Conspicuous consumption

My hero Peter Singer just wrote a nice little piece about conspicuous consumption called Why Pay More.

I often blog about conspicuous consumption, but rarely name it. To me, it is perhaps the most disgusting and most damaging way of being selfish. In a nut shell, conspicuous consumption is "keeping up with the Jones's" - spending resources on unnecessary or luxury items as a way of signaling status. Examples of conspicuous consumption include purchases of designer clothing/accessories/furniture, oversized living spaces/cars, pedigree companion animals, weddings, lavish vacations, and any purchase you'd want to brag about or that would impress your peer group. Think about purchases or experiences you post on Facebook. Think about your boards on Pinterest. Can you see conspicuous consumption at work in your own life?

The reason that I believe conspicuous consumption is worse than private indulgence is conspicuous consumption places social pressure on others to spend as you spend. Not only do you use your own resources selfishly, but you encourage others to do the same. Even worse, there's a "one-upping" that's expected - you spent 5 days in London, but I spent 5 days in London AND 3 days in Rome. And all that unnecessary spending could have saved lives.

Extremely large, public gifts to charity are also considered conspicuous consumption, as they raise the status of those making the gift. This is the one form of conspicuous consumption I support and applaud, for exactly the reason I stated above: it encourages others to do the same. The charitable gifts made by Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet have made way for other billionaires to follow suit.

Conspicuous consumption is deeply embedded in American culture, self-identity, and group-identity. It is extremely important to recognize the way in which conspicuous consumption directs our spending habits, and thus "ties up" money that we should be free to give away.

To change our culture, to value compassion over selfishness and altruistic actions over "stuff", we must celebrate and elevate those who defy conspicuous consumption, like Uruguay's 'poor' president Jose Mujica. And we should feel disgusted and outraged by public displays of luxury and indulgence, not envious.


-Selfish Blogger

The true cost of travel

I am in the midst of a career change, and that means I've sought the advice of many people in the last year. My most trusted mentor recommended I spend some time abroad volunteering for aid organizations. Clearly this is where my passion lies. By spending time on the ground, I could learn about how aid works in poor countries, and what type of aid is truly effective. I could advocate from a place of experience, even expertise. It sounds like an important and worthwhile use of my time.

And then I think about the cost.

Plane tickets, appropriate clothing, medicines and inoculations, ground transport, food, housing - thousands of dollars for my travel and basic needs. Then there are my lost wages. A meaningful trip would last at least 30 days, probably longer. Thousands of dollars.

And then I think about the true cost. The opportunity cost.

The opportunity cost of my travel - the thousands spent and the thousands given up in lost wages - the opportunity cost is lives saved. I know enough to know that poor countries do not need free, unskilled labor. I would be there for my own knowledge, nothing more. There is little work I could do on the ground to save and improve lives. What they need is money. And rather than spend my money to gain first-hand knowledge of the problem, I could spend my money to solve the problem. I could trust the published research of experts in the field and direct my resources to those groups doing the best possible work.

Leila de Bruyne, founder of Flying Kites, blogged about "Voluntourism" in the Huffington Post. She reflects on her summer as a volunteer in a Kenyan orphanage:

"I spent a lot of time that year wondering if I had unintentionally exploited the children I'd traveled so far to meet. Did I help the little ones learn the days of the week and the older kids practice their written composition? Yes. Had my trip contributed in any significant way to a more just, safe life for them? No. I was a 19-year-old, providing unskilled labor, to deeply traumatized children, for a very short of amount of time. The price of my plane ticket would have been better spent on the salary of Kenyan teacher, a source of continuity for children who deserve it the most."

I recommend reading her blog in it's entirety. Flying Kites offers a different kind of volunteer experience for people interested in helping orphaned children in Kenya - and it involves a lot of fundraising.


