Luxury Goods: Arguments in Favour and Against

Is the consumption of luxuries desirable? Let us make an in-depth study of the arguments in favour and against the luxury goods.

Arguments in Favour of Luxury Goods:

Following are the arguments which have been advanced in favour of luxuries:

1. Freedom of Consumption:

People by nature are of independent view. If any restriction is placed on him for anything, he will not like and relish it. Those who have means cannot tolerate such restrictions and it is not proper and desirable to put restrictions.

2. Increase in Employment:

Production of articles of luxury relates employment and is good for the trade and industry of a country. If thus renders a social service, besides providing enjoyment for some one.

3. It Increases Social Prestige:

Those who use luxury goods their social status goes high. Such people will not like the restrictions on the use of luxury goods when they can afford to use it.

4. Encouragement to New-Inventions and to Economic Progress:

The desire for luxuries acts as a stimulant to new inventions, new labour-saving devices and new types and modern qualities of goods. It thus helps in having technical and industrial progress.

5. Encouragement and Development of Arts and Crafts:

The production of luxury goods add to the skill of the workers. Luxury articles require art and skill to produce them.

6. Transfer of Wealth:

Expenses on luxury goods transfers wealth from the rich to the working and other useful members of the society who badly need it and make a more profitable use of it. This transfer of wealth is good for society, as it brings about a more even distribution of wealth.

7. Beneficial to Society and End of Monotony:

The use of luxuries is beneficial to society which makes people refined, cultured and up-to-date. Use of different types of luxury ends the monotony of life.

8. Increase in Government Income:

Government imposes more tax on luxury goods and this is a good sources of income to government.

9. Population Control:

Those who wants to lead a luxurious life favour less children and more comforts. This view helps in population control.

Arguments Opposing Luxury Goods:

Arguments given in favour of luxury have not been accepted by various economists and people living in the society.

Their use cannot be accepted because of the following reasons:

1. No-maximum Social Advantage:

No maximum social advantage can be acquired by the production of luxury goods, because only a handful number of people will be benefitted by its production.

2. Social Dis-satisfaction:

Luxury goods are used only by few people in society in India. Majority are not using it so great dis-satisfaction prevails among people.

3. Unequal Distribution of Wealth:

There is great unequal distribution of wealth because luxury goods are not made in cottage industries and there is bad effect on such industries.

4. No Increase in Employment Opportunities:

Luxury goods are demanded by small number of people and its production takes place in factory where one cannot increase number of workers without demand and work is done mostly by machine.

5. No Encouragement to Art and Crafts:

At present there is reduction in the production of artistic goods because luxury goods are being produced in factory by machine which reduces art and crafts workers.

6. Poor Class May Face Misery:

By the production of luxury goods, producers are getting more profit therefore production of essential articles for poor class is going down. Thus, the price of these articles is static or sometimes goes up. No reduction in price as less production takes place.

Arguments written in favour and against the luxury can be studied carefully and we can come to this conclusion that both sides have got some weight and we cannot ignore the importance completely. But to conclude it can be said that the use of luxuries articles are harmful and waste. Therefore, nothing can be considered as a luxury or as a necessary for ever and for every person. It all depends upon situation, circumstances and environment. So there should be “Necessaries for all before luxuries for any.”