It may be that the final figures will be tweaked a bit, but it is estimated that for Christmas 2018, shoppers in the United States spent roughly US$1 trillion, while those in the United Kingdom spent over £2 billion.
According to statistics published by Statista, Gallup and other similar data producers on consumer buying, over 400 million Christmas trees would have been purchased at a cost of some $2.2 billion; gifts, including electronics and toys, food and candy, personal care, health and beauty items, jewellery, home furnishings, sporting goods and decorations in that order would have used up the bulk of funds consumers set aside for the holidays. In addition, spenders would have used savings, credit cards and personal loans to complete their purchases.
The question that has been asked time and again is whether much of the spending is really necessary. The correct answer, of course, is no, but the issue has been and continues to be hotly debated. And while the final figures for 2018’s spending is projected to be much lower than 2017’s, the truth is that consumerism the world over is at an all-time high.
Private consumption, driven by the culture of see it right now, get it right now has peaked in the industrialised countries and the developing nations are quickly playing catch up. But this kind of rank consumerism is exploitative. What many do not seem to realise is that the quick thrill of owing the latest gadgets and brand name items comes at high cost that is paid for by more than money.
Numerous exposes have been done on manufacturers who keep their cost of production low by opening factories in underdeveloped countries. They do this because they are able to access cheap labour, and in the past, have even used child labour, though that practice is not as visible as it was before. Other ways in which they reduce production costs is through the dilution in the quality of raw materials and the cutting of corners. For instance, factories might have poor heating, cooling or ventilation, poor lighting and minimal toilet facilities. Workers, even though they are paid very little, also receive few if any benefits and breaks.
The manufacturer gets the best deal out of this. The workers lose and while the consumer may well pay less for the item, it is not guaranteed to be durable.
Unfortunately, the earth loses as well. The by-products of mass production cause massive environmental problems. Plastic, water and air pollution are all results of the above. Furthermore, large scale loss of the world’s ecosystems, which has been reported since during the 1970s and continues today is a direct consequence of the growth of shopping malls and industrial agriculture locations.
As a case in point: the largest shopping mall in the world is said to be the South China Mall in China, which is 7,100,000 square feet and has 2,350 stores, many offering the same items for sale. In the US, media, ranching and beef billionaire John Malone owns 2,100,000 acres of land, some of which is still forested today. And though he is noted for his philanthropy, Mr Malone’s fortune, estimated at US$7 billion by Forbes magazine, is just another indication of the disparities that still exist in the world. At the other end of the spectrum, as at the end of 2017, 2.8 billion people were still struggling to survive on US$2 a day.
People must consume to survive, but there needs to be balance in the way this is done, not just for the sake of humanity but for the well-being of the entire planet. Population growth is not slowing and the UN’s projection of 8.9 billion people occupying the earth by 2050 means that is now time to stop and take stock of what we are consuming and why and to slow down. If not, there will not be enough left for posterity.
