We live in a consumer-oriented society. That piece of information is certainly not particularly spectacular. Most people in America probably have a positive association with this term? We do need to consume, of course. Without consumption we humans wouldn’t last too long. What’s the issue, then?
I want to discuss unbridled luxury- and waste-oriented consumerism. What percentage of products produced today are luxury items? That of course depends on how we define luxuries. Luxury items are things we don’t need to survive, to live in a safe and healthy environment and to ensure the perpetuation of these conditions (I'm sure I forgot something, but let’s focus on the other stuff now.)
Why do we purchase all these luxury goods? Certainly we do get some satisfaction out of them, which makes us happier (a reasonable human right!?). Many would argue that a fancy car is necessary in order to get to work faster and safer and to impress customers (ensuring perpetuation of job). Perhaps heated leather seats, navigation system and an engine with 12 cylinders is necessary to help me relax after a stressful day on the job (without which one would suffer stress and thus endanger perpetuation of job).
I will argue here that such redefinitions of luxury are not acceptable because any one could then say I have to have that swimming pool to relax in. If I didn’t have in there would be no way I could put up with my stupid boss. Why then do members of a society like in the US or Germany spend such large proportions of their discretionary income on things they don’t really need? In order not to make this too complicated, I will not discuss what people do with their disposable income. I would, though, use a broader definition of discretionary income. Expenses for savings, paying off debt and the like should be included in discretionary income. If I as a father fail to save some money for the future and go spend all my extra cash on some “toys” then I’m endangering the perpetuation of the above-mentioned conditions. Of course, if I take out a credit in order to buy a luxury item, I am using my discretionary income. Personal debt is a huge problem, especially in the US. If I am spending borrowed money to buy luxury or essential goods, I am, in effect, reducing the amount of money available to pay for essential goods. When I later have to pay the bank bank, I will not be able to simply use my disposable income, I will be forced to use whatever money I have. I therefore see the personal debt crisis in the long run reducing individuals disposable income. By having less disposable income the chances increase that one uses discretionary income to pay for luxury goods.
I don’t have any figures at hand, but I assume that the average person does spend a fair amount of their discretionary income on luxury items. Such behavior can, in turn, endanger an individual’s financial security.
So, let’s go back to the question of why we purchase luxury items under such conditions. Some may argue that we consumers are simply pawns in the global capitalist game. We are cajoled into irrational behavior by a complex system of propaganda. We are taught from an early age that health and happiness can be acquired by collecting and maintaining certain material goods. The pretty, shiny things are the means to reaching the end (happiness, health, safety, etc.).
This might sound rather conspiratorial, but you don’t have to look far to see that we are bombarded from every conceivable angle with ads telling us to buy, buy, buy. Of course we are, for the most part, free to choose what we purchase. Look, though, at the development of fast food in the US over the last 30 years. The amount of fast food consumed in the US has skyrocketed. Are people forced to eat 5 hamburgers a week? No. Has the rise in fast food consumption added to the rise in obesity, heart disease, cancer? Yes. How can this be explained except by a concerted effort by a very powerful industry, with lots of friends in high places?
Irrational consumer behavior can often be attributed to malevolent activities of powerful institutions. Look at the sub prime loan scandal. Were home buyers warned that they were treading in dangerous waters? Were rating firms in the same boat with banks in trying to dupe potential buyers into making loans they never should have? Or should we take to heart what Georgie Bush said in this context: ‘They should have known what they were getting into and therefore it’s their own fault’. Certainly there is a place for personal responsibility and people need to think about what they’re doing. But if potential buyers are systematically being confronted with false information then even the smartest consumers are threatened.
Now I have made my point that we do have widespread spending on luxury goods that threatens an individuals livelihood. The question that is most burning to me is why we have this system of useless and harmful consumerism. One part of the equation, I assume, has to do with profit-making. A healthy capitalist system needs to grow. By creating ever more consumer markets and convincing people they need to buy stuff they don't need, this growth is assured.
Another part of the equation was recently brought to my attention. Consumerism is part of a system designed to perpetuate and secure the stability of capitalism. We have been trained to believe that the consumption of luxury goods is an integral part of a happy and healthy life.
How much of the production cycle of today’s society is in no way necessary and principally used to catalyze the profit-making machine?
What role has and does oil play in the ability for modern capitalism to have reached this point? Would the incredible concentration of wealth in the hands of a few have been possible without oil?
What if we just cut out all the production of luxury items and just gave the money directly to the company bosses? Would that be any different than the way things are now? Now we spend a large percentage of our income on things we don’t really need. While we may be creating some jobs with all of our purchases, we are, in effect, stuffing money in the pockets of the chief executives. What good does all this consumption madness do for us? Am I really better off when I can show off my new Mercedes? Does this aid me in my pursuit of health and happiness?
So there are lots of ways for “profiteers” to go about their business. They can set up monopolies, create need (marketing) or a litany of other tricks to increase the value (price) of their goods. Overconsumption is one of the best ways for sellers to make, increase and sustain their high profits?