Ice cream servings in a cone are small in Europe, probably a bit less than half the size of the big scoops we are used to over here. Generally, we equate big with good because bigger is better, right? Cars used to be the size of boats in this country until people became more energy aware. “How was the food at that new restaurant?” “It was great, we had a lot of food.” Huh? But how did it taste? And maybe the portion was too large if you needed to take half your meal home in a doggy bag. 
E.F. Schumacher was way ahead in 1973 when he argued in his economic classic Small Is Beautiful that building our economy on eternal growth is not sustainable. Indeed, our planet doesn’t expand. Around the same time, Frances Moore Lappé wrote Diet For A Small Planet. She pioneered the discussion around the terrible environmental impact our industrial “meat production” has, and argued for vegetarianism.
Interest rates have been shrinking, they are even lower in Europe than here, and discussions on negative interest rates are popping up – getting penalized for leaving your money in the bank. So spend it or put it under the mattress.
All of these are signs that small is beautiful, bigger is not sustainable, and that our economies need to shrink to halt the consumerist excess and environmental damage we have created. Think quality over quantity. “How delicious was that meal?” not “How big was it?” “What beautiful material is that dress made of?” not “Buy 2 for the price of 1.”
