I agree with you that the example is quite extreme if a dog is what is really needed to treat the depression. But on the other hand, there are other ways that a person can solve a problem without having a financial strain. Here the problem is being isolated, depressed. They can go out, make friends, volunteer, work out, invest in a new relationship. Maybe there exist people who none of those actions would help or applicable to them, and the few solutions left are getting a dog or taking drugs. Then, in that case, you can blame that it's not their basic needs being met.

But I personally know many who are depressed temporarily because they just broke up and they always wanted a dog. Therefore, as the doctor suggests, they get a note from a doctor to get a dog and shove it to the face of the current landlord (and in less than a year, get kicked out and have to find a far away and expensive place from work that allows dogs). Did the doctor tell them that the only solution is to get a dog? I doubt so. To me, that's an excuse to get a dog, not a necessity to treat depression.

All your points are from the view of a personal behaviour in a given world. And possibly this is the better way to act.

But the alternative view, of seeing the all powerful economic system failing to provide people as something as basic as a dog, and viewing this as a big failure may also be true.

What is a basic need? Something that you can't live without. A bare minimum that you can live with: Clean water, food, internet access, education, safety, housing, healthcare, a mattress, a fan in the summer and a heater in the winter, a mean to get to work are all basic needs. In most parts of the US, a driveable old car that doesn't break down every month is a basic need; a new, very safe, very reliable car is a luxury. Old people might be able to argue a dog being a basic need. But young non-disabled people who can go out and make friends saying I absolutely have to have a dog, I think, is pushing the definition of a basic need way too far. A dog is definitely a luxury to me, especially in sub/urban areas.

Maybe your (and my) parents used to spend very little for a dog and we have to spend a fortune now, but it doesn't make having a dog a basic need. It's just as good of an argument as they used to dream about a projector and now you can get one for $200. The dynamics of having things changes: Being able to get something cheap doesn't make it a basic need.

I am speaking as a dogs lover and the only reason I don't have a dog now is that I don't think I can afford a dog.

> Maybe your (and my) parents used to spend very little for a dog and we have to spend a fortune now, but it doesn't make having a dog a basic need.

What exactly has changed about the cost of having a dog? Veterinary care has not drastically increased in price so far as I know, so what about having a dog is so expensive?

My last dog was “expensive”, but I’m acutely aware of the fact that most of the expenses were things my parents simply did not do: buy a specialty breed from a reputable breeder for >$1000, have a dog walker visit daily, feed the dog expensive food, lots of toys and expensive treats.

Growing up, my dog was from a local breeder who probably ran a puppy mill. He ate pretty cheap food that came in a 30lb bag from the grocery store. He played in the yard with a tennis ball. No one came to walk him because he was outside all the time anyway. If I cared for my dog the way my parents did, the costs would be comparable.

I fully agree that having a dog is not a basic need, though.

>What exactly has changed about the cost of having a dog?

If you have land, I suppose having a dog is not more expensive. That's what my parents had, and I don't.

Part of what makes having a dog expensive for people who rent is the fact that they have to rent. When you have a dog you can kiss goodbye at least half of your rental options. The ones that allow dogs charge a premium on top of limited options.

Plus, even when you have land, when you have a dog and wants to take a vacation you have to take care of the dog. When you ask/hire a someone to take care of the dog, you have to pay them, etc.

None of this is different from our parents though. Landlords didn’t want dogs in the 70s/80s/90s either. Nor did dogs take care of themselves when their owners went on vacation.

Lifestyle expectations and the way we treat dogs is different. People who grew up with outdoor dogs in the suburbs now want to live in urban apartments with indoor dogs. But that’s kind of like saying cars are expensive because you have to rent a parking spot. You could see it that way, or recognize that as a cost of urban living instead.

When it's a cultural norm to not talk to other humans, and the go-to solution is to breed non-human animals to replace that companionship, I would suggest that the major problem is the society of isolation. To say that people can't afford to mitigate the harm of their toxic environment, and that's an economic problem, misses the point in my opinion.