Rating: 
Summary: Yes! Americans Do Shop Too Much!
Review: In Juliet Schor's essay on the consuming habits of Americans, she makes many bold statements about what she calls the "New Consumerism", the trends of the current shopping world. I feel that her claim that this new consumerism has brought about an up scaling of lifestyle norms and a growing gap between consumer desires and incomes is very valid. I am frequently being reminded in my classes, texts, etc. that there is a substantial difference between the upper class and the lower class in America, and so I think she has a point when she voices her concern that discussion of solutions to this problem must be furthered. Juliet Schor goes on in her essay to discuss reasons behind this new growing problem. One of these reasons which she goes into great depth about is competitive consumption. She explains it as "the idea that spending is in large part driven by a comparative or competitive process in which individuals try to keep up with the norms of the social group with which they identify"(page 8). I think this is true, especially I would say among younger consumers whose self concept is still in large part derived from what their peers think of them. Growing up in America today has seemed to me to be a lot of trying to fit into the right groups, the "in crowd" by buying as many name brand clothes, shoes and other commodities as possible, and starting at an early age. I think this notion is quite evident each time I see another Abercrombie Kids, Baby Gap or Pottery Barn Kids Store being opened up in my local malls.
Schor also addresses the issue of advertising, especially television advertising, playing a much larger role now in today's consumerism problem. She says that with television made available to the rich and poor classes alike, the luxury lives of TV characters and the rich and famous are broadcast into the homes of all Americans, inflating our perceptions of what others have and making us want to be like them. I'm not quite sure if this has as great of an effect on us as Schor believes. I think that we still have the ability to reason and decide just how real those lives on TV are, but I do see that we have a tendency to wish we could enjoy a bit more of the fun vacations, cars, and huge homes of the stars we see on TV. Schor describes this perception as the first in a chain of effects on the American consumer; the next ones being overspending to attain this desired lifestyle, leading to decreased savings, leading to stress and worry and ultimately a decline in quality of life.
In the last part of Schor's essay, she gives her solution as to what might solve our consumer problems. She attacks the conventional view of a consumer in economics, saying that "it exaggerates how rational, informed, and consistent people are. It overstates their dependence. And it fails to address the pressures that consumerism imposes on individuals with respect to available choices and the consequences of various consumption decisions" (page 19). So, basically her arguments then proceed to give examples of when the average consumer is irrational and the like; credit card debt, impulse buying, trends in brand loyalties, etc. I tend to agree that the conventional view of a consumer as a fully informed, rational and careful purchaser does not fit the majority of American consumers I know, nor does it comply with my own habits. The collective response that Schor prescribes for the problems of today center around making a distinction between wants and needs, attaining quality of life rather than quantity of stuff, ecological sustainability and democratization of consumption practices. She also discusses having a better politics of retailing and the "cultural environment", referring to the need for restriction on advertising in public schools, doctor's offices, etc. She says that because consumers will pay a little more for responsibly produced goods, we should also have an exposé of commodity "fetishism". Lastly, she wants to see a consumer movement where independent organizations and consumers pressure companies, influence politics, provide objective information on products and pressure the government to enact new policies. My response to her suggestions for success is mixed. I believe that we definitely need to pressure corporations and the government to be more ecologically sustainable, as do Jack Gibbons and Betsy Taylor in their criticisms of Schor's essay. I do however think that as James B. Twitchell wrote in his response to her essay, the reason that many of us consume certain goods is not for the goods themselves, but for the meaning, symbolism, or status that they bring us. Schor didn't even address a way to change the consumer's long held belief in the meaning of products we consume. We need to be effective in getting at this core issue influencing rising consumption. I think that Schor might have possibly overlooked what one of her critics, Douglas B. Holt wrote about in his critique as being the issue of differentiation. He said that people want to consume goods and services associated with different identities in order to experience those identities. This makes sense to me, because so often athletic shoes endorsed by famous athletes, clothing brands worn by favorite celebrities, cars seen driven by admired people and even hairstyles and makeup are all sought after and consumed in order for the average citizen to feel like they have stepped into the shoes of another person. If the average citizen has found a way to escape their life and social class by simply making a purchase, then it will not stop him or her when they discover that the manufacturer was sloppy in the production, or that purchasing the good supports unethical advertising, etc. Many of her critics have made valid points so I can understand the justifications of their suggestions and many of her original prescriptions. After reading the whole book I believe that it would take a combination of ideas to turn the "new consumerism" trend into a positive light. I too am an American consumer, and while I want things to be fair and to change for the better, I also see that it is going to take an awful lot for me to save instead of splurge on that next American Eagle sweater sale that comes my way.
