Why were the 2000s so hedonistic and consumerist?

[Strawberry]

most likely as more succesful lthen their parents.

iphone is a tool - it depends on person how they utilize it.

dont forget the social stigma and social exclusion . in this day and age kids without iphone can be often excluded fro mtight knit groups and become class pariah . thats why its potentialy good investment so that kid has good social networking skills/oportunities.

dont shame people for having money and spending it - most of us work very hard to get where we are - aka to be able to buy stuff liek this without any problem

- - - Updated - - -



hm disagree.

i could agree that its easier to buy things then ever before but thats because of technology . this doesnt mean that thinking customers buy anything possible. i for exampel still use amazon mainly to order books because its more convinient then go to book store.

Read what you wrote.
You just said that not having iPhone is a social stigma and might exclude kids.
You also mention it as a tool.
Meanwhile Apple is one of the most expensive "tools" you can buy. It's not just a phone. It's a status thing.
Plenty other cheaper tools provide the same functionality.

I stand by my claim. The kids are being spoiled by expensive, unnecessary things like Apple products.

[PC2]

I stand by my claim. The kids are being spoiled by expensive, unnecessary things like Apple products.

If you raise your kids with the right core values then they'll never be spoiled by any amount of nice things and expensive toys. The idea that material possessions have a corrupting influence on people is a myth.

[Strawberry]

If you raise your kids with the right core values then they'll never be spoiled by any amount of nice things and expensive toys. The idea that material possessions have a corrupting influence on people is a myth.

I disagree. Today school raises kids, not parents. And school can't raise hundreds/thousands of kids. Kids are influenced by other kids and their expensive toys. They come home and ask for the same thing, and parents buy.

Maybe not if you're piss poor in a piss poor country, but in a first world country, things corrupt big time.

[Shadowferal]

I disagree. Today school raises kids, not parents. And school can't raise hundreds/thousands of kids. Kids are influenced by other kids and their expensive toys. They come home and ask for the same thing, and parents buy.

I share your disagreement, albeit for different reasons.
But you're responding to someone that refuses any learning from history. And we know that peer pressure is one hell of an influence.
Take away the toys and we'll see what people\kids have really learned.

And if they can only deal with society through the crutches of social media's "safespaces" then I can only pity them.

[downnola]

The sixties are so disrespected in this thread. The 2000s weren't shit.

[PC2]

But you're responding to someone that refuses any learning from history.

You should not direct comments at people Shadowferal but instead direct them at ideas and arguments. When it comes to learning from history it's only possibly to learn via explanations and principles and you can't ever learn anything whatsoever from generalizing history into the future.

[Stelio Kontos]

Blech, what's with the Cult of Apple? I don't use Apple products, and there's lots of good reasons not to.

[Shadowferal]

The sixties are so disrespected in this thread. The 2000s weren't shit.

Beatniks, and Vietnam...

[kamuimac]

Yes and just like the internet most people will use it as a toy such is the human condition.

its your choice how you decide to use your phone. just like with internet indeed.

thats why some people will be forever poor. its just the modern version of fish vs fishing rod story .

- - - Updated - - -

Blech, what's with the Cult of Apple? I don't use Apple products, and there's lots of good reasons not to.

and main reason is price.

lets not kid yourself - if newest iphone would cost like 200$ everyone woudl be runing around with those.

same is with cars same is with houses.

same is with everything in our lives.

- - - Updated - - -

I disagree. Today school raises kids, not parents. And school can't raise hundreds/thousands of kids. Kids are influenced by other kids and their expensive toys. They come home and ask for the same thing, and parents buy.

Maybe not if you're piss poor in a piss poor country, but in a first world country, things corrupt big time.

well then those people fail as parents. should is not meant to raise your kids - just provide them with education and teach proper behaviour in social groups.

that "corruption " you speak about happens both in poor and rich countries. it all depends on moral backbone tought by parent at home.

- - - Updated - - -

Read what you wrote.
You just said that not having iPhone is a social stigma and might exclude kids.
You also mention it as a tool.
Meanwhile Apple is one of the most expensive "tools" you can buy. It's not just a phone. It's a status thing.
Plenty other cheaper tools provide the same functionality.

