S/o Is conspicuous consumption inherently immoral or unethical?

[DawnM]

This all comes down to "judge not".  We can only judge our own motivations for our spending.  

 

Some people probably do buy "Brand Cool" because it's cool.  But many people buy it because it will last for 15 years, the production line is transparent and involves reasonable wages for laborers, etc.  Buying a cheaper knock-off often times involves very questionable production methods/labor, and very poor quality.  

 

Are there people who buy a new winter coat every year to have the newest silhouette and style?  Probably.  I don't personally know anyone who does that, though.  

 

 

As a general guideline, it's pretty clear if people are being flashy to show off wealth or buying quality because they can afford quality.  Quibbling over whether or not heat/AC is warranted, Ugg boots are wasteful, etc, is pointless.  It depends on the person, it depends on the motive, so our best move is to keep our eyes to our own behavior.  

 

Or we find it at the Goodwill for $8.   :lol:

 

My kids have gotten all sorts of name brand expensive stuff from the thrift store.

[DawnM]

As for Christians and the idea of wealth.......

 

DH and I taught Crown Financial for a while at church.  There are over 2200 verses on wealthy and money, so it must be of some importance to talk about.

 

Bottom line (as a Christian), 100% of your wealth is the Lord's.  It all belongs to Him.  What you do with your money SHOULD be a reflection of that, and between you and the Lord as to how you spend it.  However, many don't live that way.  It isn't up to me to figure out if they are.  A BMW to one person may be like a Toyota Camry to me (in terms of percentage of income), and they may not spend in areas I do (travel, college, etc...).  

 

The only time it bothers me is when people complain about money troubles as they get into their very expensive car (for example.)

 

Our church has a benevolent fund for those who may fall on hard times.  One couple shared their financial situation to our Sunday School class, and then got some help through our benevolent fund.  Next thing we know, they are going on a Cruise and posting pics on Facebook.  Now, it is ENTIRELY possible (and actually probable) that they were gifted the cruise......but I didn't think it wise of them to post it on FB when so many knew their financial situation, and had actually donated to it.

[snowbeltmom]

Conspicuous consumption is done to enhance social prestige.  Yes, its immoral, because it is wasteful.

 

The item consumed doesn't have to be expensive.  Northface jackets and Uggs for ex.  

 

What if you are still wearing the Uggs and Northface jacket you bought more than a decade ago and haven't purchased any other winter boots since?  Is that still considered conspicuous consumption?

 

[catz]

Conspicuous consumption is done to enhance social prestige. Yes, its immoral, because it is wasteful.

 

The item consumed doesn't have to be expensive. Northface jackets and Uggs for ex.

I live in Minnesota. We have Northface and Uggs over here because they are WARM. We do well but live aa modest lifestyle in a very normal 3 bed room house that is messy and could use work. Some products ARE warmer and wear longer than others and if people judge me because of a single pair of Uggs I’ve been wearing on chilly days for 4 years, that’s on them. My 13 year old has them too. They were her desired big Christmas gift 2 years ago and still fit.

[Soror]

Lots of good points here.

 

I try to live simply but I know my simple living is far more extravagant than most of the world. My house is modest to some but downright luxurious to all those living in poverty. I tried to be purposeful in designing our house for utility and not as a display for wealth. I was purposeful in not putting in a ton of closets because I don't think we need that much stuff. I was purposeful in not building myself a huge master bathroom because I didn't see it as a necessity but there are things we could have did without, We could have made it smaller too, heck seeing spaces at Ikea we could have really cut space with better design.

 

BUT I had to ease up some because I wasn't able to maintain my values with sanity with 4 small kids in the house. So, I feel like we've done well on some things and miserably failed at others. I aim for reusable items but waste energy and throw too much away. I like to buy goods used but it is not always possible to find things. 

 

It is better to spend more on items that are sustainably made by workers paid a living wage and made to last longer but that comes at a price that my budget isn't always able to afford. 

 

I don't think progress is always progress and I don't see these continuing increases in expectations a net good. We keep pushing expectations up higher and higher, we have to work more and more to meet necessities but the movement that says those things aren't really necessary is losing. You need to pay for your kid's exorbitantly costly college and btw they need 100's to 1000's of EC's while they are growing up, this is not an extra but a need. Us SAHM's need curated outfits picked out by stylists. There is backlash against photoshopping but a growing amount of every day people use photo filters that accomplish much of the same thing, driving the cosmetics industry so we can all meet this standard that isn't even real. We seem to be stuck in this rat race and you can't question whether or not all these changes are a positive or just an example of really good marketing creating needs that were never present before.

Edited November 30, 2017 by soror

[Twolittleboys]

No, I don't think it is unethical or immoral at all (though can easily be tacky). Let's say someone has loads of money (either through hard work or just because) - what are they going to do with it? Yes, from a Christian perspective we should share generously, ideally to the point where we are no longer rich/wealthy but let's face it - very few of us are willing to do that. We are far, far from wealthy but we could give a lot more money away than we do if we were willing to give up buying treats, going on vacations, saving up, etc. And if you look at Jesus' teachings we probably should but ... So it seems unrealistic to expect the rich to do so (which is not to say that they should not share generously). 