Rating: 
Summary: Juliet Schor - Prophet of Consumer Apocalypse?
Review: According to Juliet Schor's book, Do Americans Shop Too Much?, the United States has developed a cultural preoccupation of getting and spending, and that Americans have discarded more traditional values and ways of life. She expresses that the USA's consumer culture, with its maxim of spend today what you earn tomorrow, doesn't provide individuals true satisfaction and fulfillment through the goods one buys, but only through the attainment of the status a specific product represents. She also contends that most individuals cannot help but feel the pressure to consume due to the thousands of daily advertisements an individual is bombarded with, and as Americans become more disconnected with their neighbors (people of similar socio-economic means) the individual's major lifestyle references become the families shown on television. Since television is not likely to show the lifestyles of the middle class and more likely to show the rich and wealthy, more and more Americans have come to view their lifestyles as lacking. False lifestyle references have created desires greater than the average household's means, which leads to dissatisfaction with the things households do have, frustration from trying to attain status symbols, and increasing household debt. As a result, people are working more which means they have less leisure time for more wholesome, traditional values and practices.
I agree with Schor's observations and conclusions that America is become more of a consumer culture every day, and that people are becoming more disconnected from their neighbors and traditional values. I even agree with her seven point outline to starting a national debate on the issue. But, I am disappointed that she doesn't attempt to offer any real solutions to the apparent consumerism epidemic. It's easy to point out society's ailments, but what can we do, beyond an individual effort, to curb consumerism?
Overall, this book offers many points of view on the consumerism debate, and provides the reader with a broad introduction to the problem of consumerism. The contributing authors provide strong criticisms of Schor's point of view, and she does a good job defending her view. But I would have preferred more academic citations of the facts that she uses.
Rating:
Summary: Yes They Do
Review: After finishing Schor's Do Americans Shop Too Much, I came to have a great appreciation for the democracy forum that the book is structured in. Although Schor's writing dominates the book, I found the contributing authors to be just as important. Not only did they give different perspectives to the debate, but I thought that some, especially Robert Frank, had better ideas on how to curb the ridiculous amount of consumption in America. This is why I enjoyed the book; it allowed me to be critical of the author's ideas and enabled me to choose the theories I agree with.
The first concept that struck me in Schor's "New Politics of Consumption," was that well before I was born many people already believed America had a consumption problem. Schor states, "...in the 1960s and early 1970s, a far reaching critique of consumer culture was a part of our political discourse." (p. 3) This makes me unable to compare today's culture with an America that did not over consume. Coming from this viewpoint, it was a challenging and interesting process to step back and analyze the culture I am a part of. Schor refers to the current culture of consumption as "The New Consumerism."(p. 7)
An integral part of "The New Consumerism" is the idea of "...competitive consumption..." (p. 8) Schor's idea is that people are consuming materialistic products at a high rate because they want to have what the "...social group with which they identify..." has. (p.8) Schor says that although in the 50's people identified with their neighbors down the street, they now identify with the people they see on TV who have much higher standards of living. This in turn takes consumption to a much higher level, where people are spending more than they have to compete with those in higher classes. (p. 9)
Schor supports her theory with three strong points. The first is that in a study by Fournier and Guiry, only 15% of the participants said they would be "...satisfied with...being middle class." (p. 10) The next is that the savings rate dropped from 8% in 1980 to zero when the book was published. Along with this comes increased credit card debt in the average American home. (p. 10) The last and strongest point is that Americans' "...quality-of-life measures...began to diverge from GDP in the mid-1970s after moving in tandem for decades." (p. 12)
Although Schor's theory and support are persuasive, I had to question the reality of her theory. To do this I took a look at my family's consumption practices. I analyzed three products recently purchased my parents to determine why we bought them. The first is a DVD player. By no means is the DVD player a necessity, but it is much more convenient and higher quality than VHS. I think this purchase was not to compete with others, but to keep up with technology. If my parents wanted, they could still use a reel projector, but they would have a very hard time renting movies on a Saturday night.
