If "over-consumption" is a problem, the alternative is not necessarily a preferable solution.
For all the problems that holes in the ozone layer, deforestation, and reliance upon fossil fuels present, the benefits gained by use of those resources far outweigh them.
Do you wish for the emergence of alternative fuel and energy? Won't happen until we run out of gas.
Ever buy a used item at a bargain? How would those things be in the market without someone else buying something they didn't need?
Do you like being able to go to the supermarket and getting everything and anything you need or want at an affordable price, 24-hours a day? I do. The slightly-old bread and fruit that lower-income people depend on to eat? Thank "over-consumption" for that. This will necessarily result in some waste.
Do you like having a job? As grueling and thankless a retail or food industry job may be, without "over-consumption", you and I and many others would be out on the streets with nothing to do. Without large corporations, millions would depend on and be burdened by taxation for their daily existence.
How about visiting loved ones over holidays? Vacations and trips to Europe or South America? Have you ever flown for cheap? Again, "over-consumption" is to thank for that.
We've seen throughout history that a centralized economy is doomed to failure, and the enormous benefits brought to all by a free-market economy. Despite the irrational hatred and envy directed at the rich by socialists, the fact remains that for every "decadent" millionaire and billionaire, thousands if not millions depend on their business ventures and spending for their livelihood, and any alternative will, in the long-run, result in mass starvation and tedious mediocrity.
I think you are missing the point here... This movement simply wishes for a slow down of our consumption (IE, we are using more resources than we need or have available) and the fact that we consume more than everyone else in the world for no reason, accelerating the depletion of non-renewable natural resources that are not necessarily ours to burn.
all examples that you cited are achievable without waste.
"For all the problems that holes in the ozone layer, deforestation, and reliance upon fossil fuels present, the benefits gained by use of those resources far outweigh them."
Yes but why not do a better job at controlling pollution and managing forests? those resources will last a lot longer if we do.
"Do you wish for the emergence of alternative fuel and energy? Won't happen until we run out of gas."
I know but that sucks especially since there are better alternatives.
"Ever buy a used item at a bargain? How would those things be in the market without someone else buying something they didn't need?"
why did they buy something they did not need? I know that drives the economy in part but think of the energy and resources used to make something that wasn't needed. Getting a "bargain" does not justify that and not all things get resold. you know were they end up: In a landfill contaminating the soil and taking up space.
"Do you like being able to go to the supermarket and getting everything and anything you need or want at an affordable price, 24-hours a day? I do."
That is the result of consumption, free market, etc..nothing wrong with that.
"The slightly-old bread and fruit that lower-income people depend on to eat? Thank "over-consumption" for that. This will necessarily result in some waste."
That is not a result of over-consumption but of over-production and you know perfectly that most of these "older items" are thrown out, not sold to the poor.Old fruit doesn't look good in a super-market stall.
"Do you like having a job? As grueling and thankless a retail or food industry job may be, without "over-consumption", you and I and many others would be out on the streets with nothing to do."
This discussion will spiral out of control if we try to answer each other on a point-by-point basis, so I'll attempt a more analytical approach.
You sound like you have good motivations for what you believe in, but I'm not too sure that you have considered all the results and implications of what you espouse. I do not see how a "Buy Nothing Day" accomplishes anything other than sabotage of the economy at best. Many people make their livelihoods through jobs related to the retail sector, and the Christmas shopping season makes up a huge part of their employers' annual income. If people refused to spend their money, these people will end up on the streets.
I'm not talking just about salespeople, either. I'm talking about the suppliers, the people who make $2 a day (While it seems almost inhuman to pay what seems like such low pay to us, this is simply a function of local economics. Paying these people $8 an hour would fuck up the local economy horribly. Local businessmen who cannot afford to compete against wages like that would be driven out of business.) making clothing overseas or whatever, the truck drivers who transport these goods from the shipyards, etc., etc. Material excess, as vain as it may be, creates a chain of dependence which drives the economy.
I'm also not too certain what your main concern is. Is it the impact on the environment? The decadence of consumer culture? The fact that the Western world is richer than the third world? Simple aesthetic displeasure at inefficiency?
