Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
from the wow dept
Stuart sends over a column from a Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Terry Savage, that I could have sworn was satire until someone convinced me that it's not. Savage is apparently a "financial" columnist, who apparently is a bit confused about her basic economics. Over the long weekend, she decided to celebrate the American way by berating and lecturing some children who set up a lemonade stand because they wanted to give away the lemonade for free. According to Savage, these kids represent all that is wrong with America. I'm not joking."No!" I exclaimed from the back seat. "That's not the spirit of giving. You can only really give when you give something you own. They're giving away their parents' things -- the lemonade, cups, candy. It's not theirs to give."Shockingly enough, you can read Savage's column -- for free -- online. I'm guessing she doesn't get the irony. Savage seems confused about a whole lot of things, from the concept of philanthropy and sharing to some very, very basic economics. For someone who presents themselves as a financial expert, this one column seems to undermine any credibility in the field.
I pushed the button to roll down the window and stuck my head out to set them straight.
"You must charge something for the lemonade," I explained. "That's the whole point of a lemonade stand. You figure out your costs -- how much the lemonade costs, and the cups -- and then you charge a little more than what it costs you, so you can make money. Then you can buy more stuff, and make more lemonade, and sell it and make more money."
I was confident I had explained it clearly. Until my brother, breaking the tension, ordered a raspberry lemonade. As they handed it to him, he again asked: "So how much is it?"
And the girls once again replied: "It's free!" And the nanny looked on contentedly.
No wonder America is getting it all wrong when it comes to government, and taxes, and policy. We all act as if the "lemonade" or benefits we're "giving away" is free.
Of course, the kids aren't expecting that they should get government handouts for free. They're getting marginal benefit from making (most) people happy in giving them free lemonade. Economics is not about cash, it's about benefits vs. costs. Yes, they're often calculated in cash terms, but if the marginal benefit to the children is greater in giving away the lemonade, there is nothing wrong with that at all, and it's certainly not against "basic economics" as she claims later in her column.
Again, I need to remind everyone, that you can read her column for free on the Chicago Sun-Times website. Why? Because the marginal benefit to the Sun Times and to Savage herself is higher in giving away the content for free. In the case of the Sun Times, it's from the ad revenue it receives, and in Savage's case whatever (probably too high) sum the Sun-Times pays -- and also for the "free promotion" it's supposed to give to help her sell her books. In other words, the marginal benefit to having her columns online for free is greater than the marginal cost. Just as the marginal benefit to the little girls from seeing happy people by giving them lemonade outweighs the "costs."
If we can't teach our kids the basics of running a lemonade stand, how can we ever teach Congress the basics of economics?Why don't we start by teaching our "financial experts" the basics of economics?
If that's what America's children think -- that there's a free lunch waiting -- then our country has larger problems ahead. The Declaration of Independence promised "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." It didn't promise anything free. Something to think about this July 4th holiday weekend.Wait, what? You know what the Declaration of Independence also didn't include? Anything about how much "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" costs. You know why? Because it has nothing to do with whether or not something costs money or is free. So that's not "something to think about" because it makes no sense.
But, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that someone who thinks it's a good idea to lecture little children against sharing lemonade isn't exactly the most logical of thinkers out there.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: economics, free, lemonade, terry savage
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'll spend part of my time there taking the foodstuffs that I purchased, without reimbursement, and my labor, which I am not charging for, to the waterbearing stations, which are responsible for offering refreshments to event-goers, in the interest of keeping them from getting heat stroke. (In a nutshell)
What do I get out of this? The pleasure of service. But I guess that's not worth anything, because I'm not getting a section of green paper for it. Really, that's a decidedly odd way to think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I know TAM, and his lowercase bretheren, would be dressed as the TROLLs at one of these events. What do you dress up as?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I will charge you $0.XX a minute for every minute I have to talk to you and charge $0.XX a minute to listen to you. Other taxes and surcharges may apply.
