Why do workers max out they money?

[punisa]

Michael Parenti mentioned in a speech (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVz8hVa07yY) that the reason why people have huge debts on their credit cards is not the fact that they are shopaholics, but the debt is accumulated once the worker is fired or disabled (due to health reasons). And then he/she starts using the plastic without thinking about tomorrow.

Would you agree with this? Personally I would not.
There are too many examples of common working people buying useless and stupid stuff and thus sinking into more debt.
I believe its a stress relief and a general adoption to the consumer system.
People consume and generally try to fit in thy system that surrounds them.

[milk]

Not really, it's a moral view of consumerism, which nobody can escape in our present society, and which ignores the fact that here in the UK at least, wages have been attacked for more than a quarter of a century, with people needing to rely on credit, and most personal credit has been spent on necessities, like paying off other bills, groceries etc. Not DVD players and massive televisions.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Why shouldn't workers be able to get all the things they want -- whether or not you personally think it's useless? After all, they created it all.

The increased extension of credit since the 70's has to do with capital's attempts to get itself out of crisis and keep going. Put the blame where it belongs.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

As someone who has a job and yet is far into debt, I would like to say it is beyond my control that I am this far into it. Once you start down that road, it's really hard to get back on track and be debt free. I'm trying to eat less these days to save money, because I found out the hard way trying to rationalize my insulin isn't a good idea, nor' does it save money. I wish I could get foodstamps.

I have no comment about spending money on pointless things. I like cheap stuff.

[ckaihatsu]

Ironically, while you start with a good critique of moralism here:





Not really, it's a moral view of consumerism, which nobody can escape in our present society, and which ignores the fact that here in the UK at least, wages have been attacked for more than a quarter of a century, with people needing to rely on credit,


You *end* with an argument that essentially *capitulates* to the political arena of moralism in its defense of the working class:





and most personal credit has been spent on necessities, like paying off other bills, groceries etc. Not DVD players and massive televisions.


This is a better approach, I think....





Why shouldn't workers be able to get all the things they want -- whether or not you personally think it's useless? After all, they created it all.

The increased extension of credit since the 70's has to do with capitals attempts to get itself out of crisis and keep going. Put the blame where it belongs.

[milk]

Ironically, while you start with a good critique of moralism here:





You *end* with an argument that essentially *capitulates* to the political arena of moralism in its defense of the working class:

Which is exactly what you did in endorsing the other one, which pretty much goes in a similar way as my above partial explanation of capitalism forcing down wages. And it wasn't a critique of moralism; it depends on the subjectivity, so I don't take the liberal vicar view of the reasons people get into debt it, no, quite right.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The burning contradiction here is that capital needs workers to produce for as little as possible, but also needs to sell the things that are produced. That's where your investigation should be directed.. not toward the choice of items that some workers purchase.

[ckaihatsu]

Which is exactly what you did in endorsing the other one, which pretty much goes in a similar way as my above partial explanation of capitalism forcing down wages. And it wasn't a critique of moralism; it depends on the subjectivity, so I don't take the liberal vicar view of the reasons people get into debt it, no, quite right.


I respectfully continue to maintain that your position is slightly different from a strictly materialist stance, as with the one NHIA provided.

I think the tricky part is that consumerism / consumption is distinct from the process of *labor* and the politics around it -- consumer issues tend to become moralized more easily since there really *isn't* any politics inherent to individualistic consumption / consumerism. Those who have relatively more material privilege and consumer options will tend to play social games regarding patterns of consumption, using moralistic reasoning.

From the worker's / workers' point of view consumption from one's own wages is merely a formality -- more to the point is that the wages received represent only a *fraction* of the market value that one's work was sold for, so purchases are just about trying to recoup some use value after continually being robbed through working, as NHIA mentions.

[milk]

I respectfully continue to maintain that your position is slightly different from a strictly materialist stance, as with the one NHIA provided.

I think the tricky part is that consumerism / consumption is distinct from the process of *labor* and the politics around it -- consumer issues tend to become moralized more easily since there really *isn't* any politics inherent to individualistic consumption / consumerism. Those who have relatively more material privilege and consumer options will tend to play social games regarding patterns of consumption, using moralistic reasoning.