 

If the rich won't give up their money, they can either just sit on it or spend it. And honestly it is probably better for the economy /others if they do the second. Let's say we have two rich people - one lives modestly and just keeps the money in the bank. The other goes on expensive vacations, hires a large staff, buys several houses, etc. Clearly, more people benefit from the second scenario directly (I do realize the bank would invest the money etc. and that might also be a benefit but it is harder to pin down):

 

 

Edited to add: I am not trying to say that conspicuous consumption is better than the alternative nor that it can not be immoral or unethical. But I don't think it has to be either of those. Also it may not be advisable/can lead to negative consequences but that is not necessarily the same as saying it is wrong. For me, consumption crosses a line when it becomes wasteful/tacky but of course that line is in the eye of the beholder.

Edited November 30, 2017 by Twolittleboys

[DawnM]

No, I don't think it is unethical or immoral at all (though can easily be tacky). Let's say someone has loads of money (either through hard work or just because) - what are they going to do with it? Yes, from a Christian perspective we should share generously, ideally to the point where we are no longer rich/wealthy but let's face it - very few of us are willing to do that. We are far, far from wealthy but we could give a lot more money away than we do if we were willing to give up buying treats, going on vacations, saving up, etc. And if you look at Jesus' teachings we probably should but ... So it seems unrealistic to expect the rich to do so (which is not to say that they should not share generously). 

 

If the rich won't give up their money, they can either just sit on it or spend it. And honestly it is probably better for the economy /others if they do the second. Let's say we have two rich people - one lives modestly and just keeps the money in the bank. The other goes on expensive vacations, hires a large staff, buys several houses, etc. Clearly, more people benefit from the second scenario directly (I do realize the bank would invest the money etc. and that might also be a benefit but it is harder to pin down):

 

 

Edited to add: I am not trying to say that conspicuous consumption is better than the alternative nor that it can not be immoral or unethical. But I don't think it has to be either of those. Also it may not be advisable/can lead to negative consequences but that is not necessarily the same as saying it is wrong. For me, consumption crosses a line when it becomes wasteful/tacky but of course that line is in the eye of the beholder.

 

 

I think that *can* be a misconception though.   I can work VERY hard at being a bus driver, but I can't make as much as someone who is naturally gifted at good looks and acting and makes millions off their latest movie deal.

 

As Christians, we have to realize we all have different gifts and abilities, given by the Lord, and we are to use those talents for the Lord.

 

I have more I could add, but I really need to get to work.

[Soror]

I think that *can* be a misconception though.   I can work VERY hard at being a bus driver, but I can't make as much as someone who is naturally gifted at good looks and acting and makes millions off their latest movie deal.

 

As Christians, we have to realize we all have different gifts and abilities, given by the Lord, and we are to use those talents for the Lord.

 

I have more I could add, but I really need to get to work.

A lot of people work hard, very few are "rich." 

 

Many of us have various advantages by virtue of being born in the US, having white parents, etc. etc.

[elegantlion]

I think it can be tacky and unethical, but it's not just being wealthy and conspicuous, there is a lot of intent involved - which we can often not really know. As for Christians, my area is still fraught with people and prosperity gospel teaching, it's waning, but it's there. 

 

Think of someone who builds a house, extravagant or not? What if they want to build it entirely green? It's going to cost more money, especially in my part of the country where "green" products are still very expensive. So are they being conspicuous and ethical? 

 

I think there is so much grey and our personal experiences and beliefs color in the boundaries. I grew up middle class and have lived poor and middle class as an adult - there were times my consumption was conspicuous and probably for the wrong reasons. My spending probably never reached what truly wealthy (however you define that) people have, but I bought more stuff - like those 10 jackets instead of one North Face one. So who is unethical in that situation? Probably me with my abundance of stuff and not the person who planned, brought quality, and spent more up front. 

 

I can think of one person in my life who now has a wealthy girlfriend. She bought him a giant Suburban - paid for - and he's bragging about it. This is someone who has more cars repossessed than he has ever finished paying for. I find that tacky, not because it's a new car, but because he still owes lots of people money, lives on disability for his own income, and really has no need for a giant SUV - he's not working or hauling a great number of people. The Prius that someone GAVE him when he was in dire straits was not good enough. I also find that situation unethical - but he would never admit it or see it. 

 

Someone who has a large family and a decent job may drive the same Suburban and it's not unethical or tacky because their lifestyle requires a larger vehicle and they can afford it. 

 

I do think as the consumeristic culture of the 80s and 90s dies, then we have a responsibility to be more intentional about our spending and consuming. What that looks like for everyone can be vastly different. 

[8circles]

Well, we're in agreement there - I do think a correction is coming soon, and that it will be as violent an upheaval as our centralization and dependency and consumption have been extravagant (that is to say, very violent).    I suppose I could be convinced to see it in moral terms - certainly I see what you might call equivalent extravagant and destabilizing social behavior in moral terms, and I don't think it's inextricable from economic extravagance (a la The Downside of Liberty http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/opinion/the-downside-of-liberty.html).

