Down is Up, Up is Down

Well said. Being a journalist myself, I am all too often frustrated by what most of the media leaves out -- (un)intentionally distorting the facts. They told us this was the worst Xmas season in 30 years, but didn't tell us how much worse, or by how much.

It wouldn't take but a few more words to have given us the typical % holiday sales increase, so we could draw our own conclusion.

And precious little attention was given to what could be one of the biggest reasons for the low rate of growth -- "more crap" as you put it.

Just look at the technology out there. I think people would be buying much more if there were more useful, quality products available, instead of "cheap crap" whose sole redeeming value is its low-ball price.

As for your praise of the WSJ, I have recently been confounded by the realization that CNBC has some of the most fair and in-depth financial coverage, what with the history of NBC News and fakery. That confusion was cleared up when I finally noticed the tagline -- "a service of NBC and the Dow Jones" (parent of the WSJ).

Lies, damned lies and statistics. I was having this conversation with a group of friends recently. How does a percentage point or more increase count as "the worst holiday shopping season in 32 years?" I'm reminded of a dialog from a great movie, Home for the Holidays, in which two characters liken all this crap we buy to human cholesterol clogging our societal systems.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that we head out with merely the shirts on our backs and form communes. God knows I love my toys and gadgets. But what I am referring to is the kind of pressure, innate to our media, that we must all buy, buy, buy if we're going to be "true Americans."

Puhlease.

Exactly right on, Todd...

It's the same thing I see happen all the time in the stock market, i.e. a company produces record sales, up 7% from last year and the stock tanks because the Street expected 7.5% growth...

A myopic vision of the world that is unrealistic and, in the end, a demoralizing view of life.

You said it--mindless consumerism and gluttony is reaching new highs (lows). We got into arguments in our tight little extended family this year because of all the excessive presents and gifts for the kids; it's gotten out of hand! We're cleaning out and dialing back, even as we are doing better financially now. My kids are 2 yrs and 1 month old--how many toys do they need? When they get older, I'll probably do a few lego sets (which from my own memory has a few 'planned obsolescence' problems of it's own =). Fewer, but better quality toys for us and the kids. Simplicity = sanity | Less = more!

well said, todd... also, thanks for the link to the Ben Stein article. I thoroughly enjoyed your and his commentary.

How odd -- my latest post is saying much the same thing. Now let's hope more of America (and the world) comes to the same realizations we all have here. We're following a dangerous trend.

I've sold off more"stuff" this year than ever before. I'm sick of it. Good article, thanks! It's nice to see that sort of topic in the traditional press (rather than Adbusters).

Oh and your AirStream trailer is on sale for $35 at Pottery Barn (from that xmas list weeks back)

Yep, yep, yep. And yet all you here in this country is grumbling about high taxes, etc., as we drive our SUVs on crumbling infrastructure. Sad, pathetic, and unlikely to change with the media sucking on the tit of big-budget corporate advertisers. (Not to mention the Republicrats in charge of ensuring the whiny American public that nothing will ever change. We Promise.)

Actually, if you read to the end of the article, you'll see that the author finally admits that real-money spending did decline: Corrected for inflation, then, holiday spending declined somewhere between 0.5 percent and 1 percent.

I would like to know how much of that increase in spending is on credit cards. I'd guess that the majority of this country is *swimming* in credit card debt. There has to be a correction at some point. I have heard but I can't remember where that the very best thing we could do for the economy is pay down our debts and save more. I say we all need to worry about our own *personal* economy.

While it's easy enough to boohoo consumerism and the expectations by economists that Americans must spend, spend, spend! ... Unforutnately in a lot of ways, they're right. That sales were only up about 1.5% over last year's holiday season is a terrifying statistic, especially when you consider how retailers pulled out all stops to bring in revenue. This includes extremely deep discounting and a lack of pricing power that hasn't been seen in a few decades. Don't be surprised if more than a few retailers post lackluster profits, if not losses, due to lack of consumer optimism. As someone else pointed out, adjusted for inflation, that 1.5% increase easily becomes a decline when placed next to last year's numbers.

So why is this all bad? Why are economists decrying the 'worst holiday season in decades'? Well, with consumers contributing about 2/3 of our nation's GDP, slowing consumer spending means slower growth, or possibly a recession. With business spending anemic at best, most economists are counting on the consumer to spur growth. Otherwise the whole system falls apart.

We've already been through one recession in the past two years, which was due primarily to the quick halt in business spending. A halt in consumer spending could draw another. And like that slowdown in 2001, a double-dip would result in further job and salary cuts ... Which would, in the end hurt the consumer.

Lissen, I'm no advocate of today's consumerist lifestyle, and no proponent of the need to post double-digit retail revenue growth every year. However, with a lagging economy, it's important to realize why it's still moving along at all -- and that's the consumer.

I totally agree Todd. I loved that Ben Stein article as well and I think your post is in agreement with it.

I find the technology slump to be the least surprising since consumers know they have adequate hardware, so why shell out for sub-par innovation? Well, they didn't. I find it funny that since companies don't beat their profits from the previous fiscal year, it is a failure because their stockholders will abandon ship. Microsoft of all companies is the only big tech company I know of that admits 2002 was a good year.

Media coverage is a big part of the problem. The Powerball example is perfect. People obsess over unrealistic fantasies (think People magazine) which drives not only the economy but the film industry, etc.

I think the recent McDonald's announcement is a perfect example of the problems we are going to have down the road. The company posted its first quarterly loss in its 43 year history of being a public company. I don't know much about the business world, but I knew what the explanation was going to be before it was said - SATURATION. Our economy seems to be based on growth more than profit. This is why the "global economy" is so important. My feeling is that it is only postponing the inevitable. Eventually everything thing with be globally saturated. It's awful selfish of us not to care because it will not be in our lifetime.

Unrelated but I hope you have wonderful new year!

He wants to help awaken desensitized shoppers, he says, because "they are underestimating the complexity and beauty of life." And besides, "they are definitely underestimating the impact of shopping."

Interesting article on this topic in the NY Times.

Loved this article. Found a link to it (I don't know where) and had never seen your site before. I thought about writing such an article myself, but you did a better job than I could have/would have. Thanks. Like your site!

Regarding Arianna Huffington's diatribe about the "inappropriate use of apostrophes"... She is all wrong. An apostrophe is used when forming the plural of a number (1950's) -- even letter groupings such as ABC's. If you don't believe me, consult McGraw-Hill's "Handbookof English." She seems to think that an apostrophe is only for indicating the possessive.