/sarcasm
This lady sounds like she wants to quanitify every little transaction to prove her point. I understand everything has a price but the cost of things can't always be measured in $$ though, but through our actions, thoughts, and feelings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh, for a minute there I thought you were going to bring up a serious point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah...
Then again, there are plenty of "journalists" who are clearly not in their right mind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In the immortal words of Digg followers: pics or it didn't happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When does any kid ever make a real profit on a lemonade stand?! I'm not saying it never happens. Sure somewhere some kid made a fortune selling lemonade.
What I'm saying is that the vast majority of lemonade stands are never intended to make a profit. For the vast majority of such stands, no cost benefit analysis is ever done. Having a lemonade stand is just another activity parents have kids do. Like play baseball, swim in a kiddie-poll, play cops and robbers, etc.
My point is that this lady could have stopped at 99.999% of the world's lemonade stands and made the exact same speech. Because in those 99.999% the stands were not profitable and were never intended to be profitable.
But that story would not have been as good. So she made up a stand where the kids were giving it for free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
A-holes are everywhere, and this Terry moron is one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Free
As I noted in the post.
Similarly, the girls giving away lemonade aren't doing it "for free," either. They're doing it for the marginal benefit in terms of satisfaction for giving it away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not Free
As hot as it is I don't see why it wouldn't occur to some kids that other people must be hot and want to give lemonade to them. If they want to learn the basics of economics by selling it then great, if they feel like learning how to do nice things for other people and how that has a reward of its own then that's great as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
see, your situation isnt a parallel at all, read the story more closely and you might even understand why.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
That information is not in the article. Where did you get it? How do you know what they have and what they do not have in their homes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
Because you sure can't explain it, can you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
Do you ever do any community work? Oh wait, no, you don't, you just like to troll on the sideline. Go F4 yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Free
HELL, NO! That would be socialism! What do you think I am, some kind of Obamanut? I believe in social Darwinism and the survival of the strongest!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not Free
"Pursuit of happiness" is exactly what these girls are achieving by giving away the lemonade. I think their behavior is the very core of the American ideal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Free
They make money for the advertiser. Therefore they are profitable.
Free = profitable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Have a look: http://www.suntimes.com/business/savage/2464228,070510savage.fullimage (Oops! Will this link infringe?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gasp
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gasp
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Gasp
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Gasp
/sacrasm off
Sadly too true, though
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some people just don't get it.
Thinking I had inspired the group to think creatively about ways to make some extra money, one of the students piped up
"I don't think that is right or ethical to buy something for less and sell it for more" I promptly reminded her that she worked for Wal-Mart and that is exactly their business model.
She couldn't see the intangibles that she/Wal-mart or the online jean lady were offering. Just like this columnist can't see the intangibles the lemonade girls were receiving.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Some people just don't get it.
You've got to be kidding me, no one is that retarded. How old was this Walmart valedictorian, 12?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Some people just don't get it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Was the purpose of the lemonade stand NOT to teach economics in some way? Then what was the purpose? It's fine if it wasn't, but like I said, that's usually why kids have these things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
People teach their kids basic economics now using e-bay ... ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
In that case, they shouldn't be charging for lemonade, they should be calling the cops on all the other lemonade stands.
That way, they'd have bright and shiny futures as RIAA executives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free advice
So she gave the children the benefit of her expertise. Did she charge them for it? Is she going to send the parents a bill? Wasn't that something for nothing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free advice
Heh. Excellent point. Should have pointed that out in the post as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free advice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Mike...
Perhaps you need someone in Chicago who can give you the skinny on local people and happenings? I wonder who could do such a thing....
Anyway, Terry Savage is a typical partisan moron. The entire point of her writing for the Sun Times (a liberal paper), is to present an over the top conservative viewpoint to rile up readers. Paying attention to her is like paying attention to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mike Malloy, or Alan Colmes. They aren't there to do anything other than make noise and play their caricatures...
