time or stuff?

Happy 4th of July weekend to all!

After reading and discussing Conspicuous Consumption, it was very interesting to me how split the class was on whether our society is more focused on consumption or leisure. The more we talked about it the greater the split became. Some people used the show “Cribs” as an example that we are a more about the stuff, while others used the example of becoming a fine wine connoisseur as a leisure activity to show that time is more valuable. I personally would like to have a mixture of both; I don’t need a lot of great stuff or all the time in the world, but I would like to have time to enjoy the nice things that I do have. I do wonder if that is possible? Can you have both or is it one or the other? Is it like The Eagles song that says “you can spend all your time making money, or you can spend all your money making time.”
I think that to live a life full of stuff would be an easier thing to do without having a large financial base to start than a life of leisure. It is feasible to work hard and get things along the way, more than it is to live a life of leisure at a young age. The amount of stuff a person can acquire is only limited by their willingness to work hard. Acquiring goods depending on the quality of those goods can be done before retirement if a person is wise with their money or has a way to make large amounts of money. But, famous people are usually the people we look to as an example of great consumers. They have huge houses full of toys and garages with more cars than they know what to do with. To reach the level of consumption that very wealthy people achieve is possible for anyone, but the chances are slim. I think that most people who say that we are a society who is consumption based are correct, but the examples they use are the extremes of society.
To live a life of leisure I feel like it requires a large monetary base. To sit around and enjoy stuff or the lack of stuff to do is not something the average working person can do for any extended period of time. I think our society does idolize the person who has the option to do this. The American “dream” is to work hard until you can retire. The ultimate goal is to not have to work. To have the luxury of time I feel like you have to already have the luxury of money. I could very well be wrong? I think the split in class of people who said the goal was leisure were just as correct as the people who said it was consumption, but does it require the ability to consume to have leisure? The quest for time is one that we are all on. More time for friends, more time for family, and more time to play. Does the drive for time outweigh the drive for stuff?
The discussion in class was very though provoking. I don’t feel like we can definitively say that our society is consumer driven or leisure driven. While our society is a consumer society as a whole, I don’t think excessive consumption is the goal of everyone. In the article Conspicuous Consumption it seemed like the goal was just consumption, but to do that the people had to have time. Is there a balance of excess leisure and excessive consumption? Or is it a choice that has to be made? I don’t think these things are mutually exclusive, I think a balance can be found. I think our goal should be to find that balance, like Aristotle said “moderation in all things.”