I do not believe that any of those are valid reasons to destroy, or even restrain, the result of generations of progress. In fact, for a lot of those, the success of movements such as "Buy Nothing Day" would work to ensure their failure. Third World countries are not going to do better if the Western countries scale back their consumption. I get the sense that you believe we should just give away money to these countries. That simply does not work. It only creates despots who use the money to solidify their power, and resentment toward the wealthier nations to whom the third world citizens come to depend on. At least with sweatshop workers, they have the minimal power of refusing to work. Charity breeds contempt.
So to close, I'll ask exactly what it is you think will result from the success of restraint to our consumption. And where exactly is the cutoff for that restraint? Who determines when we've "bought nothing" for long enough? Who gets to determine what we all should do to create a better world, and who gets to define what that better world is?
At least with sweatshop workers, they have the minimal power of refusing to work.
WHAT?!
First, buying nothing for one day will have very little impact toward "sabotaging the economy". The POINT, was to send a message. Do you think those who participated expected NEW AND RADICAL CHANGE the day after? No, not hardly. Hell, it probably did nothing at all, but the point was to recognize a problem and at least TRY and do something about it. As years go by, maybe acts like that WILL have an impact. The point is to try, the point is to take notice.
So we've fallen into a vicious cycle of dependency. Every shit job depends on every shit consumer to buy, buy, buy and you think the answer is to 'not rock the boat"? People take these crap jobs because they're THERE, they're EASY and they're becoming ever more popular. If we didn't spend so much, consume so much, maybe they could find a better, more fulfilling, BETTER PAYING job. So which came first, the need or the greed? It's hard to say. Give someone who's been beaten down by life an easy way out and see if they don't take it. Sure, you can say "Well, no one FORCED them to take that job." or, "They should go to school and get a better job!". But that's ignorance, pure fucking American capitalist, Republican ignorance. If you haven't lived poor, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know the mindset or how hard it can be. I don't know how hard it can be, but I can empathize.
It's so easy to absolve yourself of your gluttonous guilt by saying that we have a fine balance here! Pat yourself on the back, all of those extravagant Christmas purchases helped some poor Chinese kid make $2! It helped some poor retail-working sod make an extra 50 cents this holiday season. Way to go! You're keeping America alive, and in turn, helping the world, no? Because everyone knows, our demands keep the world ALIVE and PRODUCTIVE, yes? Bullshit.
More and more people today, in America, have to rely on two jobs because these lovely retail and low-wage jobs you speak of are more available and easily obtainable. People fall into a rut and we keep them there. If poverty levels in this country were reported accurately, you might be singing an entirely different tune. Housing rates increase much faster than the minimum wage, causing many families to live in one-room motels and apartments where both parents, IF both are present, go out and work two jobs each just to make rent. And health care, forget about it. Not to mention the cheapest foods available are loaded with carbohydrates and fat, making us even more slothful. Yes, it's a grand cycle indeed.
You take things to the extreme and seem to miss the point. Buying nothing for one day was to send a message. No one is saying we should all just stop buying ANYTHING for a long period of time. That's not the point. The point is to get you and everyone else to look at how much STUFF you purchase. How much useless stuff we buy each year, especially around this joyous, holiday season. Watch what you throw away for a month please. Just watch what goes in the trash and THINK about how long it's going to sit there. These things, these harmful to the environment, the economy, and the people THINGS will sit in the ground forever. They get made because of the demand. Well maybe we demand too much. Maybe if we practiced a little restraint and fucking thought about what we're doing, then we wouldn't need to have days like Buy Nothing Day.
If YOU think what we're doing is heading toward a better world, sir, I applaud your divine existence and your great capacity for ignorance.
We have a cheap existence and it's costing us more than you realize
"If we didn't spend so much, consume so much, maybe they could find a better, more fulfilling, BETTER PAYING job."
Um, how do you figure? It makes sense for a particular person with limited means not to spend frivolously, but that's not the point of your holiday, is it? That hypothetical cash-strapped person probably depends on the spending of others to have the job he or she does.
"If you haven't lived poor, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know the mindset or how hard it can be. I don't know how hard it can be, but I can empathize."
So you have special, extra-sensory poorness empathy which I lack, because you keep accusing me of being a Republican, which I'm most emphatically NOT? I've had to see my dad work himself into poor health to keep our family afloat. I'm currently broke, myself. I'm not, "eating ketchup for dinner" poor, but I'm not this child of privilege you keep trying to make me out to be.