Oh, and we aren't getting LeBron, Bosh, or Wade either, which is while I'll be sticking to my Hawks jersey for now....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I dont remember being charged for macaroni installations or hand-turkeys either, you cant give art away for free!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The biggest charity contributors in this country also happen to be the biggest exploiters of other people
Take a good look at Billy Gates & Co
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What if they had come from a culture that always haggles and had therefore overpriced it in the hopes of settling at a lower price? Would that have not been an important economic lesson because it doesn't follow the exact model this lady seems to prefer?
The world is not black and white people. Embrace the grey.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
I hope you go broke soon
Whats wrong with you, dude ?
Read too much of Marx or Lenin ?
I recommend warm bath and enema followed by good night sleep
Doctor's order !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
I guess every volunteer in the world are idiots because what they do goes against "economic principles."
The problem is that American economics are flawed, based on speculation over growth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
I look forward to your future posts with great enthusiasm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
Stinky IP troll, your idea of having the government support you by granting you monopolies so that you don't have to compete in an open market is far closer to socialism than anything I've ever seen Mike propose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mikey is an anti-capitalistic moron
Maybe you need to calm down. Personally, I am financially conservative, and I agree that it's a problem when people view government benefits as being "free." But come on! Letting kids give away some free lemonade is not communism, and it's sure not going to break the bank.
At the dollar store I can get 100 paper cups, a plastic pitcher, a can of powdered lemonade, and a package of paper napkins for about $5. I could let each of my SEVEN kids have their very own "Free Lemonade Stand" for less money than my husband and I spend on one date night. Doesn't sound like a bad way to spend an afternoon to me!
To me, the worst part of Savage's article was the way she presumes to know best for these little girls, and tried to "teach" them better than their parents. It's MY job to teach my children the value of a dollar, not the job of some passing know-it-all newspaper columnist. If she tried to lecture MY kids, she'd be learning about another important American value -- refusing to put up with elitist jerks who think they get to tell everyone else what to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Illegal
How is liquidating your assets at a garage sale income?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Lunch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Savage gotta be a joy at the office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
Now you know what the kids/parents intentions were?
Sigh. This has been such a landmark day for TechDirt comment stupidity. Are these rating buttons actually going to DO something at some point? I mean, I may not be the most informative guy on these threads, but some of the silliness that has been espoused today has been epic....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
the only silly comments here are from people who cannot see how stupid it is to teach your children nothing about earning a living, and everything about giving away stuff someone else paid for. helmet, you are usually smarter than that.
now, is savage took all of the office donuts and went out on the street and gave them away, you might have something. but geez, come on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
Why does it have to be so different from these:
http://www.hkqkids.org/helmet.shtml
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259576/Kwik- Save-tycoon-gives-away-fortune-fulfil-promise-God.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
What if the children where being taught a lesson in civics?
What if the children where there because they needed to learn another thing.
How can you a clueless outsider define the parameters and run with it as if it was the only possibility?
The only silly comment comes from people like you, that try to make everything fit into your views without taking into consideration any other possibilities.
Different people need different lessons in life, greedy child will sell and extort other for money so they need to be taught how to give, people who give a lot and never receive anything need to learn to be a bit greedy that is how life works now what never worked is to jump into a situation without asking any question and just deriving a whole picture from a moment in time that is just stupid, that is why business in the U.S. have died, because American business men can't see the whole picture, they don't look outside their own little boxes and get trashed in the global market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
BTW, there's a big difference between giving away what someone CHOSE to provide for that express purpose, and giving away taxes which someone was legally obliged to pay. If I buy a bunch of food and clothes and give them to my church, and the church in turn gives these items away, that's a far cry from the government taxing me and giving the money away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
from terry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: from terry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: from terry
Is there any evidence for that or is this just the dogmatic babbling of a journalist in total cognitive surrender?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: from terry
Plus, even if they were not given the supplies how is
"simply taking "stuff" out of their parents' kitchen and giving it away to strangers "
any worse than
simply taking "stuff" out of their parents' kitchen and selling it to strangers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: from terry
1) How do you know parents were not letting the kids do it?
2) Your stance denies existence of voluntarism, altruism and philanthropy. Might want to try aligning it with real life.