I stand by my claim. The kids are being spoiled by expensive, unnecessary things like Apple products.

so is a well made suit. and white shirt and tie. and milion other things

people judge you based on what they see.

your kids should know how and where to utlize them to get maximum gains in life.

[Draco-Onis]

its your choice how you decide to use your phone. just like with internet indeed.

thats why some people will be forever poor. its just the modern version of fish vs fishing rod story .

This is pretty irrelevant to how most people use their phones, people spend 1K+ on phones as a status symbol now. The fact that it is a choice doesn't change reality.

[kamuimac]

This is pretty irrelevant to how most people use their phones, people spend 1K+ on phones as a status symbol now. The fact that it is a choice doesn't change reality.

most of those people dont even spend that much instanty . there are plenty of "plans" that mobile providers offer with cheap abonaments with iphones included. and people who own business take all phones for family as company phone and toss them into costs/ depreciation to cut on income tax

ofc "cheap " means different things for different people.

there is nothing wrong with using cheap phone - there is just no need to hate on people just because they can afford better ones.

[Themius]

The sixties are so disrespected in this thread. The 2000s weren't shit.

Who were the 60s good for?

It wasn't good for people of colour or gay people or women.

[Draco-Onis]

most of those people dont even spend that much instanty . there are plenty of "plans" that mobile providers offer with cheap abonaments with iphones included. and people who own business take all phones for family as company phone and toss them into costs/ depreciation to cut on income tax

ofc "cheap " means different things for different people.

there is nothing wrong with using cheap phone - there is just no need to hate on people just because they can afford better ones.

Who said anything about hate? I am just pointing out that the vast majority of the people who owns them will not be using the features that justify the cost. You will get the same thing out of a $200 phone vs a $1000 one, the only reason people buy it is because it is a status symbol.

[downnola]

Who were the 60s good for?

It wasn't good for people of colour or gay people or women.

I didn’t say it was good. I was implying that it was the more hedonistic and full of greed than the 2000s.

[Shadowferal]

I didn’t say it was good. I was implying that it was the more hedonistic and full of greed than the 2000s.

The late 60s that had "free love" not sure I'd say was as full of hedonism as one might think.
And I don't see the "greed" part at all as society was still full on about you contributing to it to make it better. As often than not that meant time as well as money.

[Draco-Onis]

I didn’t say it was good. I was implying that it was the more hedonistic and full of greed than the 2000s.

We didn't have as many oligopolies in the 60s nor was income inequality so high so not really accurate.

[Eldar45]

It was no more hedonistic and consumerist than now. In fact, if anything, its gotten worse.

Surely you've heard the song "The Sound of Silence" by Simon and Garfunkel? Was literally a song about rampant consumerism. It was written in 1964.

[kamuimac]

Who said anything about hate? I am just pointing out that the vast majority of the people who owns them will not be using the features that justify the cost. You will get the same thing out of a $200 phone vs a $1000 one, the only reason people buy it is because it is a status symbol.

you can say the same about anything

like for example people should drive dacia duster instead of BWM x7 because technically both of them are cars that are used to travel from point A to B and former is so cheap in comparison to latter.

tool is a tool . if you cant afford expensive one thats your problem . and it exists as problem only in your eyes.

[Draco-Onis]

you can say the same about anything

like for example people should drive dacia duster instead of BWM x7 because technically both of them are cars that are used to travel from point A to B and former is so cheap in comparison to latter.

tool is a tool . if you cant afford expensive one thats your problem . and it exists as problem only in your eyes.

Did you not follow the conversation or are you just ranting?

[Felya]

It was no more hedonistic and consumerist than now. In fact, if anything, its gotten worse.

Surely you've heard the song "The Sound of Silence" by Simon and Garfunkel? Was literally a song about rampant consumerism. It was written in 1964.

This is 1970, but it’s one of the most oft repeated lines about consumerism and is referenced in a lot of pop culture...

They paved paradise
Put up a parking lot