$100? $150? $200? How much does the average person spend on recreational shopping per month? 

According to the Rubicon Mental Health Recovery Center, in 2024, the average American impulsively spent about $150 per week, amounting to almost $2000 per year. Impulsive shopping is identified by Cambridge Dictionary as making unplanned purchases that can result from outside influences such as inviting displays or limited time sales.

This financial burden may stem from today’s increasing stress levels and ensuing reliance on retail therapy, with 41% of people saying they impulse buy when they’re upset in a 2024 survey by Badcredit.org. Oxford Languages defines retail therapy as the practice of shopping to make oneself happier. It may reduce sadness by giving a sense of control and supplying instant dopamine from acquiring more goods. 

Sociology and economics teacher Brent Williams believes the root of excessive shopping can be traced back to the post-World War II era with countries like the US emerging with excess wealth. During this time, disposable income became more easily attainable for both middle and high class families. 

“That’s the setting where ‘Keeping up with the Joneses’ came from,” Williams said. “The white American suburbs where people were starting families and buying houses and cars.”

The phrase “Keeping up with the Joneses” refers to the comparison of oneself to neighbors and matching them by getting what they have and doing what they do. The idiom originates from the comic strip “Keeping Up with the Joneses” that ran from 1913 to 1940 following a middle-class American family of ambitious social climbers. Although the comic was created long ago, its ideas still reign prevalent in today’s world. 

Williams finds social media to play a key role in the growing popularity of consumerism. Trends such as the rage for Trader Joe bags that drove prices of the originally $2.99 bag up to hundreds of dollars on secondary markets, the Crumbl cookie craze that spurred influencers to consume whole boxes every week, the collecting of reusable water bottles such as Stanleys and the excessive weekly purchases of items for fridge restocks are just a few examples of mass consumerism that social media helped foster.

“With young kids, a lot of it is a status symbol,” Williams said. “If I have the nicest clothes or if I’m buying Crumbl cookies every week and I can afford that, that’s like ‘Hey, look at me,’ and you can post about it on Instagram.”

Age does also seem to play a role in varying levels of consumerism. According to Snapchat For Business, Gen Z represents 30% of the population but 40% of consumers worldwide. This may stem from having the most access to social media with BusinessDasher reporting that 94% of Gen-Zers are on social media and thus are more likely to be influenced to buy what they see online. Birmingham Newman University also reports a rise in brand collaborations with influencers and celebrities to promote products, leading to more impulsive purchases as social media users see advertisements. 

In recent years, there has also been an increase in online shopping that makes consumerism more efficient and easier to partake in. Social media platforms have evolved into markets with aspects like TikTok shop, Facebook Market, Instagram advertisements and more. Tidio.com reports that online shopping sites such as Shein, Amazon and Temu have risen in popularity by 16.2% since 2020.

Freshman Isabelle Castrence personally finds herself influenced by social media endorsements of products. 

“I see something online, like on TikTok,” Castrence said. “And then I want to get it.”

Castrence also considers herself a typical shopaholic as an avid album collector and window-shopper, browsing products but not actually buying them, sometimes around three times a week. Many find window-shopping to be just as fulfilling as actual shopping, as the dopamine from just looking at products may be enough to satisfy consumers. Castrence finds shopping to be a beneficial activity that boosts her mood.

“It gives me something to do,” Castrence said. “And I can express my style with whatever I buy.”

Castrence finds that the financial aspect of shopping doesn’t need to be a burden as products that are bought but found to be dissatisfactory can be easily returned for the full price.

“From my experiences, if people buy too much, they can alway sell it or return it,” Castrence said. “Or they’re happy with it and it’s good.”

However, not all stores accept free returns. Return management company Optoro also reports that more than 25% of returned items are ultimately discarded as companies want to avoid the costs of processing and repacking items. Freshman and BizClub co-President Kaitlyn Nguyen also disagrees with Castrence, finding all excessive shopping to be unnecessary. 

“Nowadays, [shopping is] not a need,” Nguyen said. “It’s a want. But you don’t need these clothes, you need things like fruits and vegetables.”