The next is the purchase of a home in northern Wisconsin where we moved this summer. They had to take a large loan to afford the place, which fits right in line with Schor's idea of people spending more than they have. However, housing prices have increased dramatically all over the country in the past 20 years, and especially in northern Wisconsin. Although my parents had to take out a loan, they moved into a house that is noticeably smaller than their previous home. At the same time, the new house is almost twice as expensive. Again, I do not think this purchase and loan was to compete, but rather to maintain their same quality-of-life amidst high real estate prices.
The last product is an SUV. Even though my parents are environmentally conscious, my Dad felt he had to buy an SUV to handle our long driveway in the middle of a northern Wisconsin winter. I will give my parents the benefit of the doubt on this purchase and call the four wheel drive a necessity for the winter. However, I wholly agree with Schor that the purchase of an SUV in a setting where it isn't necessary is merely for the status.
My thoughts on the concept of "competitive consumerism" coincide with both Schor's and Twitchell's views. Twitchell stated that, "More often than not what we once condemned as luxury has become necessity for a reason..." (p. 47) I agree with Twitchell in that the purchase of expensive houses and technology products are not competitive, as long as the house is not ridiculously more than what someone needs. However, I agree with Schor in that purchases of unneeded mansions and SUV's are to compete socially.
One area where I completely disagree with Schor is within her solutions for the over consuming America, what she calls "A Politics of Consumption." (p. 28) Her fourth element, "Democratization of consumption practices," is highly unrealistic. (p.30) She states, "Why not tax high-end `status' versions of products while allowing the low-end models to be sold tax free?" (p. 31) I do not believe this idea would ever be accepted in America; partly because it would require an overhaul of our current economic system and because people would not want higher taxes on products they like to buy.
A much more plausible solution comes from Robert Frank in his essay "Market Failures." (p. 37) His solution comes in the form of a consumption tax. (p. 41) Although this theory would also be difficult to implement, it would be easier to administer and more likely to go over well with the American public. His idea is to tax people not on income, but rather the difference between peoples' income and how much they save. This would discourage people from all income levels to spend needlessly and encourage them to save more. When people stop spending needlessly they stop over consuming.
Overall, Do Americans Shop Too Much has valuable insights. Schor did an excellent job of bringing the problems of over consumption to the surface. However, I believe her solutions for these problems were sometimes naïve and unrealistic. The addition of more realistic opposing arguments gives the book a high value.
Rating:
Summary: Do Americans Shop Too Much
Review: America's favorite pastimes no longer include tossing a ball around on a Saturday afternoon or a quiet night at home with the family. One of our very favorite things to do is shop. With all of the recent statistics about how much Americans spend on frivolous goods as compared to how much we save, it's impossible to ignore this fact. Many people would probably see this as a sign we're making more money, seeing better technology, becoming more educated etc. There is another side however. Other statistics pose rather threatening side effects to our incessant shopping. The environment is being consumed along with the goods we buy; more people desire the luxurious life and are unsatisfied with being in the middle; as people yearn for more, they lose leisure time to work time. Juliet Schor and the other authors, who created the collection of essays Do Americans Shop Too Much?, address both sides of the debate.
Do Americans shop too much? In Schor's essay, which begins the book, the answer is a definite "yes". Schor calls the current phenomenon the "new consumerism", essentially the upscaling of our lifestyle norms. She feels the need to address this as a problem. As I mentioned above, this increased rate of consumerism has effects on other facets of our lives. Schor also asserts that it is not enough to encourage individuals to resist the urge to buy more and better items, but that we need to look at the issue of consumerism more deeply. Schor suggests seven basic elements of a "Politics of Consumption". Among these, she suggests the right to a decent standard of living, ecologically sustainable consumption and governmental policy. The essays that follow are written by a variety of authors, critiquing Schor's opinion. Although their ideas vary on the details of consumerism, all seem to concur at least fundamentally. Americans certainly do shop too much. The issue at hand is whether something needs to be done and if so, what? This book offers a wealth of possibilities.
