Flashy yuppies paint themselves into a corner
Letter from Philip Lee Seck Kay, Straits Times Forum 2 Jan 08;
MANY young Singaporeans, gainfully employed in a booming economy, have expressed anxiety about building a large enough nest egg for a comfortable retirement. This is rather disturbing.
The reasons are not hard to trace, though, if one steps back and observes the lifestyles of these so-called 'yuppies' who hold lucrative jobs that promise much.
Today, Singaporeans' consumption habits more or less mirror those of Americans who have traditionally been consummate spenders. And like Americans, many Singaporeans discount the future in order to consume today. They are hooked on what sociologist Thorstein Veblen termed 'conspicuous consumption', which used to be the affliction of the rich.
To be sure, they get a lot of help in this respect. Crowded malls for drop-dead shopping with foodcourts to give respite to continue shopping; colourful full-page ads that tell you how good you look in that suit, how macho it would be behind the wheel of that new BMW, or hey, wouldn't that DaVinci sofa look great in our living room?
And if shopping at the mall is not your cup of tea, you can always let your fingers do the walking - relax and shop on the ubiquitous Internet. Everything to your heart's desire, from watches to motorcycles (spam notwithstanding), no problem as long as your credit is good.
Keeping up with the Joneses has given way to keener appetites: affordable luxury; living well with a vengeance; we have it, let's flaunt it; you can't take it with you; and the rest. All of which keeps the cash register ringing and, of course, an unhealthy growth in credit card debt.
One can argue that consumption is normal desire made possible by a successful economy. But if you think about it, how much do you really need?
And if you think again, there is actually nothing natural about consumer desires. They are fabricated to relentlessly stimulate these consumption habits with but one objective: to make a buck. Advertising agencies know this only too well and exploit it to the hilt.
So, a sizeable number, including the nouveau riche and even those who can ill afford it, become needlessly weighed down by a tsunami of debts as they continue to spend what they have yet to earn.
What one sees is an ethos of consumption that really did not exist a couple of generations ago, when the norms of the lower class and middle class dictated thrift and austerity, living within one's means, saving for the future and for one's children, and not being conspicuous, really, about anything.
The picture looks different now and it's not pretty. Overindulging Singaporeans are in a predicament of their own making and they must, for the sake of their retirement, find a way out unaided - and the sooner the better.
New year resolution, anyone?
Flashy yuppies? Lifestyle choice a personal one
Letter from Faye Chiam Pui Hoon (Ms), Straits Times Forum 5 Jan 08;
I REFER to the letter, 'Flashy yuppies paint themselves into a corner' (ST, Jan 2) in which Mr Philip Lee wrote about the conspicuous consumption patterns of so-called 'yuppies'.
While I agree that young Singaporeans ought to plan early for their retirement, clearly, it is neither fair nor feasible to place limitations on how, what or why one's money is spent.
It is this question of choice that sets our generation apart. Whether these yuppies really 'need' that new BMW or DaVinci sofa, why they want it, or even how they choose to finance it, is irrelevant. What is important is that we should be responsible for the choices we make.
Mr Lee points to 'an ethos of consumption that really did not exist a couple of generations ago'. But the fact is circumstances and societal values have changed over time and the austere lifestyle that he advocates appears anachronistic today.
Ultimately, it really boils down to personal choice. It is not the job of the Government or anyone, for that matter, to impose a moralistic view of the right lifestyle to lead.