I am thankful for our capitalist economy, because despite your incomprehensible belief that destroying it will make this a better world, it in fact allowed us to live in greater freedom and opportunity than we would have had otherwise.
It seems to me that you think the world is divided into two categories: your enlightened, ultra-aware camp, and pure, benighted ignorance. And you keep ascribing beliefs and ignorance upon me which simply don't correspond to fact.
Also contrary to fact is your belief that a general, all-out boycott will somehow send a message and make this world a socialist paradise. (Call it what you will, but that's what your views are, by your own words.) If someone is prone to taking the easier route and taking menial labor instead of educating himself and striving for something better, how is "buy nothing" supposed to help him? From your journals, I believe you hold two jobs yourself? I can understand how frustrating it might be to scrape by on wages earned from 70-hour weeks, I've been there. But you seem to be misplacing your anger and directing it at the hand that feeds you.
Funny, that you seem to take offense to my insinutating you're a Republican, but yet you turn around and nearly call me a socialist. Good job. You don't know me and you don't know that sometimes, I just like to argue. :p And just because I've thrown a few words into an online journal, don't presume to know what my views are. I apologize if it seemed like I was assuming anything about you. Socialist...it's a dirty word to you, isn't it?
The low-wage worker depends on our spending because that's the vicious cycle I was talking about. Do you think this is how it should be? Because it's not a balance by any means. The rich are just getting richer and the poor, poorer. Our demand for cheap goods keeps people in these jobs. It breeds more low-pay, one-skill, little-to-no benefit jobs. If the demand is there, then supply, supply, supply.
"I am thankful for our capitalist economy, despite your incomprehensible belief that destroying it will make this a better world"
I'd like to know where I said that. Apparently you can't seem to see long-term effects of our actions. You SEEM to be of the opinion that by building a factory in a poverty-striken area of the world and "giving" the lucky citizens jobs, we're helping them. Is that true? Because if it's not, by all means....
If someone is prone to taking the easier route and taking menial labor instead of educating himself and striving for something better, how is "buy nothing" supposed to help him?
You make it sound like educating yourself and finding a better job is so easy. Did I not just get through saying it's not about buying NOTHING, but curbing our spending, WATCHING what we spend it on? And I didn't say someone is PRONE to taking the easier route, people are beat down mentally, some are FORCED to take that route. Some have families and it's a hell of a lot different to take a risk with quitting your safe, low-paying job for an education and the CHANCE at a better job when you have other people depending on you.
I have two jobs to pay down some bills, not scrape by. I'm living in a fucking castle compared to some people. I have no bitterness about my two jobs thank you. So I'm not exactly "taking it out" on anyone. This is about other people, John, not me. Imagine, someone thinking outside of their own world? It's amazing, isn't it. "The hand that feeds me"?....I can't even begin to comment on that.
"I am thankful for our capitalist economy, because despite your incomprehensible belief that destroying it will make this a better world, it in fact allowed us to live in greater freedom and opportunity than we would have had otherwise."
I've read this whole thread, and you obviously see things in black and white. Either you're a commie (if you support not being a wastefdul over-consumer), or a capitalist. Wrong. I, too, support a capitalist-based economy; there are (surprise) many different ways to support capitalism and implement it. The simple truth is that North Americans are extremely *wasteful* capitalists. "Waste" and "capitalism" do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. There are a number of societies in this world which have capitalist-based economies, yet are not gluttons. Furthermore, despite all your protestations, I fail to see how over-consumption and waste make the world a better place. Quite the contrary, they're destroying it: the shambles of the environment is just the most obvious symptom of this destruction.
There are a number of other points I fully disagree with you on, but mogador and blustocking have done a fine job contending them, already. I just wanted to point out that things are not as extremist as you present them, and the world would be doing just fine - probably better - were it not for the extreme waste which overconsumption has bred. If that makes me a commie, so be it.
Let me repeat this(if blu hasn't said it already) Buy nothing is a day of protest, not an attempt at sabotaging the economy.It's a day of awareness, of communication. That's all. The retail industry will not suffer from buy nothing day anymore than it does with national holidays..
