Customer Reviews

Do Americans Shop Too Much? (New Democracy Forum)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was afraid, when I was ordering this book, that even though the topic interests me, the book would be dry and academic. However, it isn't - it's well written, and easy to follow, not overladen with academic studies. Schor's basic thesis is that Americans used to be satisfied with keeping up with the Joneses down the street, in their own neighborhood, but now we feel we must keep up with the rich and famous we see on TV.

In the introduction, Ralph Nader mentions another book, _Fat and Mean : The Corporate Squeeze of Working Americans and the Myth of Managerial 'Downsizing'_, which is also worth reading. Add to that another book, _Why We Buy : The Science of Shopping_, which I've also read. It's about how marketers induce people to shop and buy. Taken together, the three books will make you think, and definitely give you a basis for rejecting overt commercialism. You'll think twice about your next purchase in a store! (Except for books, of course; buying books is GOOD!) _

The books is broken down into three sections: first there is a section by Schor on America's obsession w/ shopping, why and how to fix (mostly a scaled down recap of her previous books). The second sections is an evaluation of Schor's ideas by a series of economists. Some like here theories but disagree on resoltions, some just don't like what she has to say. Finally, the last section is her response to these evaluations.

It's a really great primer on the subject and gives you an opportunity to see many points of view. Hopefully with that you can make your own decision on causes, effects and solutions.

When I first got it and realized that it was laid out this way, I was a little disappointed, but ended up very glad that they did this.

In Do Americans Shop Too Much?, Harvard economist Juliet Schor (with the assistance of Robert Frank, Michele Lamont, Lawrence Mishel and others) traces the current over consumption trends of American consumers influenced by media presentations of affluence. Calling for Americans to see private consumption in the light of public costs and consequences (including debt burdens, interest rate erosions on disposable income, etc.) Schor suggests a consumer movement in which people re-evaluate their basic needs versus media and advertising induced desires, placing instead, new, more financially conservative and budget-friendly values on family, leisure and community time. Enhanced with an informative Foreword by consumer advocate Ralph Nader, Do Americans Shop Too Much? is clearly written and highly accessible reading recommended for the non-specialist general reader with an interest in financial management, the impact of culture on spending habits, and the influence of media on personal and family financial behavior.

If you're like me, you loved Schor's previous work, The Overworked American and The Overspent American. I found them to be well written as well as thought provoking. This work, however, does follow in this pattern.

First of all, contrary to the clever marketing, the vast majority of it is not written by Schor at all. It's basically a Schor tribune book. A bunch of far lesser known scholars put forth their theories on consumption in a sort of reply to what Schor has said in her previous research.

Further, what these other scholars have to say is just not that interesting. It doesn't fill a void in our collective knowledge the way that Schor's original work did.

Overall, I think this book is a pretty shameless attempt to cash in on Schor's popularity. However, there are a few interesting points and for those most interested in consumption research, it may be worth a read.

Something is happening here, in the United $tates. We're experiencing a great slow-down of our economy, the once vibrant job-market is slowing in job openings, recent grades from our public school systems are near or at a decline, the youth of the United $tates are quickly taking a lead in debt, and yet, people continue to spend. GW Bush recently let loose some of our tax dollars, to try and stir up the economy. More money in our pockets, the economist figure, the more money we'll spend. The more money we spend, the greater the economy will be.

But, something just isn't working. As the Feds reduce the prime interest rate by small increments, unemployeement still rises. What is it that we're doing wrong? Maybe we're buying too much junk?

A retooling of our economy, and the good produced, and how these goods affect our nation, our families, and our selves, is needed. Juliet Schor's book is an incredible tool for this purpose.

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.

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.