 

I guess I see people's personal involvement in over-consumption in much the same way I see their participation in what I believe are destabilising/immoral social practices: their intentions are usually not bad, just naturally selfish, and ascribing them intentions beyond selfishness (which we all have, imo) is pointless.  Most people aren't made to think critically and examine and change their behavior; they're meant to follow along with social norms - it's just that occasionally, social norms get out of whack for a while until there is a correction back to (what I view as) conservative social and economic values.  (note that when I say conservative I am not talking about the political term).

 

I think of the question you (I think it was you) asked about the Hunger Games, why was it immoral, because it was in front of people who were starving? I don't know that that is the right question. I don't think it helps anyone/anything to draw a line when morality ends and immorality begins. I actually don't think it's possible. It's nebulous.

 

My thoughts are unorganized here so I'll just put them out there, in no particular order.

 

I think it's about maintaining awareness (either real or perceived) about the reality of one's wealth, both in your world and the world as a whole.

 

I don't think there's anything I can personally do (beyond charitable giving, voting for people that work to improve the situation of those less fortunate). But I can slow down the acceleration of the gap by making choices that are more modest (gosh, I hate that word but I'm getting the kids off to school and in a rush). I understand how this affects our capitalist society but I don't think that bolstering that is helpful in the big picture so I don't feel any guilt about it. Capitalism is not the best we can do.

 

I have lived as very poor and also as very wealthy. I am unable to accept that as a wealthy person it was/is my role to spend way more than necessary just because I can, enjoying it as if I hadn't a care in the world, just to keep the economy moving. I'm too haunted by the reality of the differences to do that. 

 

None of this is making a virtue of deprivation. I was raised by a very strict Calvinist - I know what that's like.

[JumpyTheFrog]

To me, the questions that would need answering are many.

 What natural limits are there on our consumption ?

 

Are there consequences to our consumption for others, now or in the future ? Are those consequences good, bad or indifferent ?

 

 

Money on hand used to be a natural limit. Now people borrow, borrow, borrow, often to enhance lifestyle rather than to scrape by.

 

As for future consequences, look at all the threads where people talk about parents in retirement who are running out of money and want a handout from their kids because they chose to spend, spend, spend over the years rather than invest for old age.

 

 

There are those in some circles that think this kind of martyrdom stems from humility but I don't think so. True humility is something else.

Martyrdom and material deprivation so often lead people to spiritual pride, a sin probably worse than conspicuos consumption.

[SKL]

I always thought Christianity was pretty direct about opposing conspicuous wealth, at least, if not also consumption: It's easier for a camel to go through a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, etc.

 

But being rich and consuming conspicuously are not the same thing at all.  Some people actually got rich by conspicuously NOT spending, and others get poor by conspicuously spending. 

 

The Bible isn't big on miserly behavior either.  The Gospel contains a fair amount of "live for today."

[ktgrok]

Consumption intended to flaunt one’s wealth is tacky, but I’m not sure it’s immoral.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

I'd also say that buying things just to have things and show them off is possibly immoral, where as buying things because you enjoy/use/find pleasure in that thing, probably isn't. 

 

So a really nice toilet with heated seats and what not, I'd not think an immoral waste of money.

 

A gold plated toilet seat that you have no intention to ever use but want to be able to say you own, just to brag about, probably some not quite moral stuff going on there. 

 

Fun to drive car, or super safe, or just a car you've always wanted that happens to be very expensive, ok. Car that you are buying ONLY because it is the most expensive and you want that status? Probably not ok. 

 

But I don't go around worrying about it. 

[SKL]

Wasn't there a study comparing disposable and cloth diapers ? I think cloth came out in front in terms of waste, but only just, surprisingly.

 

I think the study was biased and assumed a lot more loads of wash than is actually realistic for most people.  :)  It also ignored the fact that on average, babies in cloth are out of diapers all together a lot sooner.

 

That said, I notice few people complaining about single-use baby wipes (or toilet paper for that matter).  When I was helping raise my younger siblings, baby wipes were not a thing - you used cloth rags, for poop only, and nobody died.  :p  Not that I have anything against consumable wiping products, but it just seems funny how we pick on some products and not others.

Edited November 30, 2017 by SKL

[SKL]

Yes. I know wealthy people who if anything seem a little embarrassed by their wealth or ashamed of it. Or like they have to justify it somehow. These are really kind decent in no way showy.

 

So I keep wondering, why is this a thing - that (a) people feel ashamed of wealth and (b) that others consider that a virtue?

[SKL]

I think that *can* be a misconception though.   I can work VERY hard at being a bus driver, but I can't make as much as someone who is naturally gifted at good looks and acting and makes millions off their latest movie deal.

 

As Christians, we have to realize we all have different gifts and abilities, given by the Lord, and we are to use those talents for the Lord.

 

I have more I could add, but I really need to get to work.

 

And this is largely because people of all income levels use their money to support certain professions over others.  At some level this is them supporting immorality, but who is responsible for that?  Not sure what the answer is.

[hornblower]

I've always been surprised by the many Christians who can talk endlessly about modesty as a virtue when talking about a woman's dress and behavior, but seem completely blind to the concept of living a modest lifestyle in terms of financials. 
 

