Unpopular Opinions: The Thread

trouble time

Victorious
Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
758
Reaction score
545
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
More Unpopular Opinions:

When you take a cart from a store, you should need to swipe your credit card through it in order to use it.
This is mostly just to get rid of a few annoyances I have. If you don't return your cart to a proper bin... charge your credit card a fee for returning it for you. If your cart wanders through the parking lot and hits another car... you are responsible for that and your credit card can be billed.
Aldis sort of does this, you have to put a quarter in to get a cart.
 

Tai_MT

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
5,246
Reaction score
4,455
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Sounds good to me. I wish every store had something like that. I'm tired of carts banging into my vehicle, blocking parking spots, or just being shoved close to the dispensers.
 

Aesica

undefined
Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2018
Messages
982
Reaction score
921
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I didn't want it to turn into a fight but I kept getting quoted. If I didn't feel like my respondents were baring teeth, i'd have been more tame.


To clarify: No one was barring teeth or being hostile at you, no one was trying to pick a fight with or bully you on the internet or whatever you're trying to play this off as. If you took it that way, I'm sorry. Sometimes I forget that not everyone on the internet has a thick skin so...feelings get hurt I guess!

Anyway moving on!

- - -

Possibly unpopular opinion (note the separator, meaning this has nothing to do with the above reply): Humanity's technological prowess has evolved faster than its own cognitive ability can keep up with, and this will probably spell our doom before we manage to colonize beyond this planet.

Edit:

Women should have the same societal pressures put on them to ask out guys as guys have to ask out women.
I'm sorry, but this doesn't need much of an explanation. Guys go through a lot of crap trying to get up the courage to ask out someone we genuinely like. Anxiety level is through the roof. I think women having to do this as well, experiencing what we do... would likely give them a better understanding of us.
I'll admit, it's really nice to be able to just kind of...sit back and make guys do all the hard work. Is it fair? Heck no, but I can't really imagine how depressing and draining it has to be for guys to be like "hey, wanna date?" "Nope." "How about you, wanna date?" "No thanks." "Okay maybe you, then?" "Sorry!" Basically it's like this on any dating site:

Girl: 200 new likes? Oh boy, now to flip through them all and make contact with the hottest ones!

Guy: 0 new likes again? Guess I'd better start sending off likes to see if anyone responds...

So while it works nicely this way for me, I admit it's grossly unfair for the guys and thus, I agree that it should probably change. Too bad humans have such a hard time getting over the programming from both society as well as their primitive, outdated mating software.
 
Last edited:

JFB1222

Wind Runner
Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
22
Reaction score
14
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
Unpopular opinion: I'm freaking hilarious.... And sexy!
 

standardplayer

Keeper of Kitties
Veteran
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
495
Reaction score
2,230
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
@JFB1222 if I got a dime for every time I said both of those things about myself, I'd buy every graphic resource available for RPG Maker....
And have a sickening amount of money left over.
My wife just ignores it now XD
 

Zanckst

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
32
Reaction score
91
First Language
Malay
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Becareful with our cadences of words and spontanious active or passive gestures, or the hidden gorillas will be angered.

Anyway my unpopular opinions are: Girls with bikinis aren't necessarily "bad".
 

Oddball

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
1,683
Reaction score
451
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
Kamari from final fantasy 10 is a good charecter if you put in the work, and lancet every enemy he can learn something from
 

TheoAllen

Self-proclaimed jack of all trades
Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
4,645
Reaction score
5,284
First Language
Indonesian
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
I'll put another one.
RMXP mapping is suck and that is one of my reason to pick vx and above.
 

Ryisunique

Detective, AUEI
Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
150
Reaction score
631
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
At birth, your DNA should be taken and put on file.
This probably reeks of human rights violations or whatever... But, I honestly don't care. It would be a lot harder to get away with crimes if everyone's DNA were already on file. Paternity cases would also be solved a lot easier. Just upload the DNA sample into the computer, set the criteria for "closest match" and bam.
Nope. Nope. Nope.

I swear, I've seen cases of people being denied healthcare because there is a preexisting condition in the DNA. It might have been a tv show, but there are countries that are deciding your worth due to things beyond your control. So, no. It would be abused.

