We, as consumers, and the companies we benefit from, are not willing to give up our right to buy without a fight, no matter the cost.
Expert opinion: Does buying now and paying later help or hurt your finances?
Priya Malani, CEO of Stash Wealth and Paula Pant, host of the Afford Anything podcast talk, buy now, pay later.
Throughout my early 20s, I made some questionable financial decisions. At the ripe age of 23, I understand things well enough. I stopped using installment payment tools like Klarna and Afterpay. I deleted most retail apps from my phone, except for Amazon and SSENSE. I rarely use food delivery services and only use one fast food app, which I won’t name.
That said, I’m trying my best to be more intentional about where and how I spend my money, which is very different from my contemporaries who act with financial abandon (trust me, I still make my fair share of rash and regrettable purchases).
But these questionable financial practices seem like subtle forces in the eyes of people my age. From Coachella tickets to luxury goods and lipstick to love baths, buy now, pay later options give eager consumers access to products they otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.
“Buy now, pay later” platforms appear to be more economical than traditional credit cards, as they typically do not charge interest. As a result, perceived costs are reduced and consumer spending is increased. As the cost of living rises and investing in your future becomes a distant dream, buy now, pay later offers instant gratification and the illusion of financial freedom during dire financial times.
What’s even more clear is that our habits continue to support consumerism, or overconsumption, as an enduring aspect of American identity. It’s as if a footnote in the Bill of Rights says we have the right to buy. We, as consumers, and the companies we benefit from, are not going to give up our rights without a fight, no matter the cost.
Even if Apple is mediocre, it’s not enough to stop us from buying.
That’s why Apple is able to release a new mediocre phone every year with a huge pool of buyers. The mediocre iPhone 17, released in 2025, is touted with the same improvements as every other iPhone. That means a slightly better camera, a slightly better speed, a slightly better screen resolution, and so on.
Some things have changed. The Pro model’s design is much uglier (what’s with those weird camera bezels?), and the newly introduced iPhone Air is the same, but thinner. Its mediocrity may have sparked outrage online, but it didn’t significantly impact Apple’s sales.
People looking to buy a smartphone don’t currently have many options. This market is benefited by two companies: Apple and Samsung. Competitors like Huawei, a Chinese company that has outpaced American companies, are banned in the United States, calling into question the sanctity of the free market.
When many of our choices feel predetermined, consumers feel like they have some autonomy over the companies they buy from. Under America’s corporatocracy, where our dollars are more trusted than our votes, our consumption not only reflects our aesthetic tastes, but also our morality.
Sidney Sweeney, the American Eagle, and the morality of denim
Take, for example, the recent denim cold war between American Eagle and Gap. The former, with the help of blue-eyed, blonde Sidney Sweeney, aligned itself with Americana and conservatism at the center through offensive genetics puns.
Gap went in the opposite direction and tapped global girl group Katei to appeal to a progressive, young and diverse audience. The brand identity spread through these advertisements divided potential denim buyers into factions along political lines. Shopping at American Eagle post-Sweeneygate doesn’t just mean favoring denim styles. It also meant you aligned yourself with their conservative politics. The same goes for the gap.
Regardless of how consumers felt about either brand, the ads were effective. According to Variety, Sweeney’s jeans collaboration sold out within a week, with some items selling out within a day. American Eagle shares rose 29% after the brand and Gap took other steps toward similar ends.
Whether they were able to achieve financial success has little to do with the audience to which they surrendered. That’s what makes being obsessed with brand identity so dangerous. At the end of the day, it’s all smoke and mirrors.
The “America First” people who seemed to like Sweeney’s ads would never know that American Eagle jeans are not made in the United States. Gap’s use of diversity (a good thing) and representative politics doesn’t cancel out the fact that the company buys cotton from child laborers in India.
For those who understand that there is no truly ethical consumption under capitalism, the idea that multi-billion dollar corporations would package up our morality and sell it to us is laughable. The only way to make our consumption behavior less exploitative and unethical is to consume intentionally, take a deep breath and consume less.
Perhaps tools like Klarna and Afterpay are traps that keep us in a cycle of overconsumption, rather than a powerful gateway to financial freedom. But to allow that would be to violate Americans’ birthright to buy and buy and buy. After all, consumerism is as American as Apple Pay.
Kofi Mframa is a columnist and digital producer for USA TODAY and the USA TODAY Network.