From the worker's / workers' point of view consumption from one's own wages is merely a formality -- more to the point is that the wages received represent only a *fraction* of the market value that one's work was sold for, so purchases are just about trying to recoup some use value after continually being robbed through working, as NHIA mentions.

With a morally-charged word such as blame.

I wasn't on about whether or not you should buy Fairy washing up liquid or Ecover. And most workers, I'd wager, don't view their consumerism in a "strictly materialist" way. Unless you can find evidence of that? Instead of describing what happens from your materialist point of view, which I knew already. Your whole posting here has been based on the assumption that I offered a "critique" of moralism, when I never did. I was pointing out it was others who moralise about the reasons people get into debt, i.e. they spend their money or borrow money to purchase superfluous items, which hasn't been the case mostly.

[bcbm]

because living in poverty sucks

[Fawkes]

Working class people max out their credit and get way into debt because they have no choice but to purchase things they do not have the money for. What else are you gonna do when you can't pay to fix your broken transmission with your debit card/cash?

As far as consumerism and "pointless" purchases -- which it would seem constitute a minority of debt-causing purchases -- (also, referring to those purchases as such is kinda condescending, not gonna lie), people work for horrible wages doing things they hate making the very products they will later buy. The money spent on those products goes into the pockets of their bosses. People are not content with their shitty lives, so they attempt to find a way to improve them. The nature of advertisement is such that it instills a feeling of inadequacy in the consumer base and capitalizes on the existing disempowered feelings of the working class. That inadequacy can only be rectified through the purchasing of said product, whether it is a dermatologist's ad saying "You Can Have Beautiful Skin" (implying that you don't and that having "beautiful" skin will improve your quality of life. Anyone living in NYC will be more than familiar with the Dr. Zizmor ads all over the subway that say exactly this) to a Hollister ad of a guy wearing some stupid jeans with a naked girl next to him (having a good sex/love life improves your overall quality of life. These ads imply that that is made possible through purchasing these pants). So people spend money they often don't have on these things in hope of attaining that better life that is perpetually deferred.

This isn't to say people should not purchase these things they themselves made, it's just a way of showing how capitalists utilize credit and advertising as one way to allow this system to perpetuate itself.

But again, based off my own observations, consumerism does not seem to be the main cause of debt.

[punisa]

But again, based off my own observations, consumerism does not seem to be the main cause of debt.

Many interesting points worth agreeing with have been said here, including this one.
But still I think that consumerism as the dominating system has something to do with large individual debt.
Ok maybe it's a bit different in the US, I don't know.

But I see many people owning cars (or even two cars) when they could easily use the well organized public transport.
Once I asked a person why did he buy a car (on debt), he told me that "only the poor people ride buses".
Doesn't this have something to do with the general perception of a consumerist society?
You are degrading your social status if your colleagues go to work in a car and you arrive by a bus, no? Well, depends where I guess.
That's just my personal observation.

[bcbm]

the people who sell crap help create social incentives for people to buy crap, i don't think that's controversial?

[scourge007]

I just recently quit my landscaping job because of my asshole of a boss. Never even paid me what I earned at all. I have no credit cards , but I'm also not going to spend my money like crazy either.

[Fawkes]

Many interesting points worth agreeing with have been said here, including this one.
But still I think that consumerism as the dominating system has something to do with large individual debt.
Ok maybe it's a bit different in the US, I don't know.

But I see many people owning cars (or even two cars) when they could easily use the well organized public transport.
Once I asked a person why did he buy a car (on debt), he told me that "only the poor people ride buses".
Doesn't this have something to do with the general perception of a consumerist society?
You are degrading your social status if your colleagues go to work in a car and you arrive by a bus, no? Well, depends where I guess.
That's just my personal observation.

Okay, perhaps it could be the primary cause of debt, but based off my own observations (my family going into debt to cover my mom's cancer treatments, my friend's family going into debt to try to support their small bakery, multiple friends of mine going into debt through the taking out of student loans) it appears things purchased that were much more of a necessity than a "needless" purchase are the causes of major debt. But even if the opposite is true, it doesn't change the role debt plays in the perpetuation of capitalism.