"While it seems almost inhuman to pay what seems like such low pay to us, this is simply a function of local economics. Paying these people $8 an hour would fuck up the local economy horribly. Local businessmen who cannot afford to compete against wages like that would be driven out of business.) "
That is not their employees problem and considering that the largest employers with the worse abuse records that produce goods for our consumption are western companies ( see GAP, Banana republic, Guess, NIKE, reebok, ADIDAS.)These are multy billion dollar corporations that get fined over and over for underpaying workers( even by Asian standards) and quite a variety of other abuses including physical abuse.
This is a 20 sec search on Google. There are better ways of maintaining the economy's "chain of dependance" buy the way, your argument is not new. It was said that if the suthern slaves were to be freed, the economy would collapse. "At least with sweatshop workers, they have the minimal power of refusing to work. Charity breeds contempt."
sure. please check out those links and do some research yourself. "I'm also not too certain what your main concern is. Is it the impact on the environment? The decadence of consumer culture? The fact that the Western world is richer than the third world? Simple aesthetic displeasure at inefficiency?"
all of the above contribute to our accelerated demise.
"I get the sense that you believe we should just give away money to these countries. That simply does not work. It only creates despots who use the money to solidify their power,(...)" Guess what? we are the ones who put those despots in power most of the time. we like them, they are not socialists and the less socialist they are, the more we like them. Our foreign policy is less than helpful to the poor. That's a whole other bag of shit though. as for giving them money. yup, that is exactly what we should do. If you know some history you know that we are the ones who put them it that shithole so we should certainly help them out.
what will all this result? redistribution of wealth taken from others, better management of our scarce natural resources. we don't have to "buy nothing" we can just buy less of what we don't need, such as SUV's in California. we decide as a race(IE humanity) not as a country. we north Americans think only of ourselves and nothing else. You are the perfect example of that and as long as people like you call the shots, nothing will change and this planet will go to shit even quicker.
There are other occupations and again, no one is calling for an end to those things all together, just restraint.
"Without large corporations, millions would depend on and be burdened by taxation for their daily existence."
It's called Canada and we are happy and doing just fine.Also, do you really know anyone that depends solely on large corporations "for their daily existence"? that's sad.
"How about visiting loved ones over holidays? Vacations and trips to Europe or South America? Have you ever flown for cheap? Again, "over-consumption" is to thank for that."
Flying is rather expensive these days in part due to meddling in the middle east for the sake of oil.What exactly does over consumption have to do with air fare?
"We've seen throughout history that a centralised economy is doomed to failure, and the enormous benefits brought to all by a free-market economy."
Benefits to us, North Americans; western society.Is Africa actually getting "enormous benefits"?
"Despite the irrational hatred and envy directed at the rich by socialists"
That's one hell of a generalisation and socialists are not relevant. socialism is not liberalism.
the fact remains that for every "decadent" millionaire and billionaire, thousands if not millions depend on their business ventures and spending for their livelihood"
nothing wrong with that, how about sharing the wealth with those that produce it? Like the Asian workers that put together that VCR for 2 dollars a week? And over here,lets give people health care and proper wages.This has nothing to do with my post by the way....
"and any alternative will, in the long-run, result in mass starvation and tedious mediocrity."
This is already going on in Africa, the middle east and Asia.Has been since these continents were colonial territories of some sort. many scholars will tell you that starvation and tedious mediocrity ARE the result of the Free market. Just one example: Ethiopia and Erathrea(sp?) have been in conflict and even at war for a long time over one thing: water. Thanks to the free market, the US supplies both countries with weapons. Both states are within the poorest in the world. Again, this has nothing to do with buy nothing day.This is simply a day of protest to raise awareness for our abuse.
