Shouldn't people take a better care of their own species?

[just_Alice]

I know it may sound strange, as we live in a society, where people mostly adore animals and I don't have anything against it, but still there's one catch. Sometimes it comes to my mind that some people spend too much money on pets and numbers speak for themselves (estimated expenditures for 2018 year - 72.13 billion USD according to The American Pet Products Association), I'm not talking about simple feeding or taking care of homeless pets here. I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?
But another, more important question is lying on top of that: shouldn't people take care of other people, instead of domesticating animals, that would feel better under wild nature conditions? Only in the US there are nearly 564,708 homeless people, taking them away from streets and giving them the opportunity to become educated would improve country's economy by increasing the number of skilled labour. What's your opinion on this?

[South Park]

I know it may sound strange, as we live in a society, where people mostly adore animals and I don't have anything against it, but still there's one catch. Sometimes it comes to my mind that some people spend too much money on pets and numbers speak for themselves (estimated expenditures for 2018 year - 72.13 billion USD according to The American Pet Products Association), I'm not talking about simple feeding or taking care of homeless pets here. I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?
But another, more important question is lying on top of that: shouldn't people take care of other people, instead of domesticating animals, that would feel better under wild nature conditions? Only in the US there are nearly 564,708 homeless people, taking them away from streets and giving them the opportunity to become educated would improve country's economy by increasing the number of skilled labour. What's your opinion on this?

You are not wrong, but the society in which we currently live is very different from societies in the past, when people do not even know the name of their neighbor next door then it is impossible for them to care about anyone else, people think that since they are paying such high taxes they do not need to do anything more, so what you are saying could be possible in a community that had closer ties and had a smaller government.

[Jating]

I have one friend who spends thousands of dollars on one of his pets because the dog has a cancer. But eventually she die. So I don't the rational but I didn't ask. The only reason I think of its because animals like dog don't retaliate and didn't harbor negative sentiments towards human.

Imagine you feed someone you didn't know, but then you are robbed or something. Or you help someone on the streets because they claimed to be disabled. But if you closely followed them, they are able body but just too lazy to get a job. I hope you get my point.

[davis196]

Many people don't have kids and they replace the idea of having a kid with having a pet(which is weird).
Most of the people are usually hypocrite,selfish and evil,while pets are grateful when you take care of them.
That's why people spend money on pets,instead of donating for charity.
I wish that the merchants in that 70 billion USD pet industry started accepting crypto payments.

[aleksnutis]

I know it may sound strange, as we live in a society, where people mostly adore animals and I don't have anything against it, but still there's one catch. Sometimes it comes to my mind that some people spend too much money on pets and numbers speak for themselves (estimated expenditures for 2018 year - 72.13 billion USD according to The American Pet Products Association), I'm not talking about simple feeding or taking care of homeless pets here. I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?
But another, more important question is lying on top of that: shouldn't people take care of other people, instead of domesticating animals, that would feel better under wild nature conditions? Only in the US there are nearly 564,708 homeless people, taking them away from streets and giving them the opportunity to become educated would improve country's economy by increasing the number of skilled labour. What's your opinion on this?

I share your opinion about how much people spend on their pets, but could help African citizens. Perhaps the problem is that they do not know how to do this and how to control that their money will go completely to help people.

[AT101ET]

It’s simple human psychology. Humans lend more of themselves than they do on others.
Pets belong to the individual and said individual will do all that’s necessary to look after the pet (think of it as a family member). When it comes to giving charity however, people tend to be a little tighter. One doesn’t feel like they are giving it away - it’s a household expense, whilst the other does despite it being the correct thing to do.

[neliawesome]

Thats is really true that there are lots of people spending more money for their pets rather than helping to people who are in need.Well we can never blame them because first of all we cannot dictate what they want and they earned their money from their own hardwork.For them its time to give their self a happiness through seeing their pets in better condition even they will spend lots of money on it but its their own happiness.Grooming and buying pets makes them happy.I know it feels absurd were they prioritize animals rather than humans but thats what their happiness about, it is to see their pets looks great.We have different perspective.Some people wanted to help other people through charity while some wanted only to spend out their money into what they wanted to.