The most satisfying part of my day was reading the reply written by Schor at the end of the book. The essays leading up to it were certainly thought provoking and well argued, but it was the completeness of the entire book that made it a worthwhile read. Schor poses an interesting question, which any American can identify with, since everyone shops. Those other than economists, however, likely don't think a lot about the impacts of buying, certainly not to the degree they would reading this book. What was especially effective was the variety of opinion. It caused me to be more critical of the ideas, including my own. In the reply, closure was achieved. Schor addressed the other authors' critiques and not only responded to them, but accepted them. She writes in no uncertain terms that parts of her argument are incomplete, but that she has confidence in others. This brings Schor closer to the reading audience and makes her a much more realistic author.
Rating:
Summary: Hell yeah they shop too much!
Review: American culture of consumerism appears to be quite similar to a cocaine addiction. Shopping becomes the drug, begging to be consumed with every new clearance rack at any given department store. Consumers become fueled with the need to fill a void within their daily lives. There are many valuable critiques on the addictive shopping habits of Americans living in the twenty-first century presented throughout Juliet Schor's Do Americans Shop Too Much?
Materialism can be, and in fact is, addictive. "Shop-aholics," if you will, are not only hurting themselves, by carrying out shallow existences, but are supporting a system that will create an even greater unequal distribution between the wealthy classes and the growing poor. Of course, as it's argued, consumerism boosts jobs so, then, why should we worry about spending habits at all if spending money is for the greater good anyway?
The truth is that while the purchasing of any sort of product supports the capitalist market that America needs to maintain its economic strength, we must not forget to question whether or not the current economic system benefits all Americans. Douglas Holt reminds us that we must understand that the most effective kind of change will only happen at the structural level. More clearly, to question consumerism is also to question the structure in which consumerism is born. If consumerism were to be critiqued in the forefront, then capitalism would embody the entire backdrop of the discussion. Holt refers to the market system when he states, "Intervening with market structure rather than market content is also politically preferable" (Schor 67). In essence, our money is doing the speaking in this country. How, where, if, and when we spend our money is undoubtedly heard by the people running our country. In this context, "the people running our country" not only refers to the government as a whole but also refers, more specifically, to the manufacturers of all goods being consumed on a day-to-day basis. The extravagant amount of time Americans spend shopping has been heard by the manufacturers; manufacturers are, perhaps, only fulfilling the strong desire to have more that Americans display through their spending habits. Their spending habits are, arguably, part of the unavoidable effects of a society structured through capitalism.
A reasonable question, then, comes into play: Who should bare the brunt of the blame for the negative, greedy effects of consumerism, the companies or the consumers? The answer is not as black and white as Juliet Schor infers. Juliet Schor answers the question of the title of her book (Do Americans Shop too much?) with a resounding `Yes!' However, she fails to emphasize the necessary, follow-up question to such a problem. That question being, of course, `What now?'
Juliet Schor emphasizes that the mainstream way of life for most Americans involves filling every free moment in their lives with shopping. That is, Americans shop on lunch hours, weekends and holidays. Personally, I think that Americans shop in excess due the convenience of stores in close proximity, twenty-four hour shopping access, store bargains (clearance, "50-75% off!"). In the eyes of a customer, life becomes full of "good deals".
The easy access and availability of credit cards is one of the main major causes of overspending. Having access to a credit card is dangerous because you are not in direct handling with a concrete form of cash. You do not realize the amount you are spending until the inevitable bill appears in your mailbox a month later. Yet, even then, the bill can be put aside; it is easy to ignore something that doesn't need to be paid immediately. Of course, not ever paying the bill, or paying it later than was allowed, results in late fees, higher interest, and bad credit. This reflects very poorly on the consumer giving him/her a bad reputation.
Economists refer to the attainment of a comfortable, middle class standard of living as the "good life". However, the question lies in the amount we consume and whether this amount produces inequality, alienation or power (4). Often times, the values which we live get passed down onto our children, who learn excessive consumption to be the norm.