How about the fact that the U.S. consumes more product and resources than most countries combined? How about our culture? Our mass-consumerism, buy-buy-buy, Worship The Corporate God culture? Could THAT have something to do with it? Don't be an idiot. Go read.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
momijizukamori![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-11-29 05:34 am (UTC)I call bullshit on this. Exactly how does the strength of the U.S. economy lead to the death of the world?
no subject
Date: 2002-11-29 08:06 am (UTC)come back and we will discuss it.
here are a few more links
Date: 2002-11-29 08:19 am (UTC)http://www.eap.mcgill.ca/publications/eap2.htm
http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/B-SPAN/sub_overconsumption.htm
http://www.22september.org/info/en/consu.html
http://www.npg.org/forum_series/overpop&overconsume.htm
http://www.wrm.org.uy/plantations/cando/overconsumption.html
http://www.overpopulation.org/solutions.html
http://www.leas.green.net.au/richpoor.htm
These are just a few,please check them out.
no subject
Date: 2002-11-29 07:35 pm (UTC)For all the problems that holes in the ozone layer, deforestation, and reliance upon fossil fuels present, the benefits gained by use of those resources far outweigh them.
Do you wish for the emergence of alternative fuel and energy? Won't happen until we run out of gas.
Ever buy a used item at a bargain? How would those things be in the market without someone else buying something they didn't need?
Do you like being able to go to the supermarket and getting everything and anything you need or want at an affordable price, 24-hours a day? I do. The slightly-old bread and fruit that lower-income people depend on to eat? Thank "over-consumption" for that. This will necessarily result in some waste.
Do you like having a job? As grueling and thankless a retail or food industry job may be, without "over-consumption", you and I and many others would be out on the streets with nothing to do. Without large corporations, millions would depend on and be burdened by taxation for their daily existence.
How about visiting loved ones over holidays? Vacations and trips to Europe or South America? Have you ever flown for cheap? Again, "over-consumption" is to thank for that.
We've seen throughout history that a centralized economy is doomed to failure, and the enormous benefits brought to all by a free-market economy. Despite the irrational hatred and envy directed at the rich by socialists, the fact remains that for every "decadent" millionaire and billionaire, thousands if not millions depend on their business ventures and spending for their livelihood, and any alternative will, in the long-run, result in mass starvation and tedious mediocrity.
uhm.....
Date: 2002-11-30 06:03 pm (UTC)This movement simply wishes for a slow down of our consumption (IE, we are using more resources than we need or have available) and the fact that we consume more than everyone else in the world for no reason, accelerating the depletion of non-renewable natural resources that are not necessarily ours to burn.
all examples that you cited are achievable without waste.
"For all the problems that holes in the ozone layer, deforestation, and reliance upon fossil fuels present, the benefits gained by use of those resources far outweigh them."
Yes but why not do a better job at controlling pollution and managing forests? those resources will last a lot longer if we do.
"Do you wish for the emergence of alternative fuel and energy? Won't happen until we run out of gas."
I know but that sucks especially since there are better alternatives.
"Ever buy a used item at a bargain? How would those things be in the market without someone else buying something they didn't need?"
why did they buy something they did not need? I know that drives the economy in part but think of the energy and resources used to make something that wasn't needed. Getting a "bargain" does not justify that and not all things get resold. you know were they end up: In a landfill contaminating the soil and taking up space.
"Do you like being able to go to the supermarket and getting everything and anything you need or want at an affordable price, 24-hours a day? I do."
That is the result of consumption, free market, etc..nothing wrong with that.
"The slightly-old bread and fruit that lower-income people depend on to eat? Thank "over-consumption" for that. This will necessarily result in some waste."
That is not a result of over-consumption but of over-production and you know perfectly that most of these "older items" are thrown out, not sold to the poor.Old fruit doesn't look good in a super-market stall.
"Do you like having a job? As grueling and thankless a retail or food industry job may be, without "over-consumption", you and I and many others would be out on the streets with nothing to do."
no subject
Date: 2002-12-02 11:07 am (UTC)You sound like you have good motivations for what you believe in, but I'm not too sure that you have considered all the results and implications of what you espouse. I do not see how a "Buy Nothing Day" accomplishes anything other than sabotage of the economy at best. Many people make their livelihoods through jobs related to the retail sector, and the Christmas shopping season makes up a huge part of their employers' annual income. If people refused to spend their money, these people will end up on the streets.
I'm not talking just about salespeople, either. I'm talking about the suppliers, the people who make $2 a day (While it seems almost inhuman to pay what seems like such low pay to us, this is simply a function of local economics. Paying these people $8 an hour would fuck up the local economy horribly. Local businessmen who cannot afford to compete against wages like that would be driven out of business.) making clothing overseas or whatever, the truck drivers who transport these goods from the shipyards, etc., etc. Material excess, as vain as it may be, creates a chain of dependence which drives the economy.
