American business has long excelled at creating a sense of shortage amid abundance, an anxiety that one must act now or miss out.
...immense strains on the economy, which [have] made bargains more crucial than ever...For decades, Americans have been effectively programmed to shop...Financial institutions have scattered credit card offers as if they were takeout menus and turned our houses into A.T.M.’s.Hollywood and Madison Avenue have excelled at persuading us that the holiday season is a time to spend lavishly or risk being found insufficiently appreciative of our loved ones.
These are excerpts, and perhaps the full article is more nuanced than these make it appear (though I don't find it so). But is it really proper to lay the blame for that man's death at the feet of "American business," "strains on the economy," "financial institutions," or "Hollywood and Madison Avenue"?
The article draws parallels to the breadlines of the 1930s and the gas lines of the 1970s. Are these really analogues? At one point, reporter Peter Goodman does make a cursory reference to the fact that the bargains sought at that Long Island Wal-mart weren't exactly for essentials, but he does so by declaring that Chinese-made flat screen TVs have become our 21st century "comfort food."
This is deeply misguided. If Americans (uh, American consumers) are so enthralled by Madison Avenue's campaign of false scarcity, if they believe financial institutions have forced them into borrowing against their homes and catapulting their personal debt to 120% of their income, and if they best way they can think to address their economic anxiety is to buy a flat screen television at a discount then this "adjustment" is going to be far more painful than many economists imagine.