A couple different authors critiqued Schor's book. Some authors agree with Schor's ideas while others disagree. One interesting argument revolves around the driving forces of consumption. Juliet Schor believes that consumption is driven by the poorer classes wanting to "purchase" their way into a better social class by having more stuff. However, Douglas Holt points out, "it is not the upscale emulation" that is driving consumption but the "differentiation" (64). "Differentiation," as Holt sees it, has to do with people seeing consumption as a way to define, and redefine, their identities. It has to do with the idea that we will become what we consume. To some degree, there is quite a lot of freedom in this view. If one's self-concept can be redefined through each purchase; there are no limits to becoming who we have always dreamed of becoming. Yet, Holt and Schor's opinions collide without either one of them realizing it. Perhaps some people dream of escalating their social class while, at the same time, do so by following the lead of those people already well off.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Issues, Sketchy Statistics
Review: Do Americans Shop Too Much? by Juliet Schor points out trends in American consumerism that are not being given attention by many academics or even the media. Schor's book has a unique, forum style, which allows its reviewers to consider the opinions of several individuals without tediously searching for arguments and responses over various issues of journals. Schor published an original essay, which outlines the increase in consumerism along with the increase in the hours spent at work and the decrease in saving and time spent with families. She traces the increase in consumerism to the end of the Great Depression, when spending money was considered patriotic, and she analyzes the changes that this has brought to American culture. She points out that the minimum wage has not been adequately adjusted to account for the increasing cost of living, and argues that many women have not entered the work force voluntarily, but have found work necessary to adequately provide for their families. She claims that many working class individuals are not permitted to work fewer than forty hours and in many cases are pressured or even required to work overtime in order to maintain their jobs. She also ridicules brand name purchasing, and suggests taxing the purchase of name brands.
In the next section of her book she has published response to her essay by other prominent sociologists and economists, all of whom agree with her main points but state differing opinions or present further data about minor facets of her argument. Robert H. Frank enthusiastically supports the idea of a tax system that rewards investing, but James B. Twitchell does dare to poke fun at Schor's attack on granite countertops. Jack Gibbons practically summarizes Schor's essay, boiling it down to four main points, and Betsy Taylor, Craig J. Thompson, and Douglas B. Holt also reiterate much of what Schor has already stated, as does Clair Brown, who also adds some further statistics. Holt does, however, point out that a tax on positional goods would be impractical due to the rate at which fashions change. Michael Lamont and Virág Molnár add that consumerism cannot be viewed strictly from an individual basis because shopping is often a social activity. Lawrence Mishel, Jared Bernstein, and John Schmitt suggest that changes in "living standards" rather than changes in income are needed in the United States today.
In the final section of the book, Schor has the last word by refuting the responses to her essay, and reaffirming her position.
While I did find the subject interesting, and many of the statistics to be alarming, I was not overly surprised by any of the assertions, and I think that more of the sociological perspective needed to be included in the original argument. I am also skeptical about the accuracy, or rather applicability, of some of the statistics, which are not well documented (nor are those of Brown). Schor makes unsupported generalizations regarding the wishes of women in the work force, apparently drawn entirely from her own experience, rather than by conducting polls. Furthermore, I am curious as to how she selected the essay reviews to be included in the package. Nowhere in the book was I able to find the procedure she used to pick the responses that she published, and since no one disagreed with her on anything other than a minor point, I do not find it likely that the responses were selected impartially. Furthermore, by allowing herself to speak twice and any possible opponents only to speak once, she further imbalances the forum, the purpose of which I suspect had been to present multiple sides of the issues addressed. Rather than attain this objective, unwitting readers are deceived into believing that no opposing views exist. In my opinion, if a debate is going to be published in forum style it should be impartially compiled by a third party, and care should be taken to include all viewpoints. Furthermore, Schor suggests few remedies to the apparently immense and immediate problems faced by American society. She does not address methods of implementing the few solutions she does outline. Most of her suggestions, such as taxing brand names, are unrealistic and would be exceedingly difficult to implement. For example, how would one go about defining the brands that should be taxed? In the case of canned goods, apparently Dole would be taxed whereas the Food Club brand would not, but what about Roundy's? Ideally an impartial system could be developed and a mathematical formula applied, but there will always be room for interpretation and in the non-idyllic world, large corporations can buy that interpretation. Instead of suggesting manners of contacting politicians or demanding that these issues be addressed in political debates, Schor states that American consumers need to change their attitudes. It is possible, even likely, that she is right, but rather than putting herself up on a soapbox for not buying her clothes at a corporations such as Walmart or using brand name products, I think her energies could be better used constructively. In any case, her essay has opened an important and often overlooked subject up to debate, and if enough people consider the issues she has addressed, perhaps some improvements will be made.