Excessive shopping also has obvious financial consequences; 32% of Gen-Z and 46% of millennials now have more credit-card debt than emergency savings. In addition to not being budget-friendly, today’s mass consumerism also has a prevalent detrimental effect on the environment. Environment.co reports that at least 45% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the production of goods worldwide. The returning of items Castrence mentioned above may also add to greenhouse gas emissions as people expend more gas to travel to return items. The clothing industry alone is also responsible for 20% of global water pollution. Dyes and waste destroy natural water sources, especially in the countries of the Global South where cheap, high pollution manufacturing takes place, further contributing to a cycle of environmental degradation. Online shopping has also fostered waste and pollution due to the reliance on packaging, particularly that made of plastic. The World Wildlife Fund reported that by 2015, two-thirds of all plastic ever produced was waste. Plastic continues to be manufactured and used in products worldwide on a mass scale. 

“So it’s a problem,” Williams said. “How do you get people to scale it back and be happy with what they have?” 

Mass production of goods from big corporations and brands is negative in many other aspects, such as the exploitation of workers in numerous countries of the Global South like Bangladesh, India, China, Vietnam and Indonesia. The fast fashion industry alone employs around 75 million people worldwide with 98% of them being paid less than a living wage in numerous countries of the Global South. Read more about the fallout of fast fashion in “Behind the Seams.” Attacking or boycotting these big corporations, however, also negatively impacts the workers who rely on them for wage, no matter how low. It may also indirectly or directly lead to supply chain disruptions on a global scale, an eventual stock market collapse and ensuing worldwide depression. 

“We can’t get rid of consumers because companies would crash,” Freshman and co-president of BizClub Aria Fernandez said. “So it’s neither a negative or positive thing, it just has to exist now because of how far it’s gone.”

Despite the many negatives of over-consumption, Castrence believes that generally the good outweighs the bad and ultimately it depends on how the person shops. 

“It could be good that people are expressing themselves with whatever they buy,” Castrence said. “It can also be bad if they’re addicted and just wasting money.”

Indeed for many, the addiction runs deep. The issue may seem intimidating and unstoppable, but some have already made efforts to combat it. In a survey by Intuit Credit Karma, 20% of Gen Z-ers and Millennials were committing to a “no-buy year” and 56% were planning on a “low-buy year” for 2024. TikTok minimalism influencer @tiny_waste participated in a 2024 no-buy year and posted a TikTok of their results. 

“Overall, we did so well,” @tiny_waste said. “It’s definitely changed my brain chemistry and how I think about purchasing. Everytime I pick something up [now], I’m like ‘I can live without this.’”

Many other influencers like @tiny_waste have also shared their results online. Some did not have a successful no-buy year, listing insufficient goal clarity, lack of accountability and unforeseen stressors in life that led to shopping for instant gratification as factors that contributed to their failure. However, many are reattempting or starting a no-buy year for 2025 with these factors in mind.

Mass consumerism and its complementary social issues proves a systematic problem that needs addressing from the roots. On one hand, mass consumerism may be a financially burdening addiction with the mass production of common goods being reliant on the exploitation of laborers in the Global South while also being increasingly destructive to the planet. On the other hand, consumerism may provide an immediate reprieve from the stresses of everyday life while also keeping businesses—both old and entrenched and young and small—in business and supplying impoverished people in the Global South work and a means for income.

Mass consumerism can’t and shouldn’t be entirely eliminated. However, it can be curbed. Consumers can avoid financial stresses, oppose big corporations and be an environmentally friendly shopper by limiting shopping and supporting small businesses. They can also buy products that are environmentally friendly-made or recycled, avoid animal testing and are produced by non-exploited, paid workers. All necessary information can be found by a quick search of the business. Websites such as SustainabilityTracker.com provide relevant information on the sustainability of whatever brand or business users input. Fernandez and Nguyen also both believe in pursuing one’s own research to better mindfully shop. Nguyen currently does personal research to be a more mindful consumer. 

“I’m still debating if it’s a good thing or a bad thing,” Nguyen said. “So I’m doing my research.” 

So far, Nguyen has mostly found data on the environmental consequences of excessive shopping. Actions like Nguyen’s are steps toward evaluating today’s mass-consumption dilemma as ultimately, it falls onto society to determine what is best for it.