Unpopular opinion, until we can have huge swaths of forests that are easier to replenish, we should just work on artificial trees to make those a good alternative until then.
 

Tai_MT

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
5,246
Reaction score
4,455
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Nope. Nope. Nope.

I swear, I've seen cases of people being denied healthcare because there is a preexisting condition in the DNA. It might have been a tv show, but there are countries that are deciding your worth due to things beyond your control. So, no. It would be abused.
I don't agree with the standpoint of "we shouldn't do it, because it can be abused". If that were the case, we should do nothing. Everything can be abused. People already abuse current systems.

Plus, people will find a way to discriminate no matter what. If it isn't your skin color, it's your sexuality. If it isn't your sexuality, it's your nationality. If it isn't your nationality, it's your religious beliefs. if it isn't your religious beliefs, it's your political leanings. If it isn't your political leanings, it's your parenting skills. If it isn't your parenting skills, it's your job choice. If it isn't your job choice, it's how much money you make or don't make.

People invent all sorts of reasons to justify segregating each other and abusing each other. The "Us Versus Them" mentality doesn't really go away with our species.

I'd rather it be easier to catch criminals than worry about people drawing imaginary lines between each other to give each other reasons to treat each other like crap.

"You can use it to discriminate" is fairly flimsy justification for not doing something. Especially when every society discriminates and it's essentially part of human nature to do so.
 

Lornsteyn

Sleepy Dragon
Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
265
Reaction score
322
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RM2k3
@Tai_MT
Nah, I dont think its good if they get our DNA without a reason.
It would be better if we get more cameras everywhere and more cops patroling.
 

Ryisunique

Detective, AUEI
Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
150
Reaction score
631
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
Plus, people will find a way to discriminate no matter what. If it isn't your skin color, it's your sexuality. If it isn't your sexuality, it's your nationality. If it isn't your nationality, it's your religious beliefs. if it isn't your religious beliefs, it's your political leanings. If it isn't your political leanings, it's your parenting skills. If it isn't your parenting skills, it's your job choice. If it isn't your job choice, it's how much money you make or don't make.
So, we want to give everyone more ammo? Immediately getting DNA at birth gives them the ability to see who will have health issues earlier and decide that they don't want to spend money on that person. Private insurance companies were dropping people once they developed cancer. If that came to pass, they would have been denying instantly or charging outrageously.

It would be better if we get more cameras everywhere and more cops patroling.
Yes to the camera, but no to the cops. The US system is awful.
 

bgillisp

Global Moderators
Global Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
12,517
Reaction score
12,819
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
The camera system is not great where I live either, as it is guilty without trial right now. But I'll say no more as that will drag politics into things.

For DNA, many countries are pushing for everyone on one health care system, which would make the DNA argument null and void as now the companies would have no choice anyways. Plus like @Tai_MT said, fear of misuse shouldn't stop us. Cars can be misused, should we stop making them? Medicine can be misused, should we never make any more medicine? That argument can be used to eliminate about anything we got in society honestly if you want to go down that path.
 

Touchfuzzy

Rantagonist
Staff member
Lead Eagle
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
6,468
Reaction score
5,491
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I think fear of misuse is a valid concern, but the concern should be directed towards finding ways to avoid that misuse, not in shutting things down completely.
 

Tai_MT

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
5,246
Reaction score
4,455
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
@Lornsteyn They already can, anytime they want. Spit on the ground? Legally, they can take your DNA out of it. Leave a hair follicle anywhere in the world? Legally, they can get it.

The only difference is that they need something to match it to. Sure, there are laws required to be followed to obtain DNA in most cases, but all in all... it's an easy as crap law to skirt around right now.

The only thing that would really change is everyone's DNA would already be on file after birth, and police would no longer have to skirt around the law to obtain a sample of your DNA (oh, you took a sip from a cup and left it behind? You didn't want it anymore, we can take your DNA off of that!).

Basically, it just cuts out all the pretending you have civil rights to your DNA and makes it plain as day that you really don't (because, you don't. In any country, really.)

So, we want to give everyone more ammo? Immediately getting DNA at birth gives them the ability to see who will have health issues earlier and decide that they don't want to spend money on that person. Private insurance companies were dropping people once they developed cancer. If that came to pass, they would have been denying instantly or charging outrageously.
I always like that the solution is, "we need more insurance!" and not "we need insurance companies to stop holding a monopoly on what healthcare costs and return purchasing power to the common citizen".