Rating:
Summary: Conspicuous Consumption-A Growing Problem in Today's Society
Review: Do Americans shop too much? For the most part, yes they do. According to the author, Juliet Schor, "the average American now finds it harder to achieve a satisfying standard of living than did the average American twenty-five years ago" (Schor, p. 5). Americans work longer hours now to keep up with their consumption habits, something that has become a norm in today's society. But the difference these days is that they are trying to keep up with the richest people and not just their neighbors anymore. This creates a vicious cycle of work-and-spend, in which they must continue to work hard to keep up with their highly consumptive lifestyles. Juliet Schor refers to this as competitive consumption, the idea that competing with other people leads to increased spending.
This increased spending has become more of a problem over the years as desires for certain goods has taken over peoples' lives. Many people can not earn enough money to support their highly consumptive lifestyles, leading to an increased aspirational gap. This has led many people to take out money from their savings account as they continue to spend more and more. The unrealistic desire to have goods that only the very rich can afford has thus resulted in a poorer quality of American life.
Juliet Schor argues that one way to reduce our overall consumption is to tax high-end goods. I disagree that this is a solution in reducing our work-spend cycle habit. Just because the rich have more money doesn't mean that they should be penalized for it. And who is to say what is a high-end good and what is a low-end good? People are going to argue that some of the goods they buy are out of necessity and not because they want to show off their wealth. Yes, it is true that many Americans get caught up in having the best of the best. But it is their choice, and they should have the freedom to decide what they want to spend their income on. I believe that even if certain luxury goods are taxed, people will continue to spend. So not only does taxing high-end goods affect the wealthiest people, but it limits what the average worker can buy as well. Although Juliet Schor has good intentions in trying to reduce conspicuous consumption, she doesn't take into consideration the chaos and resentment that would follow. For the most part though, I really enjoyed reading her book. I agree that Americans have a tendency to spend too much money on things they don't need. However, I feel that it should be up to each individual and not the government to decide what is best for that person.
Rating:
Summary: Conspicuous Consumption-A Growing Problem in Today's Society
Review: Do Americans shop too much? For the most part, yes they do. According to the author, Juliet Schor, "the average American now finds it harder to achieve a satisfying standard of living than did the average American twenty-five years ago" (Schor, p. 5). Americans work longer hours now to keep up with their consumption habits, something that has become a norm in today's society. But the difference these days is that they are trying to keep up with the richest people and not just their neighbors anymore. This creates a vicious cycle of work-and-spend, in which they must continue to work hard to keep up with their highly consumptive lifestyles. Juliet Schor refers to this as competitive consumption, the idea that competing with other people leads to increased spending.
This increased spending has become more of a problem over the years as desires for certain goods has taken over peoples' lives. Many people can not earn enough money to support their highly consumptive lifestyles, leading to an increased aspirational gap. This has led many people to take out money from their savings account as they continue to spend more and more. The unrealistic desire to have goods that only the very rich can afford has thus resulted in a poorer quality of American life.
Juliet Schor argues that one way to reduce our overall consumption is to tax high-end goods. I disagree that this is a solution in reducing our work-spend cycle habit. Just because the rich have more money doesn't mean that they should be penalized for it. And who is to say what is a high-end good and what is a low-end good? People are going to argue that some of the goods they buy are out of necessity and not because they want to show off their wealth. Yes, it is true that many Americans get caught up in having the best of the best. But it is their choice, and they should have the freedom to decide what they want to spend their income on. I believe that even if certain luxury goods are taxed, people will continue to spend. So not only does taxing high-end goods affect the wealthiest people, but it limits what the average worker can buy as well. Although Juliet Schor has good intentions in trying to reduce conspicuous consumption, she doesn't take into consideration the chaos and resentment that would follow. For the most part though, I really enjoyed reading her book. I agree that Americans have a tendency to spend too much money on things they don't need. However, I feel that it should be up to each individual and not the government to decide what is best for that person.
Rating:
Summary: Do Americans Shop Too Much?
Review: Do Americans Shop Too Much? The consumption of Americans has increased a tremendous amount over the years. People have made a trip to the mall a weekly habit or perhaps even a daily habit. People have gone from owning one television to five televisions, from owning two pairs of shoes to twenty pairs of shoes, but why? The increased amount of consumption may drive one in to thousands of dollars in debt, but it does not seem to matter, for it is the possession of many unnecessary material goods that supposedly make an individual better off.
