The current hostile corporate takeover in the USA and the clear loss of political power of the common people, I started wondering what happened if people used consumption as their leverage. Since the system is designed for continuous growth, what would happen if a mass movement of people stopping buying new non-essential consumer goods?
It would send a much stronger message than angry public protests. Thoughts?
Edit 1: Received some fantastic responses one of these highlighted February 28th as the “National No Spend Day” that we can consider the rehearsal.
*Do not make any purchases Do not shop online, or in-store, No Amazon, No Walmart, No Best Buy, Nowhere!
Do not spend money on: Fast Food,Gas,Major Retailers Do not use Credit or Debit Cards for non essential spending
WHAT YOU CAN DO: Only buy essentials of absolutely necessary (Food, Medicine, Emergency Supplies) If you must spend, ONLY support small, local businesses.*
This movement is the definition of equitable, not spending means everybody can contribute within their means, and if you can’t afford to buy shit anyway, you’re already doing your part!
I’m sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but any publicly traded company no longer needs to post a profit. Boomers are retiring and 401ks ensure that these companies will make money purely from “value potential”. Maybe in 20 or so years as the demographics change this will be different, but this is how I see it going down today.
If all of America collectively decided not to purchase from publicly traded companies, and instead only bought from small local companies for just one month. I doubt it would even register on a YTD stock price chart. It would need to be a true philosophical change in how we consume products, and it would have to last for longer than a month to be effective. On top of that, only privileged households will realistically be able to “choose” not to buy consumer goods.
I think we should all buy less and be more mindful of where our money goes. I think we should buy locally and promote businesses that you agree with on levels beyond the value of the good or services they offer as often as possible. However, I don’t think we can effectively protest this way unless it was a true lifestyle change for a large portion of the country.
I’d disagree, we saw it with COVID how vulnerable corporations are. They’ll always focus on stock buybacks and stuff like that over recession-proofing. Also, this is quite an equitable movement. Those who can’t afford new shit are already contributing to it.
Firstly, the covid pandemic was a multi year event. Secondly, publicly traded companies were enriched greatly from that time. Also it wasn’t conscious degrowth or a lack of ability, it was supply chain issues that caused products not to be available for purchase.
The initial shocks happened in the first 3 months.
Yup, that’s why the control here is in the consumers’ hand and again, it’s sort of like reducing your consumption so it starts hitting the metrics enough for corporations to realize the risks.
I agree. Inventory isn’t going to change much, just delay it a little, if that.
Peter Zeihan expects the opposite as Boomers sell their stock to fund lifestyle.
Could be both. First up, then down.
Edit to fix name.
I haven’t read this take yet, and I’m not an economist.
My point is that right now, boomers are doing everything they can to invest, so its a self fulfilling prophecy of ETFs and investment funds. Where everyone is buying in because the stocks are preforming well and the stocks are performing well because everyone that plans to retire is buying in.
However once boomers start to either sell their assets or die off, there will be a sudden surplus of stock and other assets in a pretty small window. And i doubt it will be a boon for the economy or the stock market.