thriving.
     
  11. Sep 11, 2009 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Seriously - this is a mind-bogglingly naive line of thinking!

    There are a lot of different ways to look at this, but perhaps it is best seen as a testament to how advanced a society we are when people don't even consider the possibility of being homeless or starving when thinking about what unemployment could mean.
     
  12. Sep 11, 2009 #11
    "Stressing out" is when something is constantly on your mind bothering you.

    The reason we stress out is because we sense an impending catastrophe and devote more thought-time attempting to find a way to avoid the catastrophe.

    So, I think that stressing out is an extremely important behavioral mechanism.

    If the catastrophe has already happened, as in the case of having contracted AIDS (the example you cited as being a good time to stress out), then there is no rational benefit to continuing to stress out over it.
     
  13. Sep 11, 2009 #12
    Maybe they think living the simple life is not worth it. They dont foresee society advancing. They see that that future will be the same as now and if you have less money your condition wont improve.
     
  14. Sep 11, 2009 #13

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So you think that in an advanced society, people will think that buying houses on an interest-only loan is a good idea? That running up credit card after credit card to the limits because they feel safe doing so, because they think there's a safety net?

    Ah...oh no...I just described the last 10-or-so years...:redface:.

    It's not naive; it's what has been happening. But now people are pulling back, becoming much more reasonable.

    And I don't think an advanced society would encourage financial wrecklessness, btw. I don't think you do either, I think I may have not been clear in my post.
     
  15. Sep 11, 2009 #14
    This was my first thought as well. At some point, the fear of not being able to provide for and protect your family easily outweighs personal comfort and personal safety.
     
  16. Sep 11, 2009 #15
    I wouldn't be left homeless if I knew howto hunt for my own food and new how to grow food. When the united states was formed, most people hunted for their food and built their own houses. If people lost their jobs and homes now, people would not have a back up plan to deal with such misfortunes and would be as helpless as a newborn infant without its mother .


    We have plenty of time. The only time that is finite is the time the moment we are born until the time that we die. There are people who live on communes and people who don't live on communes who grow their own food in their own back yard. We should have a back up plan in case society collaspes upon itself . It is naive to think that our comfortable lifestyle will not be interrupted by internal or external factors that may disrupt it and not have a backplan on how to prepare for this kind of emergency..
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2009
  17. Sep 12, 2009 #16

    Wax

    User Avatar

    Not everybody has a backyard or the means to grow their own foods to be self sufficient from society. Do you think the people who live in NYC have a backyard or the money to go country side to buy a ranch to hunt animals? You can't just go into someone's milk pasture and kill his cow just because you're hungry. You know animals just don't grow on trees right? They have to be farmed, nurtured, and space to live. Who do you think pays for the ranch? Nobody's going to give every single person in the country a backyard to grow their own food.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2009
  18. Sep 12, 2009 #17
    The vast majority of people do not live in an area that is suitable for this lifestyle. If you still have enough saved up for a ticket to Alaska, congratulations....but you have to give up on all bets of maintaining a normal life in society...
     
  19. Sep 12, 2009 #18
    No. Astronuc asked you, "How many people depend upon you for food and shelter?" not who you depend upon.

    Edit: Sorry noblebas. A lot of people are giving you the what-fors, but you might consider the constraints people place themselves under-as well as the latititudes they take, to provide for the well-being of those they cherish.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2009
  20. Sep 12, 2009 #19

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Not sure if I was unclear, but in responding to you I was reiterating that noblegas's position is naive - I wasn't calling your position naive.

    Regardless, I don't see what your post has to do with the topic being discussed. Whether someone is financially reckless or not, long-term unemployment has the same effect if no one is around to pick them up: homlessness and starvation. The recklessness of the past 10 years just means people live closer to the edge - it doesn't mean the edge isn't there if people live more responsibly.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2009
  21. Sep 12, 2009 #20

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Do you own enough land to grow your own food? If not, where would you do that? Can you live inside food? (how does growing food provide you shelter?)
    Have you ever tried it? What makes you so sure you could do it? When America was first settled, a lot of people died because of how difficult it is to live that lifestyle.