I went without Health Insurance for a very long time. I had it, but I never presented it. I told every doctor that I had no insurance. I would then ask what it cost at the end of the visit and cut them a check right then and there. Why? Because it was insanely cheap to do so.

See, hospitals bill what they think they can get. They take a look at your insurance and say, "Yep, I can definitely charge $800 for an ambulance ride 9 blocks to the hospital in which we did nothing except check blood pressure and check for a concussion" (true story, happened to me). Insurance will pay it, because that's what all the hospitals are charging them.

Meanwhile, if you tell a hospital, "I don't have insurance", they realize they'll probably be lucky to get any sort of payment out of you. They'll charge you what something is actually worth to just get a payment. My doctor visits only cost $60, and that's with the prescription they gave me. Cheap as crap. Meanwhile, the claims for the same thing that come across my desk (billing to a state Medicaid plan) are charging $200 minimum for the same thing.

The reason your Healthcare is so high? It's because insurance companies exist. It's because they hold an insane monopoly over the prices.

Personally, I think Insurance should only be able to legally cover things that are "life threatening". That is.. you get cancer... you get some disease... got into an accident, became paralyzed, etcetera. Major life issues. Let it cover the things people actually cannot afford themselves.

Could I pay a $1000 bill? I could. By myself. Especially if you allow me to make payments. And, why can't I make payments? Credit card companies and banks do. Want to know why? Because you have insurance. Insurance pays immediately in a single lump sum.

DNA could only be used as "ammo" by insurance companies if you continue to allow insurance companies to dictate prices and destroy the healthcare system.

Get rid of Insurance, or strictly regulate it to only be able to pay out for life threatening/life changing medical issues... and suddenly most of healthcare becomes affordable again.
 

Ryisunique

Detective, AUEI
Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
150
Reaction score
631
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMVXA
That's actually more of an argument for medicare for all. Something which I'm fully for.

Honestly, it's not just medical. There are a host of factors that make this incredibly gross.
 

Touchfuzzy

Rantagonist
Staff member
Lead Eagle
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
6,468
Reaction score
5,491
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
This is veering into political territory, so I think we need to be careful on the topic.

But I will say I think you have a lot of misconceptions about how the medical insurance system works in the US. Doctors and hospitals are not the bad guys in this.

Moving from a million private health insurance companies to a single payer model would fix a lot of the issues, as a lot of the skyrocketing cost of healthcare has to do with 2 things:

1. Insurance companies don't pay what we pay. They pay a fraction of the cost charged to them, and deny as much of it as they can. This means that medical providers need to raise prices so they don't get completely shafted.
2. The amount of paperwork and administration personnel required to handle insurance charges continues to rise. There is a lot of different companies and you have to understand how to deal with each one. And because they will constantly deny charges, you need dedicated people to handle appealing denials. In fact, there are entire companies that contract with doctors/hospitals just to handle nothing but appeals.

There is also a lack of regulation on pharmaceutical companies jacking up prices on medicine that is needed to even live. For instance, my father has to take a specific pill 3 times daily to prevent a fungus in his brain from killing him. The pill costs $300. Each. They don't cost near that to produce. But he is a captive customer. His choice is to either take it or die. Over $300,000 a year. Just to live. Because they know you can't not have it. And guess what: His insurance company denied it as experimental.

Luckily he was able to qualify for a program to get it for free (which they have to reapply for every year, and every year we get to worry they'll deny it), or well. Yeah.

And this is something a lot of people face. Insulin for instance, we have a lot of evidence that all the US insulin producers are price fixing. But no one does anything.

A single payer system would say screw you to all this.

(Source: My mom was a nurse who moved to working in Insurance billing for a major hospital, then moved to hospital auditing (basically trying to figure out where they can cut cost without cutting care). My brother is a PA. I've had lots of discussions about the healthcare system and its flaws with each of them from inside the system).
 

Tai_MT

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
5,246
Reaction score
4,455
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Honestly, a "single payor" system simply removes competition for prices. My opinion is that the problem is that there is no competition. Insurance companies pay for everything and the customers rarely see the cost or complain about it. If the burden of payment was put back onto the customer, like pretty much every single product in the world is... you'd see prices go back down, as hospitals could only charge what people could afford.