In Canada, many old school anglophone wealthy people are remarkably hidden in plain sight. Like they'll show up looking just sort of put together in an old Prius and be introduced as Jane. Someone will tell you Jane is an accountant and someone else will mention she helped with that big fundraiser for the ( insert charitable group which does excellent work & has superb scores on actually giving money and aid to its cause) foundation last year.  Eventually you'll find out Jane is SO so so so so so rich that she & her family make the national top wealthiest lists. Oh, that's Jane?  

On the other hand, there is a group of incredibly wealthy Chinese immigrants who DO like to flaunt wealth. They really do. I've read numerous articles and interviews in which they just say that their belief is that it's good to be proud of wealth and their possessions. Here's an example of some of that conspicuous consumption: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/13/world/americas/canada-vancouver-chinese-immigrant-wealth.html

So, there are some interesting race/culture/class frictions with this too.... 

 

[EmseB]

I was thinking about this and came up with an example that illustrates my thoughts.

 

Over 10 years ago, DH and I got an amazing opportunity to take a transatlantic cruise for very little $$. So I wanted to go on a cruise message board to find out the ins and outs, tips and tricks, etc. So I'm reading through the different boards and for the different cruise lines and come across one of the more high-brow ones.  The more expensive the cruise line, the more ridiculous they get about catering to people's requests, and the clientele is markedly different on each board between say Carnival (considered a "budget" line) and the more expensive ones. On one of the super expensive cruise line boards I saw a post where a man bragged about requesting a suckling pig for dinner while they were on board just to see if the cruise line would deliver. And the cruise line accommodated him!! To me, even thinking about it now, I just am so grossed out by this.  The whole thing from the staff rushing around to fly or deliver a suckling pig on board, to this man not really wanting it, but just wanting to be able to have it done for him...just everything about it makes me feel so awful.

 

BUT! Three months later I went on my own cruise and everything about it, IMO, was so indulgent and lavish. The waitstaff all worked so hard to please us. There was so much food and entertainment...ridiculous!

 

So, me being grossed out by the pig...well, I went and enjoyed myself in the same way, to a lesser degree, that would probably gross other people out. And part of me justifies it by saying, "Well, I'm not as bad as suckling pig guy. At least I am thankful for this. At least I'm not putting the staff through the wringer like him. At least I'm not that bad." And I think in the 1st world it's all like that to a degree.

 

The problem with declaring conspicuous consumption immoral is that it's totally subjective. My threshold is different from everyone else's.  So what do we do? I think largely it means minding our own business and doing what we know to be the right thing based on our own values. Most of the people I meet who declare certain levels of consumption immoral are unwilling to lower their own standard of living because they find it to be within the bounds of their own morality.  Everyone does! It's just human nature.

 

Also, decadence itself, to me is inherently immoral.  It means decay or falling off...basically having so much luxury that we can't care any more. Unrestrained or excessive self-indulgence.  Some people would see me taking a cruise as decadence. I find it hard to disagree on the face of it, but also think that one vacation like that in 10 years for which I'm extremely grateful might not be in that category because of my circumstances/attitude. IOW, I can justify it as not decadent based on circumstances and attitude. And maybe just the existence of cruise lines that operate the way are a decadence.  It's hard to define in the 1st world in light of the extreme poverty that most of the world lives in.

 

Anyway, not to focus too much on one specific example, but I think it illustrates my thoughts on the whole thing.

[Lady Florida.]

Well air conditioning is a survival thing where I live. People literally die of heat and heat related illnesses. Prior to air con babies died during heat waves. Heating is less essential.

 

Here too. You'd also have a hard time finding a car that doesn't have air conditioning here.

[creekland]

I think it's ok to consume things you can afford, no matter what your income level.

 

I don't think it's ok to consume and brag about it. If you are doing YouTube videos of yourself trashing items rather than using (pouring bottles of champagne on watches) then that is a problem. If your family has a special celebration and serves good champagne at the party, then I don't see any reason to object.

 

I have friends with very high incomes. They don't find a way to show off new things or activities. It's just how they live. It doesn't bother me when I see they have a new car. They use their stuff. They don't buy a new car and purposely trash it even though they can.

 

I don't think a brand is necessarily a mark of consumption. If it's a good quality and gets used I'm not sure what the argument is.

 

:iagree:

 

From a Christian perspective, let's remember that Christ turned water to wine for a celebration.  Perhaps he should have changed it into sandwiches for people not invited to the wedding?  What was he doing here?  I think it's fair to say that happiness and celebration are meant to be parts of our earthly life.  There is a zone between deprivation and overindulgence and where we fall in that zone becomes a personal conscience decision.  

 

We can also remember that Job was a man pleasing to God.  And that Paul had no problem going to Lydia's house - no condemnation of her whatsoever even if she dealt with purple cloth (folks can do their own googling if that doesn't make sense).

 

Personally and from my own faith (Christian), the verse I'm going to go with is "Judge Not..."  It's not my job*.  When folks spend money on things I wouldn't I remind myself to be thankful that they are keeping that section of the economy going.

 

* I make an exception for those who pour expensive bottles of wine on high dollar watches while saying they're doing it just because they can, but it essentially takes that much of an extreme for me to judge others and I may still be sinning by doing so (judging - personally I think I'd also be sinning by doing that sort of wastefulness, but God gets to judge in my faith).

[Arcadia]

Ugg boots was a new one to me. I'm not going to quit wearing ugg boots because I do it for practical reasons but I might be slightly more hesitant to share if someone asked about my Mother's Day gift.

Pet ownership is costly but pets are so common that I don’t think anyone is going to judge unless the person is bragging about how much he/she is spending on pet shampoo, food, grooming services ... (it’s the tone of voice when talking not the amount stated)

My friend adopted three cats that were previously strays. She spend her own money feeding strays and bringing them to a shelter. She doesn’t go round bragging how much she spend.

 

UGG is UGG Australia after all. The allure in my home country is that it is imported goods and retail price is high so it became a status symbol. Seriously who needs UGG winter boots just one degree north of the equator :lol:

There was a fad here like six years ago where many moms were wearing UGG classic boots to children events from fall to spring. My husband was bored and counted the number of non-UGG boots at an event. I don’t know if it was a regional fad or state wide or there happened to be a big UGG warehouse sale.

My husband bought me the UGG Rosen boots during a sale together with a few other pair of boots (all different brands). I am really hard on my shoes soles and I need boots for ankle support so I need more than a pair per winter. The UGG boot has a retail price of $225 but we paid a sale price of $20.

I don’t know if your mother’s day gift is boots or something else. It’s a gift and even if it is a luxurious want, there is nothing wrong with answering in a factual way. I do tend to leave brands off though when answering general questions like what did you get for mother’s day. Close friends can ask for more info if they want to know. Like a coffee loving friend would probably want to know the exact model of my coffee maker.

[J-rap]

If "conspicuous consumption" specifically means showing off wealth to prove status, then I think the motivation is skewed.

 

Otherwise, I don't think there's a clear answer.  What we think is okay or even frugal someone else will think is decadent.  I think if there's going to be any judgment at all, it should be based on the heart/motivation.  (But even then, I think we have to be so very careful.  We really rarely know the heart of someone else, and all the things and experiences that led them to the point they're at.)  I also think that those who have more have a responsibility to give more.  

 

But, I don't think any of us should become complacent either.  I think it's good to constantly re-evaluate what we choose to put our time and money into, and think about how it affects our planet and those around us, not just now but for future generations.  And, as new discoveries are made about the world and its people and the resources we use, we may need to change how we do things.  We will never hit the "perfect" mark or even know what it is exactly (as far as being ethical world citizens), but we can always work toward getting better at it wherever we're at in life.

 

 

 

 

[Carol in Cal.]

The thing is, convos about this kind of thing tend to devolve into judgey vs. defensive.

 

As usual, there is a nuanced Christian view--values that need to be balanced include:

 

1.  Feeling and acting on compassion (to do so is probably the most Christ-like thing one could do)

2.  Enjoying what God has given us 

3.  Sharing with others in joy, including with the local and more distant church

4.  Caring for the poor, especially other Christians

5.  Trusting in God

6.  Being good stewards of natural resources 

7.  Paying people fairly and promptly

8.  Putting our focus elsewhere than materialism

9.  Remembering that what we have is really God's and managing it in that light

 

And in conclusion:

"17As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. 18They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, 19thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life."  I Tim. 6.

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2017 by Carol in Cal.

[Twolittleboys]

I think that *can* be a misconception though.   I can work VERY hard at being a bus driver, but I can't make as much as someone who is naturally gifted at good looks and acting and makes millions off their latest movie deal.

 

As Christians, we have to realize we all have different gifts and abilities, given by the Lord, and we are to use those talents for the Lord.

 

I have more I could add, but I really need to get to work.

 

Of course. I did not mean to imply that hard work always will lead to riches (or conversely that being not wealthy implies a lack of hard work). All I meant is that as far as consumption is concerned it to me doesn't make a difference how the wealth was acquired (i.e. it is no better or worse to spend money you have earned by working hard than money you inherited/married/won etc.).

[catz]

Pet ownership is costly but pets are so common that I don’t think anyone is going to judge unless the person is bragging about how much he/she is spending on pet shampoo, food, grooming services ... (it’s the tone of voice when talking not the amount stated)

My friend adopted three cats that were previously strays. She spend her own money feeding strays and bringing them to a shelter. She doesn’t go round bragging how much she spend.

 

UGG is UGG Australia after all. The allure in my home country is that it is imported goods and retail price is high so it became a status symbol. Seriously who needs UGG winter boots just one degree north of the equator :lol:

There was a fad here like six years ago where many moms were wearing UGG classic boots to children events from fall to spring. My husband was bored and counted the number of non-UGG boots at an event. I don’t know if it was a regional fad or state wide or there happened to be a big UGG warehouse sale.

My husband bought me the UGG Rosen boots during a sale together with a few other pair of boots (all different brands). I am really hard on my shoes soles and I need boots for ankle support so I need more than a pair per winter. The UGG boot has a retail price of $225 but we paid a sale price of $20.

I don’t know if your mother’s day gift is boots or something else. It’s a gift and even if it is a luxurious want, there is nothing wrong with answering in a factual way. I do tend to leave brands off though when answering general questions like what did you get for mother’s day. Close friends can ask for more info if they want to know. Like a coffee loving friend would probably want to know the exact model of my coffee maker.

 

I think this brings up a good point.  Often on these one off things, you really don't know the back story.  The person with 3 large fancy breed dogs may be fostering or have rescued and that's their passion.  The person with the Ugg boots may need really warm boots for sore feet and watch for sales.  Uggs are warm in a way like nothing else.  I'm always surprised seeing them on people in warmer areas.  We've never paid full price for a pair of Uggs and most of my winter coats are from thrift.  I LOVE older full long wool coats.  Cozy, great for layering, comfortable for driving without feeling like the stay puft marshmallow man.  Even fancy private colleges - no one pays sticker price.

 

I do not enjoy materialistic people.  If your favorite thing to talk about it is what other people are wearing or doing and make sure you're keeping up, we probably aren't going to be close friends.  I get that vibe from someone over time.  Not from judging what they're wearing on our first meeting. If you have nice things, but are kind and gracious, I have no issue with you.  Even if you make choices that I wouldn't make. 

 

Edited November 30, 2017 by WoolySocks

[Crimson Wife]

 there's no income inequality it wouldn't be immoral.

 

I don't consider income inequality per se to be a problem. What *IS* a problem is that poverty is too widespread. If everybody had their basic needs met, it wouldn't matter at all that some people have more. Not envying others is one of the Ten Commandments.

 

Wealth creation doesn't HAVE to come at the expense of others.

[fraidycat]

I think this brings up a good point. Often on these one off things, you really don't know the back story. The person with 3 large fancy breed dogs may be fostering or have rescued and that's their passion. The person with the Ugg boots may need really warm boots for sore feet and watch for sales. Uggs are warm in a way like nothing else. I'm always surprised seeing them on people in warmer areas. We've never paid full price for a pair of Uggs and most of my winter coats are from thrift. I LOVE older full long wool coats. Cozy, great for layering, comfortable for driving without feeling like the stay puft marshmallow man. Even fancy private colleges - no one pays sticker price.

 

I do not enjoy materialistic people. If your favorite thing to talk about it is what other people are wearing or doing and make sure you're keeping up, we probably aren't going to be close friends. I get that vibe from someone over time. Not from judging what they're wearing on our first meeting. If you have nice things, but are kind and gracious, I have no issue with you. Even if you make choices that I wouldn't make.

 

They are actually temperature regulating so can be comfortable in all kinds of weather. They originated and expanded through surfers and surf culture. They are originally *beach boots*, not ice and snow boots.

[catz]

They are actually temperature regulating so can be comfortable in all kinds of weather. They originated and expanded through surfers and surf culture. They are originally *beach boots*, not ice and snow boots.

 

Learn something every day!  I can't wear mine if it's about about 30 degrees or I get TOO hot.  But that's midwestern blood for you.  :lol:

 

[hornblower]

and IMO Uggs are unethical because they're fur

[nixpix5]

Like - Like - Like - at least this way I am not running out of "likes."

 

This is a good point. There are those in some circles that think this kind of martyrdom stems from humility but I don't think so. True humility is something else.

I agree completely with this.

[MysteryJen]

Living in a HCOL area and being surrounded by wealthy people (some really, really wealthy), I decided a few years ago to not worry about them. I needed to concentrate on my own tendency to judge and be envious of people who traveled and had beautiful things. It really helped me to be happier about my situation, concentrate on my own values and be grateful for all the things I do have. 

I know that sounds preachy, but I started to just be happy that there are beautiful things in this world and that rich people spending tons of money were part of bringing that to life. Art, houses, gardens, jewelry, fashion...more beauty in the world and jobs for the artists and craftspeople. I want artists and craftspeople to make a good living, because those people are valuable to our society.

 

I still struggle with a couple things. 1. bad drivers in expensive cars-that just pisses me off and 2. Fabulously weathly people with terrible, tacky taste- just makes me sad.

[ktgrok]

 On one of the super expensive cruise line boards I saw a post where a man bragged about requesting a suckling pig for dinner while they were on board just to see if the cruise line would deliver.

 

 

I think this gets back to the idea I had earlier, the line between wanting something just because it is expensive/flashy/wahtever versus wanting a thing because you actually would get pleasure out of it. 

 

That guy didn't want the pig, he wanted the power that his money gave him. Not to mention he was valuing that pig and the prestige more than the people who work there. Another bad thing.  

 

The more I think about it, the more I think i think it shouldn't be that the love of money is the root of all evil, but the love of power. 

[Liz CA]

I always thought Christianity was pretty direct about opposing conspicuous wealth, at least, if not also consumption: It's easier for a camel to go through a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, etc.

 

I think it just means that if you are wealthy you may perceive less need overall and less need for God's provision.

I don't interpret it as opposing wealth. Some Christian people of considerable means have been able to do a lot of good with their wealth.

[Carol in Cal.]

I think it just means that if you are wealthy you may perceive less need overall and less need for God's provision.

I don't interpret it as opposing wealth. Some Christian people of considerable means have been able to do a lot of good with their wealth.

Like Lydia.  And Elijah's friend who had the room built for him.  And Mary and Martha.

[Crimson Wife]

Driving a gas-guzzling vehicle when you don't need it for work/hauling/etc. I do think has a moral dimension that other types of conspicuous consumption doesn't. Each gallon of gas burned results in 24 lbs. of CO2. If you can afford a Lamborghini, you can afford a Tesla Roadster and the solar panels on your house to make charging it "green".

[amy g.]

I’m feeling an irresistible urge to wear my uggs grocery shopping today.

[Ottakee]

I remember hearing Dave Ramsey or someone else like him speaking in this once. His take was that if you can afford it...after your bills, giving, etc then go for it.

 

I tend to agree, if you can afford the higher level items and they add to your life (not just for show) then it is fine to spend your money on them.

 

I have a friend who has a much higher income level than me but she also gives very generously (likely she gives more a year than my yearly income)

[8circles]

I think it's interesting how some people are answering *for themselves* and other people are describing other people.

[maize]

Driving a gas-guzzling vehicle when you don't need it for work/hauling/etc. I do think has a moral dimension that other types of conspicuous consumption doesn't. Each gallon of gas burned results in 24 lbs. of CO2. If you can afford a Lamborghini, you can afford a Tesla Roadster and the solar panels on your house to make charging it "green".

Electric cars aren't actually very environmentally friendly or human friendly:

 

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101630187X

 

 

 

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green-think/

 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/01/child-labour-behind-smart-phone-and-electric-car-batteries/

[JumpyTheFrog]

I just finished a book called “Little Soldiers†where an American mother whose parents who immigrated from China moved to Shanghai and put her son in the local schools. While the book is mostly about their educational system, it was interesting to read about the obsession teachers had with luxury purses. Basically, they had no problem spending a month’s (low) salary on luxury goods. They also expected them as bribes from parents.

 

At one point a teacher found out the author’s husband was back visiting the US. She stopped teaching and called other teachers into the room, whereupon they demanded the author look up what was in stock at Nordstrom, etc. Then they all submitted their order to her, expecting her husband to get everything into China when he returned without having to pay customs on the goods. This was so they didn’t have to pay import taxes on yet another luxury purse or wallet.

[Bootsie]

I always thought Christianity was pretty direct about opposing conspicuous wealth, at least, if not also consumption: It's easier for a camel to go through a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, etc.

This scripture has been subject of much debate among theologians.  Having access to wealth brings challenges and responsibilities.  I don't think this scripture means that simply having wealth is immoral, unethical, or sinful.  Having wealth means that one may take certain things for granted and may not have to worry about some things.  But, it also brings other challenges.  I can't imagine, for example, the worry a wealthy person faces of whether their child will be kidnapped for ransom. 

[aggie96]

I don't think making a virtue of deprivation is healthy.

 

Completely agree.

[8circles]

Well, this is a topic I take very personally considering I live in the capital of indulgence and excess. It's really hard for me to live here and reconcile my beliefs. But I'm  stuck here and making the best of it. It's likely I'm oversensitive because I see overindulgence and waste all the time. There are loads of good people here, so I try to focus on that. It hurts my heart to drive downtown sometimes. Yet, I know this city wouldn't exist without conspicuous consumption. So there's that. 

 

I'm sorry, I didn't mean this to be a slam on anyone. I don't have a problem with your post. It was just an observation.

[creekland]

I can say I enjoyed our usual Taco (Salad) Thursday lunch today.  It's our usual because if we're home on Thursdays for lunch, we go.  It's tasty and we like the place we get it from.  It's definitely not a need (esp weekly), but the $$ we spend help keep the place in business and support 3 individuals who own it and their families.  It also helps keep us up on how they are doing and vice versa - along with anyone else we know who we meet while there.  It's "community" (something proven to statistically be better for lives BTW), but I'll admit, one certainly doesn't need to get that while spending money weekly.

 

My neighbor is a dog groomer.  She appreciates those who spend their money "frivolously" getting their dogs washed and groomed even though they could do it themselves.

 

I appreciate the fact that people still ride (and buy) English show ponies.  That's definitely a luxury not everyone can afford and no one really needs.  Some of these ponies fetch pretty high prices (long after they leave our farm!).

 

We get the oil changed on our car when needed rather than doing it ourselves now that we're not on a really tight budget.  That supports the folks with jobs doing it and their suppliers.  When hubby did it that supported the store he bought the filter and oil from.

 

We all make choices.  I like mine.  You choose yours.  En masse we keep a good number of folks employed, 'cause none of us could do it on our own - not even the most wealthy among us.

 

Or, I guess we could all turn into homesteaders growing/hunting our own food and creating our own clothing, shelter, and entertainment - but honestly?  I thought our species had evolved into something that worked better for pretty much everyone (while still allowing those who want to homestead that option).

[SKL]

I think it just means that if you are wealthy you may perceive less need overall and less need for God's provision.

I don't interpret it as opposing wealth. Some Christian people of considerable means have been able to do a lot of good with their wealth.

 

Yes, I think it is the concern that wealth is power and you can think "this is me doing all this" / "I don't need anyone" and really get off the track of submission / devotion to God.

 

I believe the next line though is "but with God, all things are possible" or something like that.