    Again, this line of thinking you are on is extrordinarily naive. You're not thinking it through.
    True. Nothing I have seen from you, though, suggests you have a back up plan. You have a vague, romantic notion of how great it would be to live in a simpler time, but that's just a fantasy, not a plan.
    If society collapsed completely, most of the world's population would die. The world quite simply can't support 6 billion people living an ancient lifestyle. Feeding the world requires modern farming. Providing sanitation requires modern plumbing and water services.
     
  22. Sep 12, 2009 #21
    I wasn't suggesting that growing food provided shelter, but people are able to grow their own food, I am sure people are able to create their own shelter if they were thrown in such a situation. I am not suggesting that we should live a pioneering lifestyle, I am suggesting that we should have an alternative lifestyle just in case the modern lifestyle we currently are in suddenly collaspes upon itself.

    Russ you have not answer my question: How would you and most people who take our modern conveniences for granted react if they were suddenly snatched away from you? I don't know you personally so I cannot say how you will react if you were suddenly thrown in those circumstances. But it is safe to say that most americans(myself included), would not know how to easily adapt to a different set of circumstances that is especially a large inconvenience to their lifestyle. Just look at the suicide rates during the great depression when 25- 30 percent of people were unemployed . I can surely imagined how large the suicide rates would be if 90-100 percent of people were unemployed. Russ, are you forgetting that most people on the planet don't live a modern lifestyle that we in the west do? Why aren't 3 billion people dead? Sure, they don't have the biggest survival rates compared to western societies, but they managed to survive and there is not a strong correlation between how technologically advanced a nation is and low/high suicide rates(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate.) Unexpectedly, some in less technologically developed region of the world are more happier than many western nations(I wouldn't be). Nigeria, being an example(http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_hap_lev_ver_hap-lifestyle-happiness-level-very-happy); How are those people who lack the modern conveniences that we in the west for granted surviving? You are putting words in my mouth, Russ. If you look at one of my previous posts, I clearly said that I would freak out if my laptop and other electronics appliances I used on a daily basis inconvenienced me. I said I would not know how to react if such conveniences were permanently/temporarily destroyed because of a severe economic depression. I don't want to replace the modern society I currently live in with a primitive society. I certainly did not suggest that a primitive lifestyle is superior to my modern lifestyle like you claimed I did. My biggest concern is how humans will adapt if modern society collaspes upon itself, particular the humans who live a lifestyle that convenience them the most compared to the rest of world ? If people were no longer able to provide store-bought food , what would you do in that situation to survive? It would be silly to kill yourself ; we are supposed to be an adaptable species.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  23. Sep 12, 2009 #22

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Ummm - this is what one wrote, to which Russ responded.
    Also please respond to my question - "how many people depend on you, noblegas".


    Not being able to provide for one's family is quite stressful. Watching one's spouse or children go hungry is quite stressful. Not being able to obtain medical care for one's ill spouse or children is quite stressful.


    Of course, as lisab indicated, some people have become accustomed to 'wants' rather than 'needs', but I reflect more on those who are unable for whatever reason to obtain basic necessities.
     
  24. Sep 12, 2009 #23

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

  25. Sep 12, 2009 #24
    I don't see where I wrote in any of my posts where I suggest that growing food will provide shelter for you. Please show me that statement I've made.


    I depend on my parents currently for food and shelter, but I would have to learn how to adapt and not sink into a depression or kill myself if my parents suddenly decided to kick me out . I can understand why people get upset when they lose their jobs and they are unable to provide for their family. But we need a back-up plan if such a situation were to arise; You should already know that when you are hired for a job, there is no guarantee that you will have your job next week or even tomorrow. That is why you should have a back up plan in case you were to lose your job. It might not be much, but it would be beneficial for you if you were to grow vegetables in a garden and then stored your produce only for emergencies like losing your job; But I don't think many americans take such precautions seriously and I don't think the stress levels would be as high when faced with losing a job if such precautions were given more serious consideration and thought. Many posters have the impression that I value a primitive (hunter/gatherer society over our modern society, I do not; I love modern conveniences; But I don't like how people react when conveniences are suddenly taken away; why do you considered these kinds of precautions naive
     
  26. Sep 12, 2009 #25

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I did, but you seem to be responding to a different statement that no one made.

    Quoting noblegas, "I wouldn't be left homeless if I knew howto hunt for my own food and new how to grow food."

    Hunting and growing food having nothing to do with shelter or being homeless.

    In other words, one has no dependents. Rather, one is dependent on others, namely one's parents.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook