Argumentative Essay On Buy Nothing Day

Andrew Leonard's "Black Friday: Consumerism Minus Civilization" argues that the Black Friday shopping spree has begun to get out of hand in the previous years. Leonard explains that consumerism is a great thing for America, but showing Americans that it is okay to go crazy when shopping for deals is not the way to approach the buying markets. He mentions a Target advertisement and states that, "The Crazy Target Lady is not a joke. Watch her cannibalize her gingerbread man, or strategize her reverse psychology shopping techniques... she is America. She might be a lunatic, but it's a culturally approved lunacy" (Leonard 166). The author emphasizes how Americans embrace the acts of the target lady as funny and amusing, but during Black Friday shopping, some shoppers will take the night to the extreme like the advertisement does. He does remind us that there is light at the end of the tunnel, by reporting how shoppers are seeing the problems with the night of crazy shopping. I agree with Leonard that there are problems with Black Friday ads, and that consumers are realizing Black Friday shopping is taking away from Thanksgiving.

Before discussing the pros of a Buy Nothing Day, we must understand the reason why it can be beneficial. Consumerism, the purchase of goods or services, is typically seen as a fantastic way to boost the economy but everything has a limit. Excessive consumerism, or the act of buying too many goods and services, can become a major issue for any economic system. For instance, in the 1920’s there was a huge economic boom which created a consumer revolution. Eventually, this led to The Great Depression that left many Americans struggling

Judith Levine wrote the book “Not Buying It’’.It is a nonfiction book about Judith Levine,along with her friend Paul,to go 12 months(1 year)without shopping . Levine researched consumerism and anti-consumerist movements.Judith Levine was led to write “Not Buying It’; because she thought it was “the confession of a woman any reader can identify with.Someone who can’t live without French roast coffee or SmartWool socks,but someone who has reached their limit with our consumption,and its effects on the earth and everyone who dwells here”.

In reading Anna Quindlen’s¬¬ 2008 op-ed, “Stuff Is Not Salvation”, she briefs the reader on the horrors of American consumerism. Her piece starts with a morbid detail of a Wal-Mart employee that was trampled to death during a Black Friday Sale. She goes on to summarize how the shoppers continued to grab items even after the management announced that the store was closed. Quindlen also sprinkles her work with several statistics. Though there are many valid points that these statistics bring, she doesn’t provide a reference nor citation to these points. Quindlen also has a small scope on those whom live frugal and fruitfully. Quindlen focuses only a handful of personal experiences, mentioning friends who falter, and small rural farmers in Pennsylvania.

First, the day called Buy Nothing Day helps to understand what it would be like to buy nothing for one day. The change impact is different to different people. Some people originally do not spend a lot and some people do. Those who do not spend a lot originally, they most likely will not see

We should not use the penny because it costs more than a penny to make a penny. An article from the Baltimore Sun says that “the penny is probably safe until it starts costing more money to produce it than the coin is worth.” (Hirsch). If it costs more to make the penny than it is worth, it would be bad because you would lose money and the United States is still in debt.

There is no doubt that Christmas is a religious event but nowadays Christmas becomes more commercialized, as it has been defined as a high consumption season because the gifts giving culture becomes the most important part of Christmas and the consumers want to please their children

The article "Buy Nothing Bay" by Mark Bayle. The publisher is Permaculture: Inspiration for Sustainable Living. The author's purpose for writing is to persuade and inform the reader. Bayle tries to convince the reader that in a "Buy Nothing Day" you can have many benefits. The author is also trying to inform the reader by telling them the difference between economics and freeconomics.

The reason to have an annual Buy Nothing Day would lessen our effect on the environment, even then a little goes a long way. It would lessen our effect because less car, that fill the air with carbon monoxide, would be on the street filled with people with the need to buy goods. This would also decrease gas use. In Addition, a Buy Nothing Day would allow businesses to close and check inventory especial before a holiday like Black Friday, where people are so eager to consume. Lastly it gives people a chance to spend more time with their family and teaches people how to plan, which is very important skill. One does not even have to take part in Buy Nothing Day at all.

The rise of industrialization and manufacturing that began in the eighteenth century has drastically changed the lifestyles of the world. No longer do citizens find, make, or trade for everything they need at home and in their local communities, but instead they rely on national and global commerce to provide for them. This shift in production is the basis for the annual Buy Nothing Day, which attempts to reverse the ill effects of gross consumerism and spread awareness of the issues in our current lifestyles. While many critics would point to the fact that one day will provide little to no discernable impact on the problems faced, Buy Nothing Day will produce greater effects through the awareness it provides than any actual deeds committed on that singular day.

The very first Buy Nothing Day was organized in Canada in 1992. This is a day that people are encouraged to purchase no goods as a way to increase awareness of excessive consumerism. Since then, an online article has urged worldwide acceptance of taking this 24-hour consumer detox. One day a year where no one purchases anything would be a good establishment because it would give consumers a well needed break, show the government/businesses how crucial consumers are, and give the world a view of life without consumerism.

According to the film “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices” by Robert Greenwald Walmart is a rising controversial organization who exploit their employees, cause harm to the environment, eliminate local business and uses cheap labor in order to produce it's good and maximize profit. One of Walmart strategy to expand its business is to move into small towns and eliminate their competition by lowering their prices compare to local business. Local store owners can’t compete with Walmart low prices and local store owners are a force to sell their business to cover up their expenses. However, the value for local store owners business drops significantly because buyers aren’t willing to pay a high price knowing how hard it is to compete with Walmart if they decided to open their own business. Thus eliminating jobs which lead to increase in unemployment in small towns.

In 1992 the first “Buy Nothing Day” started in Canada. This “Buy Nothing Day” was an attempt to have a 24hr. consumer detox in order to expose the environmental and ethical consequences of overconsumption. Since then Buy Nothing Day has been held yearly in many countries. With the installment of a yearly Buy Nothing Day in many countries it is obvious to see why many business’ take a hard hit and can take a serious toll on a day in which goods are purchased.

The first ever Buy Nothing Day was held in Canada on 1992. Buy Nothing Day was organized as a day where no goods would be purchased, and as a result of this boycott of goods it would raise awareness of the ethical and environmental implications of overconsumption. This is a great and innovative idea that gives publicity to a neglected issue, which is the implications of overconsumption. Nowadays people do not realize how much damage overconsumption actually does to our world. They fail to realize that their brand new Nike sneakers were made by child labor in a crammed sweatshop somewhere in Asia. They fail to realize how much pollution was released into the environment from mass production in factories, so that they could

In contrast, many people and organizations have argued that Walmart is not holding true to their original sustainable commitments. According to the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Walmart's greenhouse gas emissions have continued to grow over the last 10 years, and it’s percentage of renewable energy is inadequate compared to other major corporations. Stacy Mitchell, the author of the report and a senior researcher at the Institute believes that the core issue behind Walmart’s lack of action is that they will not change their unsustainable business model to make sustainable advancements. She says that, "Walmart has a highly unsustainable business model, built on shipping goods long distances, selling mountains of very short-lived products,