We have all heard the saying, "keeping up with the Joneses". It is a phrase that describes virtually every Americans' desire to want what they don't or can't have. In Juliet Schor's, Do Americans Shop Too Much? Shcor illustrates the American cycle of spending and working which is accompanied by high expenses and low savings. The combination of these two patterns leads to more time spent working and less leisure time. Over time, this cycle has produced a gap in our society between the wealthy and the poor. This gap largely affects the middle class because they must "work harder to stay in place." (24) Schor calls this a "positional treadmill". Schor argues that this continuous act of consuming and wasting is a large contributor to many environmental problems. Schor's proposed solution to our conspicuous consumption and conspicuous waste is to tax luxury goods, and change policies so that they regulate advertising and the envirionment. Schor argues that with improved policies and taxes, Americans will stop the cycle of spending and working, get out of debt and have more leisure time.
Schor's argument is analyzed by a number of authors whom each present different opinions about the issue of American consumption. Holt and Thompson argue Schor's view of Americans' need for high socioeconomical status by saying that consumers do not wish to copy the wealthy, but rather aim to "reinvent themselves by consuming new things in new ways." (92) Many of the authors argue that Schor has misinterpreted the current consumer culture and that her solution would only minutely make an impact on our society. Eventually, advertising agencies will find a way to manipulate the system and people will still want more than what they need.
My reaction to Schor's analysis of American consumption is: I agree that Americans are caught up in the cycle of spending and wasting, but I think that the person themselves is responsible for being a part of the cycle, not society. Although we are influenced by television and the upper class society, it is up to each individual person how they spend their money. Americans must resist their desires to buy expensive, luxury items which are usually unnecessary, overpriced and glamorized by advertisement and the media. We must learn to accept the things that we have and be proud of ourselves no matter what kind of car we drive. We must focus on buying for purpose, not for show. I think that Schor presents a good solution; however, it is unlikely that it will succeed. If policies are changed to regulate advertisement, there will still be advertisement everywhere because we are all walking ads. It is unlikely that our wasteful habits will change because Americans have always been wasteful human beings. It will take more than changing policies to improve the environment and stop our wasteful habits. We will continue to overspend and be wasteful as long as we have the resources to do so. It is the tradition of our culture and we are constantly influenced by our surroundings to continue our conspicuous behaviors. The cycle will continue as long as Americans are able to work and companies are able to advertise. Maybe if we all keep spending and working long enough, we will be able to "catch up to the Gates'".

The book, Do Americans Shop Too Much? is a compilation of essays from various economists regarding the consumption of Americans. In the first portion of the book Juliet Schor presents an essay that not only argues Americans spend too much, but that their excessive spending doesnt lead them to happiness. She points out that Americans are no longer comparing themselves with their neighbors, but that their frame of reference has switched to TV stars and co-workers. Americans are now comparing themselves to the Rich and Famous. This leads people to go beyond the basic survival needs of life and consume carat weight diamond rings, sport utility vehicles, and designer apparel. This Status Game, as Schor calls it, drives people to purchase the rare and expensive in order to claim superiority, causing a chain reaction and forcing everyone below to follow suit in order to keep up with his or her social class. As a result of all this over consumption, Schor discusses the devastation to the environment, increasing credit card debt, decrease in savings, and fewer funds for public projects.
To follow up on Americans consumption habits Schor proposes several solutions to the various problems. This involves a decent standard of living, quality of life verses amount of stuff, staying within the Earths ecological bounds of consumption, and government policies to deter people from excessive consumption. To coincide with Schors theories and solutions economists critique Schors initial essay. Each critic has different agreements and disagreements regarding Schors theories and solutions. I felt Clair Brown brought up a valid point when she questions, What constitutes the quality of life? A certain lifestyle might be quality to one person, and unlivable to another.
Schor had a number of convincing points to her essay. However, I dont agree that all Americans are constantly competing for positions in society. Feeling compelled to be doing the same as people driving the flashy car, having sex, drinking the martini, or listening to the latest stereo system doesnt necessarily equal a struggle on the social totem pole. Maybe it simply means Americans just want to be having fun. I do agree that Americans consume beyond our Earths ecological limits and something needs to be quickly re-evaluated.
Aside from the personal disagreements with the novel, I learned a lot and definitely broadened my outlook on various current economic problems that our country faces. The book is relatively brief with a lot of information crammed into it. At times I found it a little difficult to keep up with the pace. However, I would recommend the book to anyone who wanted another perspective on our cultural habits and their ramifications.

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.