I work for Medicaid (which is basically a far more restrictive insurance company), and I can tell you pretty much all the tricks used to keep prices high and what things cost you. I can also tell you how much personal information your government is collecting on you with your medical claims.

See, here's how we determine what we'll pay:

We pay a fraction of the average cost of something or "up to a certain dollar amount". So, if you want to get paid more... you simply need to have all hospitals raise the prices for everything. We re-evaluate this about every 3 years or so and release our new "fee schedules" (telling providers how much we'll pay for any given Code they use). These costs are based upon what medical care providers are charging.

So, because we pay a fraction... a percentage... or up to a specific dollar amount... it is in the best interests of the hospitals to charge as much as possible just to make money. To cover all their costs. So that they can get more money the next time we re-evaluate prices. It's an incredibly easy system to gain.

As for the "personal information" gathered about you? Oh, here's where it gets quite fun. :D Several years ago, we had a code system where there existed just, "A1234" type codes. A1234 might just mean to us "Concussion". Which, you know, we'd pay our rate about it. We switched code systems to be insanely more specific now. Now, the codes are like, "A12345B" which could be "Concussion from being hit in the head with a turtle". Yes, our codes are THAT specific now. We have a code for nearly every reason you could get a concussion. That includes a separate code for baseballs, basketballs, soccer balls, rocks, falling, etcetera. Every code we now use is like this. We keep this information on hand for 7 years before we destroy it. However, we're working on a permanent database that any medical provider/insurance company would be able to see in order to get their hands on your medical information and "make better decisions" about payment of your claims or not.

So, what you have happening is the people paying the bills for you, gathering a ton of information on you, basing decisions on that information, and deciding how much any hospital/doctor can or will get based on what we think something is worth (we have no doctors or marketing people actually working for us, we have no idea what any drug is actually worth... what any procedure is actually worth... we hire nurses... but they're nurses who often just google the price of something at market value... which isn't helpful to the customers at all).

Essentially, you have people with no involvement in healthcare at all... deciding how much your healthcare is actually worth.

I think it would be better if you and your doctors decided how much your healthcare was worth and paid that amount. Rather than involve a third party who doesn't know anything about medicine to do pricing.

EDIT: And none of that is even getting into how bad it would be if there were some kind of breach of one of our systems. We have HIPAA to worry about, sure, but it might surprise you how unsecured any of our systems are, or any of the systems used at hospitals. With the insanely specific codes we use now, anyone who breaks in and gets your medical records will get highly specific information about you. No longer would they get "blood clot" and the treatment code. No, they'd get, "blood clot due to X reason", which could be obesity, poisoning, etcetera.

If you had an inside view of what this looks like from inside an Insurance company... I think you'd probably share a similar viewpoint to mine, considering how it all works and what we see every day. :D
 
Last edited:

Touchfuzzy

Rantagonist
Staff member
Lead Eagle
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
6,468
Reaction score
5,491
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
That ignores the biggest thing: Why should there be competition in a necessary field for living?

Do you think we should privatize police? firefighters? education?

The idea of healthcare as a capitalist service is kind of weird. And the problem with US healthcare IS that it is treated as an adversarial system rather than what it should be: a life saving service.

Insurance companies do everything they can to not pay for anything. That is how they make money. As long as "making money" is the goal of part of our healthcare system rather than patient care, then we'll always have problems.

Also, pharmaceutical companies have already proven that "competition" in the medical field doesn't create lower prices. Insulin companies continue to raise prices in unison. Because they KNOW you have to have insulin to live, it isn't an optional service, they can work together to price fix because what other choice do you have?

You know where you can get cheap insulin and other medications? Canada.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Latest Threads

Latest Posts

Latest Profile Posts

Can't wait for the next Sonichu
Birdhouses are usually made of wood. Birds typically live in trees. Trees are wood. Birdhouses are made of birdhouses.
He just discovered cellphones...

(I don't know why am I drawing so much these days...)
In medieval times, a common way to eat food was upon edible plates, which were made of bread, called trenchers.

Forum statistics

Threads
93,670
Messages
914,448
Members
123,260
Latest member
ft371pta
Top