I'm also not too certain what your main concern is. Is it the impact on the environment? The decadence of consumer culture? The fact that the Western world is richer than the third world? Simple aesthetic displeasure at inefficiency?
I do not believe that any of those are valid reasons to destroy, or even restrain, the result of generations of progress. In fact, for a lot of those, the success of movements such as "Buy Nothing Day" would work to ensure their failure. Third World countries are not going to do better if the Western countries scale back their consumption. I get the sense that you believe we should just give away money to these countries. That simply does not work. It only creates despots who use the money to solidify their power, and resentment toward the wealthier nations to whom the third world citizens come to depend on. At least with sweatshop workers, they have the minimal power of refusing to work. Charity breeds contempt.
So to close, I'll ask exactly what it is you think will result from the success of restraint to our consumption. And where exactly is the cutoff for that restraint? Who determines when we've "bought nothing" for long enough? Who gets to determine what we all should do to create a better world, and who gets to define what that better world is?
Re:
Date: 2002-12-02 11:56 am (UTC)WHAT?!
First, buying nothing for one day will have very little impact toward "sabotaging the economy". The POINT, was to send a message. Do you think those who participated expected NEW AND RADICAL CHANGE the day after? No, not hardly. Hell, it probably did nothing at all, but the point was to recognize a problem and at least TRY and do something about it. As years go by, maybe acts like that WILL have an impact. The point is to try, the point is to take notice.
So we've fallen into a vicious cycle of dependency. Every shit job depends on every shit consumer to buy, buy, buy and you think the answer is to 'not rock the boat"? People take these crap jobs because they're THERE, they're EASY and they're becoming ever more popular. If we didn't spend so much, consume so much, maybe they could find a better, more fulfilling, BETTER PAYING job. So which came first, the need or the greed? It's hard to say. Give someone who's been beaten down by life an easy way out and see if they don't take it. Sure, you can say "Well, no one FORCED them to take that job." or, "They should go to school and get a better job!". But that's ignorance, pure fucking American capitalist, Republican ignorance. If you haven't lived poor, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know the mindset or how hard it can be. I don't know how hard it can be, but I can empathize.
It's so easy to absolve yourself of your gluttonous guilt by saying that we have a fine balance here! Pat yourself on the back, all of those extravagant Christmas purchases helped some poor Chinese kid make $2! It helped some poor retail-working sod make an extra 50 cents this holiday season. Way to go! You're keeping America alive, and in turn, helping the world, no?
Because everyone knows, our demands keep the world ALIVE and PRODUCTIVE, yes? Bullshit.
More and more people today, in America, have to rely on two jobs because these lovely retail and low-wage jobs you speak of are more available and easily obtainable. People fall into a rut and we keep them there. If poverty levels in this country were reported accurately, you might be singing an entirely different tune. Housing rates increase much faster than the minimum wage, causing many families to live in one-room motels and apartments where both parents, IF both are present, go out and work two jobs each just to make rent. And health care, forget about it. Not to mention the cheapest foods available are loaded with carbohydrates and fat, making us even more slothful. Yes, it's a grand cycle indeed.
You take things to the extreme and seem to miss the point. Buying nothing for one day was to send a message. No one is saying we should all just stop buying ANYTHING for a long period of time. That's not the point. The point is to get you and everyone else to look at how much STUFF you purchase. How much useless stuff we buy each year, especially around this joyous, holiday season. Watch what you throw away for a month please. Just watch what goes in the trash and THINK about how long it's going to sit there. These things, these harmful to the environment, the economy, and the people THINGS will sit in the ground forever. They get made because of the demand. Well maybe we demand too much. Maybe if we practiced a little restraint and fucking thought about what we're doing, then we wouldn't need to have days like Buy Nothing Day.
If YOU think what we're doing is heading toward a better world, sir, I applaud your divine existence and your great capacity for ignorance.
We have a cheap existence and it's costing us more than you realize
no subject
Date: 2002-12-02 12:15 pm (UTC)Um, how do you figure? It makes sense for a particular person with limited means not to spend frivolously, but that's not the point of your holiday, is it? That hypothetical cash-strapped person probably depends on the spending of others to have the job he or she does.