[Arcadia]

They are actually temperature regulating so can be comfortable in all kinds of weather.

  

Learn something every day!  I can't wear mine if it's about about 30 degrees or I get TOO hot.  But that's midwestern blood for you.  :lol:

 

My feet are cold in UGG high calf boots and I am in the library :p My feet can never agree with temperature ratings for boots regardless of brands. I grew up near the equator, it takes 100degF before I feel hot. Disposable foot warmers are my friend for below 50degF.

 

From UGG’s webpage https://www.ugg.com/about-sheepskin.html

“Wool fleece helps maintain body temperature, making UGG footwear appropriate for all climates. In fact, the wool will keep your feet warm down to -30 F and cool up to 80 Fâ€

[Crimson Wife]

Electric cars aren't actually very environmentally friendly or human friendly:

 

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101630187X

 

 

 

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green-think/

 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/01/child-labour-behind-smart-phone-and-electric-car-batteries/

 

You skipped the part where I said about getting solar panels to make the electricity used to charge the vehicle come from a "green" source rather than a carbon-producing one. 'Cuz, duh, if you plug your Tesla into a coal-powered grid, then it's not really better for the environment.

 

From the linked Wired article:

 

The Union of Concerned Scientists agrees; it found that even when you add in emissions from battery manufacturing, EVs generate half the emissions of a conventional car over the course of its life

[Arcadia]

Regarding China’s newly rich, this New Yorker article does explain some https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/22/chinas-rich-kids-head-west

 

“As in Russia, the sudden formation of a new oligarchy in China means that there are many super-rich people who are unfamiliar with the ways in which more entrenched aristocracies quietly protect their wealth. “No matter the culture or age, old money knows from long experience that it is far safer to be secluded and less seen,†Winters said. But new money, as Thorstein Veblen theorized, asserts itself through conspicuous consumption.

...

But, for affluent Chinese, the most basic reason to move abroad is that fortunes in China are precarious. The concerns go deeper than anxiety about the country’s slowing growth and turbulent stock market; it is very difficult to progress above a certain level in business without cultivating, and sometimes buying, the support of government officials, who are often ousted in anti-corruption sweeps instigated by rivals.

...

I remembered something Ray had told me: “The poorer your parents were when they were young, the more they want a better environment for their kids.†The desire to have a Western-educated child is spurred by considerations of prestige as much as by practicalities. Also relevant is Oei’s observation that his clients aren’t the richest or the best-connected people in China; they want their children to have access to the cultural and political capital that is unavailable to them. Underpinning the discussion of fuerdai in China is a national apprehension about the future élite of a country that is just coming of age.

...

The home buyer, typically the husband, lives and works in Asia, where cash can be made fast, while establishing his family members in Canada in order to move the money to a place of social and political stability. Yan has coined the term “hedge city†for places like Vancouver: they are a hedge against volatility at home.â€

[Ausmumof3]

Pet ownership is costly but pets are so common that I don’t think anyone is going to judge unless the person is bragging about how much he/she is spending on pet shampoo, food, grooming services ... (it’s the tone of voice when talking not the amount stated)

My friend adopted three cats that were previously strays. She spend her own money feeding strays and bringing them to a shelter. She doesn’t go round bragging how much she spend.

 

UGG is UGG Australia after all. The allure in my home country is that it is imported goods and retail price is high so it became a status symbol. Seriously who needs UGG winter boots just one degree north of the equator :lol:

There was a fad here like six years ago where many moms were wearing UGG classic boots to children events from fall to spring. My husband was bored and counted the number of non-UGG boots at an event. I don’t know if it was a regional fad or state wide or there happened to be a big UGG warehouse sale.

My husband bought me the UGG Rosen boots during a sale together with a few other pair of boots (all different brands). I am really hard on my shoes soles and I need boots for ankle support so I need more than a pair per winter. The UGG boot has a retail price of $225 but we paid a sale price of $20.

I don’t know if your mother’s day gift is boots or something else. It’s a gift and even if it is a luxurious want, there is nothing wrong with answering in a factual way. I do tend to leave brands off though when answering general questions like what did you get for mother’s day. Close friends can ask for more info if they want to know. Like a coffee loving friend would probably want to know the exact model of my coffee maker.

See referencing Ugg boots here wouldn't actually be referencing a specific brand because it's just the generic name we use for sheepskin boots. I think there's even an amusing court case over it. Basically saying Ugg can't trademark the name because it's ubiquitous.

[Arcadia]

See referencing Ugg boots here wouldn't actually be referencing a specific brand because it's just the generic name we use for sheepskin boots. I think there's even an amusing court case over it. Basically saying Ugg can't trademark the name because it's ubiquitous.

Kind of like the way the word Xerox was used to mean photocopy when I was a kid.

 

I think it’s like Doc Martens and Levi’s in Asia. Here in California it is just household brands but back home they are status symbols because the import tax make the retail price rather high.

 

My oldest does not like monogram bags where the brand is monogrammed all over. For example this Coach bag http://www.coach.com/coach-edie-shoulder-bag-31/57933.html to him is overdone while this Coach bag http://www.coach.com/coach-turnlock-edie-shoulder-bag/36855.html is okay.