If the USA is a terrible, horrible place, what country do the (Millennial and elitist) critics think we should try to be like?

Have the critics spent a year in whatever country that is?  It seems reasonable that they should, to be sure they know what that country looks like instead of relying on second- and thirdhand reports.  After all, changing the nature of our nation is not going to be cheap or easy.  Even "climate chaos"-mongers do a little (ultimately flawed) research.  Let's be scientific and be sure to gather evidence before we commit to such an all-encompassing endeavor.

It sounds promising when critics say we should give free medical care and education to everyone, and maybe in some ideal world, that would happen.  Where is it happening right now?  Nowhere.  If we think about it in terms of "free diversity advice," how many people with diversity-related degrees are willing to work for free?  Even if their college debts were forgiven, they still have to pay rent and buy food.  They cannot afford to work for free.  Neither can medical caregivers like doctors and nurses, nor education providers like teachers and administrative staff.

The critics know this and assume that the costs can be borne by the government through draining the wealth of the rich.  This is why it would be a good idea for them to visit the country they think we should be like, in order to study firsthand how the system works and how effective it is.  Sweden has a great reputation among the perfectionists, but have the critics studied its history?  The Swedes owned slaves a long time ago, some from neighboring peoples who were also Scandinavian, others from Ireland or places farther away.  Do they get a pass if their slaves were white, or are they still on the hook for the immoral (by modern standards) practice of slavery?  They also overran Norway at one point, not unlike Europeans overrunning the Native Americans in the United States.  Are they still worth emulating, despite this awful (by modern standards) history?

The medical care provided by Cuba is supposedly state-of-the-art, but have the critics gone there for an extended period and experienced the care of the island's doctors?  Have they observed the kind of care Cuba gives its poorest people?  Have they noticed how incredibly wealthy the Castro family has become since taking over?  Whatever wealth was extracted from American-owned and local businesses since the revolution has been funneled more into the Castro's bank accounts than into the hospitals.

So whom do the critics want us to be like?  I notice that celebrities who pledged to leave the United States if Trump was elected are still here.  Despite the critics' insistence that this is an awful country, where racist violence (by whites) is on the increase, they don't seem interested in building a wall to keep illegal aliens out for their own good.  The illegal aliens claim asylum to get in because their homelands are so dreadful, then complain that the sight of the flag of the country giving them sanctuary is even worse, as they wave their homeland flags and cry racism if any of us objects to that.

Truth is, no one who is here wants to leave.  I'm not saying our country is perfect, but I doubt that perfection is possible.  For those who love the country as it is, seeing it change is painful.  While those who prefer socialism or communism could find actual socialist or communist countries to emigrate to, there is nowhere for the rest of us, who love our representative democratic republic, to go.  The Bill of Rights that acknowledges our human rights to free speech and religion, individual gun ownership, etc. does not exist anywhere else.  We have nowhere to go.  That is why we look for ways to fight for our country without tipping into civil war.  This is, to us, the last best place on Earth, the shining city on a hill.