Quote:
|
Originally Posted by meembo
This obviously isn't true -- many people give away a great deal of money for the benefit of others. Others save it for a rainy day, or for retirement. I have stuck to a $100 limit for Christmas for a long time -- tree, presents, everything -- and I think it's the most sane thing I do during the holiday season.
|
Actually it is very true.
As long as you are participating in a means of production and earning money you are part of the problem (if there is said to be a problem to begin with). If you earn $200 and only spend $100 for Christmas and you put the other $100 in the bank... all $200 of you money spent.
The $100 you put in the bank is loaned by the bank to others and they spend it... as I said above production and consumption are inextricably linked. The folks at adbusters and buy nothing day fall into the trap that many do when critiquing consumerism... they ignore this connection and treat the two (production and consumption) as seperate issues.
The only way for you to truly curb consumerism, in the way they are suggesting (ie buy nothing) is to earn less or earn nothing. Then you have taken yourself out of the equation. You have lessened the whole... not very practical is it?
For the record, I am a regular reader of adbusters and have been since they launched. I think they have some interesting ideas... I just think they have missed the mark.