"If you haven't lived poor, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know the mindset or how hard it can be. I don't know how hard it can be, but I can empathize."
So you have special, extra-sensory poorness empathy which I lack, because you keep accusing me of being a Republican, which I'm most emphatically NOT? I've had to see my dad work himself into poor health to keep our family afloat. I'm currently broke, myself. I'm not, "eating ketchup for dinner" poor, but I'm not this child of privilege you keep trying to make me out to be.
I am thankful for our capitalist economy, because despite your incomprehensible belief that destroying it will make this a better world, it in fact allowed us to live in greater freedom and opportunity than we would have had otherwise.
It seems to me that you think the world is divided into two categories: your enlightened, ultra-aware camp, and pure, benighted ignorance. And you keep ascribing beliefs and ignorance upon me which simply don't correspond to fact.
Also contrary to fact is your belief that a general, all-out boycott will somehow send a message and make this world a socialist paradise. (Call it what you will, but that's what your views are, by your own words.) If someone is prone to taking the easier route and taking menial labor instead of educating himself and striving for something better, how is "buy nothing" supposed to help him? From your journals, I believe you hold two jobs yourself? I can understand how frustrating it might be to scrape by on wages earned from 70-hour weeks, I've been there. But you seem to be misplacing your anger and directing it at the hand that feeds you.
a socialist paradise?
Socialist...it's a dirty word to you, isn't it?
The low-wage worker depends on our spending because that's the vicious cycle I was talking about. Do you think this is how it should be? Because it's not a balance by any means. The rich are just getting richer and the poor, poorer. Our demand for cheap goods keeps people in these jobs. It breeds more low-pay, one-skill, little-to-no benefit jobs. If the demand is there, then supply, supply, supply.
"I am thankful for our capitalist economy, despite your incomprehensible belief that destroying it will make this a better world"
I'd like to know where I said that. Apparently you can't seem to see long-term effects of our actions. You SEEM to be of the opinion that by building a factory in a poverty-striken area of the world and "giving" the lucky citizens jobs, we're helping them. Is that true? Because if it's not, by all means....
If someone is prone to taking the easier route and taking menial labor instead of educating himself and striving for something better, how is "buy nothing" supposed to help him?
You make it sound like educating yourself and finding a better job is so easy. Did I not just get through saying it's not about buying NOTHING, but curbing our spending, WATCHING what we spend it on? And I didn't say someone is PRONE to taking the easier route, people are beat down mentally, some are FORCED to take that route. Some have families and it's a hell of a lot different to take a risk with quitting your safe, low-paying job for an education and the CHANCE at a better job when you have other people depending on you.
I have two jobs to pay down some bills, not scrape by. I'm living in a fucking castle compared to some people. I have no bitterness about my two jobs thank you. So I'm not exactly "taking it out" on anyone. This is about other people, John, not me. Imagine, someone thinking outside of their own world? It's amazing, isn't it. "The hand that feeds me"?....I can't even begin to comment on that.
no subject
Date: 2002-12-04 10:46 am (UTC)I've read this whole thread, and you obviously see things in black and white. Either you're a commie (if you support not being a wastefdul over-consumer), or a capitalist. Wrong. I, too, support a capitalist-based economy; there are (surprise) many different ways to support capitalism and implement it. The simple truth is that North Americans are extremely *wasteful* capitalists. "Waste" and "capitalism" do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. There are a number of societies in this world which have capitalist-based economies, yet are not gluttons. Furthermore, despite all your protestations, I fail to see how over-consumption and waste make the world a better place. Quite the contrary, they're destroying it: the shambles of the environment is just the most obvious symptom of this destruction.
There are a number of other points I fully disagree with you on, but mogador and blustocking have done a fine job contending them, already. I just wanted to point out that things are not as extremist as you present them, and the world would be doing just fine - probably better - were it not for the extreme waste which overconsumption has bred. If that makes me a commie, so be it.
*claps*
Date: 2002-12-05 12:30 pm (UTC)Ah the good ol' days of Kat-dom and cool-ass people at Spookyland. The troll-hunting and the discussions. *sighs* :)
no subject
Date: 2002-12-04 10:23 am (UTC)Buy nothing is a day of protest, not an attempt at sabotaging the economy.It's a day of awareness, of communication. That's all.
