Getting more bang per buck is exactly how material progress works.

Reducing costs is really, really important, and nothing to be ashamed about.

To a point. But there comes a point where further cost reductions made the product or service worse, and increase the adverse impact on society in general in many ways.

At that point, there's absolutely something to be ashamed about.

Yes, maybe. But the right trade-off between cost and quality is something for customers to decide.

Eg you could build a smart phone that mechanically lasts ten years, but who would want to use a ten year old smart phone anyway?

> and, frankly, just cost in general.

Well, of course. Edge cases aside, why shouldn’t anyone save on money when it’s acceptable to do so?