[charlotte04]

I know it may sound strange, as we live in a society, where people mostly adore animals and I don't have anything against it, but still there's one catch. Sometimes it comes to my mind that some people spend too much money on pets and numbers speak for themselves (estimated expenditures for 2018 year - 72.13 billion USD according to The American Pet Products Association), I'm not talking about simple feeding or taking care of homeless pets here. I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?
But another, more important question is lying on top of that: shouldn't people take care of other people, instead of domesticating animals, that would feel better under wild nature conditions? Only in the US there are nearly 564,708 homeless people, taking them away from streets and giving them the opportunity to become educated would improve country's economy by increasing the number of skilled labour. What's your opinion on this?

Sometimes humans are so dumb and stinky so that I only take good care of those poor animals that doesn't have any rights for other people to live in this world.

[kaya11]

I believe it is needed for humans to take care of pets. Well if you exterminate them all I think there would no more balance in the world. Pets like cats and dogs helps humans for example rats are commonly problems which farmers and indoors too. So if you have cats on your house the lesser the parasites are.
If people will solely put their money on to beggars and homeless people, they must just think they don't need to work anymore-people with money will feed them. So it's a balance-but if you say people with pets lessen their expenditures like buying their pets clothes that is too much price then you have the point. Some rich people do these things not knowing there is a lot more better who needed the money rather than wasting it on a pet.

[Wendigo]

Well animals have one big advantage over human beings and that is unadulterated, unconditional love. On the other hand humans are inherently treacherous and dishonest, and they will stab you in the back sooner or later. That's not to say there aren't any pets that will bite the hand that feeds them, but it's usually a very rare exception to the rule and it's mostly animals that have been abused in the past. Taking care of perfect strangers like homeless people is very risky, because you never know how they will conduct themselves in their new home. At first they might appear grateful and sweet, and then start acting out and make trouble.

[just_Alice]

Well animals have one big advantage over human beings and that is unadulterated, unconditional love. On the other hand humans are inherently treacherous and dishonest, and they will stab you in the back sooner or later. That's not to say there aren't any pets that will bite the hand that feeds them, but it's usually a very rare exception to the rule and it's mostly animals that have been abused in the past. Taking care of perfect strangers like homeless people is very risky, because you never know how they will conduct themselves in their new home. At first they might appear grateful and sweet, and then start acting out and make trouble.

You're right, it's actually very likely that homeless people won't say big thanks to the ones that helped them, unlike pets. But here's the thing - let's say citizens would give money not directly to people who are in need, but raise funds to build some kind of shelters, where they would have teachers, books, clothes and be able to learn some things. That would be for the benefit of the governmental economy, by reducing the level of unemployment, for instance, which would be better for those citizens. Of course, ideally, it's government's responsibility, but the reality is different. The problem is that they don't think in the longer term and wait for repercussions wight away (like for dogs to wag their tails).

[HI KITTY]

I know it may sound strange, as we live in a society, where people mostly adore animals and I don't have anything against it, but still there's one catch. Sometimes it comes to my mind that some people spend too much money on pets and numbers speak for themselves (estimated expenditures for 2018 year - 72.13 billion USD according to The American Pet Products Association), I'm not talking about simple feeding or taking care of homeless pets here. I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?
But another, more important question is lying on top of that: shouldn't people take care of other people, instead of domesticating animals, that would feel better under wild nature conditions? Only in the US there are nearly 564,708 homeless people, taking them away from streets and giving them the opportunity to become educated would improve country's economy by increasing the number of skilled labour. What's your opinion on this?

yes, every species are deserved to be loved and care by the people around them. If they live with us, we are responsible to take care with our pets/ species , like dogs and cat. That's why we need to love them and keep them clean and healthy. They are not just species but also friends to lean on, to play with them when we are bored.

[Mometaskers]

I'm talking about this habit, when pet keepers become obsessed with some special breeds that cost thousands of dollars, or do expensive haircuts, paint nails or whatever for their animal companions. Come on, is that what animals really need? I think that's just a show-off, and why develop new breeds, when there are lots of animals struggling on streets?

Humans have been doing this ever since we discovered we can domesticate plants and animals. It's called signalling, also known as showing off. "Look, I'm well off and can afford to spend money on this useless monster of a breed. I definitely have money to burn and make a good mate."

Even without the outrageous examples though, a survey has shown that millenials are spending more on pets than previous generations. Either we have a softer, gentler generation of people or that survey was skewed by couples who prefer to lavish on pets first instead of immediately having a baby. For all the cost associated with treats and vet visits, pets are still way cheaper to maintain than a constantly hungry human larva (and those are just horrible, horrible).