-Selfish Blogger

Extra money

I've yet to come across a person, no matter how wealthy, who thinks "I have so much extra money sitting around, I just don't know what to do with it all." We live a lifestyle according to our means (and sometimes beyond our means). An increase in income means an increase in spending - more dinners out, nicer clothes, a more expensive car, a larger living space in a wealthier part of town. We have wish lists of the luxuries we'll buy, the vacations we'll take, once we get more money. We always want more, so we spend what we make. While our wish list things are nice to have, they are far from necessities. And more to the point: you could spend that money to save lives instead of marginally improving yours.

June Walbert over at USAA has some simple ways to save $1,000 a month (and it doesn't mean moving to a small apartment or getting rid of your car). Her article is written in the context of saving money for an emergency fund, but the concepts apply to saving money to reach your philanthropic goals. What will you do with the money you save?


-Selfish Blogger

Your chance at fame has arrived

A photo of a New York police officer giving boots to a homeless man has gone viral. The New York Times reports that while on duty, Officer Lawrence Deprimo spotted a man in the cold without shoes. Deprimo talked with the man, found out his shoe size, and left to purchase a $100 pair of boots in a nearby store. He returned and helped the man put on his new boots. Now that's a good police officer! A tourist snapped the now famous photo of the scene. It reminded her of her father, a police officer who she witnessed giving food to a homeless man when she was a child.

This touching story immediately reminded me of someone too: my compassionate friend Leanne. She keeps her car stocked with bottled water and granola bars, so any time she drives past someone on the side of the road holding a sign that says "hungry" she is in a position to help. Any day now, someone will snap a picture of Leanne's good deeds and she will be just as famous as Officer Deprimo!

I think the kind-hearted acts of police officers like Lawrence Deprimo and that tourist's dad and people like Leanne are so moving to me because they seem rare. I hope that acts like these become so common that their note-worthiness falls somewhere between folding laundry and serving cake at a birthday party.

But until that time comes, YOU have an unprecedented opportunity to achieve viral internet fame!! Your next act of compassion could be the next Gangnam Style. Or "Call Me Maybe" might be a better analogy. Anyway, what I'm saying is, compassion is hot right now, so take advantage of the moment and up your charity game. Keep an eye out for lost animals, be alert to signs of domestic violence and human trafficking, and pay attention the next time you see someone living on the street who needs help. Follow through on every do-gooder moment that presents itself, even if the only help you can give is very small. Officer Deprimo is famous for buying a pair of boots. Whatever, you can top that no sweat. Better get to it. Can't let this chance at fame pass me by.


-Selfish Blogger

Priorities

When I interned with Amnesty International, I was deeply moved when my supervisor told me that Amnesty does not prioritize one human rights violation over another. How can you weigh rape against false imprisonment? How do you choose between the rights of women and the rights of children? You can't. Every human rights violation is wrong; every violation needs to be stopped. What a compelling position. And yet, how very unrealistic.

We live in a world of limited resources, so organizations like Amnesty operate with limited resources too. The act of distributing those resources is an act of prioritization. The staff hours spent, the volunteers mobilized, the leaflets printed to stay that man's execution were staff hours and volunteers and leaflets that didn't go toward helping women in Juarez or ending the genocide in Sudan. The hope is that nonprofits think carefully about how to use their resources - using them in areas where they can be the most effective and make the most difference. Well established groups like Amnesty, with a highly qualified board of directors and professional staff, distribute their resources strategically and calculate where they can have the most impact (even as they believe that one human rights violation shouldn't have to be prioritized over another). We prioritize whether we want to or not, but hopefully we do so consciously.

If you measured where you spend your resources - your money, your time, and your influence with others - what would it reveal about your priorities (whether or not you've consciously chosen them)? My first priority is me, followed by the nonprofit I run... Minecraft probably lands in my top 10. The causes that I really care about could rank a lot higher if I thought more about my priorities. I wonder how many of us unintentionally prioritize coffee over feeding a hungry child, alcohol over safe drinking water for a family in a third world county, or new clothes over a life-altering surgery for a poor woman.

Props to my friends at PETA, who can honestly say that the majority of their personal resources go toward making real, lasting change in our world.


-Selfish Blogger