Juliet Schor addresses this new consumerism as a way of bolstering one¡¯s self esteem. She states we need a new ¡°politics of consumption¡± because the new consumerism that arose in the 1980s, a rapid escalation of desire and need, is causing stress, harming the environment, and weakening the public sector. Americans¡¯ shopping habits are affecting their daily lives and the environment that surrounds them. Schor argues that as people use to be satisfied with keeping up with the people down the street, people are now competing with the rich individuals they are interacting with and trying to live up to their standards because of what is viewed on television. Suggestions are made to decrease this new consumerism through consumer movement to pressure the state to enact policies including: taxes on luxury and status consumption, green taxes and subsidies, new policies toward advertising, and international environmental and labor standards. Nine additional authors comment in regards to Schor¡¯s argument as some agree and others disagree. Schor¡¯s book is an interesting read and gives an educational perspective to the rise in unnecessary consumption, which proposes reasonable solutions to new consumerism.
I strongly agree with Schor¡¯s argument that people are trying to keep up with the rich individuals they observe through the media, especially television. With channels such as MTV, VHI, E and shows such as Entertainment Tonight and Friends, individuals perceive that having the most expensive material objects and driving the latest sports car will make a person happier and more accepted by society. Also, the increasing popularity of reality television shows such as the Bachelor/Bachelorete, Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, and American Idol supposedly give consumers a more real life experience and a way to relate themselves to these real people. Whether these shows are true reality is a whole different issue, which consumers have trouble understanding.
The portrayal of beautiful and rich superstars with $5,000 Gucci bags and expensive brand name clothing seems to be the key to happiness and success. Individuals easily forget that stars such as Britney Spears and Jennifer Lopez are making millions of dollars a year. Consumers believe that if they dress and look like million dollar stars they can be just as star studded as the people they are exposed to everyday on television. Wrong! American consumerism has become ridiculous in the sense of trying to keep up with the millionaires people see on television.
Rating:
Summary: Americans do shop too much...but they like it!
Review: I think that most people would answer the question of do Americans shop too much with a simple "yes." And the truth of the matter is that Americans would all shop even more if there were more money in the old wallet. I enjoy shopping myself, and thought that the book on the topic by Juliet Schor would make an interesting read.
For the most part, I agree with Ms. Schor's arguments. Her idea that Americans are strongly motivated to acquire things in order to keep up with those around them seems to make sense. I do think, however, that most people who buy things for this reason are not totally aware of this as a motivating factor. It is just normal to want to be up to par with those considered to be at your own level or even slightly above.
Schor also makes a good point in saying that consumers are not totally rational and are definitely subject to impulsive purchasing behavior. There is a reason why candy is located at the checkout line. Storeowners know where to put things in order to create a better chance of selling an item that isn't a necessity. Milk, eggs, and bread are usually located in the farthest department from the entrance of the grocery store. Of course, this is because store operators hope that the consumer will have other items catch his/her eye while on the way towards one of those commonly purchased items. We buy things that we were not planning on buying, and if anyone thinks otherwise, they are crazy.
When reading Schor's seven basic elements on the politics of consumption, I couldn't help but think that she is in a dream world. Americans are never going to only purchase things that they "need." And if you were to ask someone if they really needed to buy shoes they would say yes, even if those shoes were a $150 pair of Nike basketball shoes. The line between needs and wants is blurred and will always be that way. Her arguments in this section are far too idealistic. There is no way that the American government would only tax high-end "status" versions of products and leave low-end models tax free. Government officials most likely only buy the high-end stuff to begin with, and you can't tax someone's taste. Schor's ideas sound lovely, but just aren't realistic to the majority of Americans. It would be wonderful to think only of quality of life rather that quality of stuff, but too many people think that stuff can make their life better.
As far as the rest of the book is concerned, I enjoyed reading the thoughts of the critics of Schor's essay. It is hard to say exactly which point of view I can say I totally agree with. I guess there isn't just one. For the most part, Schor was right on in her thoughts. It is just too bad that we live in a society where most people don't even bother to think about what and why they shop.
|