The retail industry will not suffer from buy nothing day anymore than it does with national holidays..
"While it seems almost inhuman to pay what seems like such low pay to us, this is simply a function of local economics. Paying these people $8 an hour would fuck up the local economy horribly. Local businessmen who cannot afford to compete against wages like that would be driven out of business.) "
That is not their employees problem and considering that the largest employers with the worse abuse records that produce goods for our consumption are western companies ( see GAP, Banana republic, Guess, NIKE, reebok, ADIDAS.)These are multy billion dollar corporations that get fined over and over for underpaying workers( even by Asian standards) and quite a variety of other abuses including physical abuse.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/jan99/suit14.htm
http://www.sweatshops.org/buy/ladders_pants.html
http://www.angelfire.com/biz4/punkness7lacy/brand.html
This is a 20 sec search on Google.
There are better ways of maintaining the economy's "chain of dependance"
buy the way, your argument is not new. It was said that if the suthern slaves were to be freed, the economy would collapse.
"At least with sweatshop workers, they have the minimal power of refusing to work. Charity breeds contempt."
sure. please check out those links and do some research yourself.
"I'm also not too certain what your main concern is. Is it the impact on the environment? The decadence of consumer culture? The fact that the Western world is richer than the third world? Simple aesthetic displeasure at inefficiency?"
all of the above contribute to our accelerated demise.
"I get the sense that you believe we should just give away money to these countries. That simply does not work. It only creates despots who use the money to solidify their power,(...)"
Guess what? we are the ones who put those despots in power most of the time. we like them, they are not socialists and the less socialist they are, the more we like them. Our foreign policy is less than helpful to the poor. That's a whole other bag of shit though. as for giving them money. yup, that is exactly what we should do. If you know some history you know that we are the ones who put them it that shithole so we should certainly help them out.
what will all this result? redistribution of wealth taken from others, better management of our scarce natural resources.
we don't have to "buy nothing" we can just buy less of what we don't need, such as SUV's in California.
we decide as a race(IE humanity) not as a country. we north Americans think only of ourselves and nothing else. You are the perfect example of that and as long as people like you call the shots, nothing will change and this planet will go to shit even quicker.
Re:
Date: 2002-12-05 12:31 pm (UTC)Verra nice.
continued.....
Date: 2002-11-30 06:05 pm (UTC)"Without large corporations, millions would depend on and be burdened by taxation for their daily existence."
It's called Canada and we are happy and doing just fine.Also, do you really know anyone that depends solely on large corporations "for their daily existence"? that's sad.
"How about visiting loved ones over holidays? Vacations and trips to Europe or South America? Have you ever flown for cheap? Again, "over-consumption" is to thank for that."
Flying is rather expensive these days in part due to meddling in the middle east for the sake of oil.What exactly does over consumption have to do with air fare?
"We've seen throughout history that a centralised economy is doomed to failure, and the enormous benefits brought to all by a free-market economy."
Benefits to us, North Americans; western society.Is Africa actually getting "enormous benefits"?
"Despite the irrational hatred and envy directed at the rich by socialists"
That's one hell of a generalisation and socialists are not relevant.
socialism is not liberalism.
the fact remains that for every "decadent" millionaire and billionaire, thousands if not millions depend on their business ventures and spending for their livelihood"
nothing wrong with that, how about sharing the wealth with those that produce it? Like the Asian workers that put together that VCR for 2 dollars a week? And over here,lets give people health care and proper wages.This has nothing to do with my post by the way....
"and any alternative will, in the long-run, result in mass starvation and tedious mediocrity."
This is already going on in Africa, the middle east and Asia.Has been since these continents were colonial territories of some sort.
many scholars will tell you that starvation and tedious mediocrity
ARE the result of the Free market. Just one example: Ethiopia and Erathrea(sp?) have been in conflict and even at war for a long time over one thing: water. Thanks to the free market, the US supplies both countries with weapons. Both states are within the poorest in the world. Again, this has nothing to do with buy nothing day.This is simply a day of protest to raise awareness for our abuse.
JohnTChoe, are you a Republican? Just asking.
Date: 2002-11-29 03:18 pm (UTC)