3) You gave advice to the kids for free. Or did you charge them?
4) Your column that you are linking online is free to view. I paid nothing for it. Thanks!
5) You also posted here for free. Aren't you going to pay Mike for doing so? Free enterprise and all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: from terry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: from terry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tax Breaks?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You missed the point of the column
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You missed the point of the column
Giving away lemonade does not promote an "entitlement mentality" on the part of either the giver or the recipient.
This is a radical assumption about the motives and worldview of some people that you have never met. I have never met any child old enough to operate a lemonade stand who actually thought that "mommy and daddy" have unlimited wealth.
You really think that their entire worldview of social wealth is going to derive from one experience in which they gave away lemonade? You really think they will extrapolate from that to believe that a government has unlimited money and thus they should be given something for nothing?
Don't you think there is a value in teaching children to give gifts to their neighbors and interact with them? If someone would be developing an entitlement mentality from this, don't you think it would be the recipients of the free lemonade and not those who gave it?
You have not demonstrated that there is any "entitlement crowd", nor have you shown that anyone has failed to understand that lemonade ultimately costs money.
Giving away lemonade is a gained opportunity to teach children about sharing, about being friendly, about socializing, about their neighbors, and about service.
I can't believe I just rebutted the argument that giving away free lemonade will destroy the character of children...ugh. I feel dirty now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You missed the point of the column
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Savage missed the point.
A Mad Max approach to society leads to well... a Mad Max style society. You can't have a functional society that is made up of nothing but self-centered sociopaths. Greed as the singular defining virtue just doesn't work out in the end.
At some point, people need to be willing to give as well as take.
The no-share mentality will eventually ensure that there is no one to do those things that are seen as benefiting the "customer" more than the "seller".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You missed the point of the column
Problem is, her point is a completely stale economic conservative's cookie-cutter response to everything under the sun. And this column proves it. Anybody who would seriously write a column complaining that little girls giving away free lemonade shows what is wrong with the country is obviously much much much much much more obsessed with getting across point 157(b) of the Conservative Economic Manifesto, come hell or high water, than with talking about real things that happen in the real world for real reasons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You missed the point of the column
What the rabidly capitalistic columnist was complaining about was parents teaching their children about things like charity and altruism, which are antithetical to capitalism.
The kids are giving away lemonade (a limited resource) that they did not pay for.
Do you really think the kids parents were doing this without their parents permission? Get real. Just because you can't imagine yourself ever giving anything away for free doesn't mean their parents were likewise so greedy.
Then we'll all live in squalor.
I'm sure if you had things your way everyone but you would live in squalor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You missed the point of the column
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You missed the point of the column
I don't think you're familiar with the concept of capitalism if you believe that. Nowhere do charity and altruism fit in.
"You must make yourself stronger to better help others."
The capitalist makes himself stronger in order to help himself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are you all missing the point?
I don't care if you agree with Savage or not, but could you at least address the real issue she raises, instead of focusing on the children? I know berating her for yelling at children is easier than talking about her real point, but you should give it a shot anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Are you all missing the point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
So the children stole the lemonade? Because certainly stealing and giving away what you stole is wrong. Unless you're Robin Hood, of course.
I also agree that this story never happened, she's basically making an analogy by saying those in the Left think like children. They live in a world where nothing really costs money because their parents pay for everything.
But the analogy fails because parents willingly pay for everything. Parents give kids lemonade for their stand in the same way they might give a kid a baseball and bat to start a game with his friends. Not to make a profit, as you and Terry Savage seem to think. But because it's fun.
That's why everyone here is focusing on the fun the imaginary kids had by starting their imaginary lemonade stand. Because that's the point of having such a stand. That's the point of buying your kid a kiddie-pool. That's the point of buying your kid a football. Etc., etc., etc.
And that's why Terry Savage is utterly wrong in the issue she made up, then raised.
She's erroneously comparing childhood games which are not conducted for profits to situations where profits are expected. She's erroneously comparing situations where people willingly give money to situations where people are forced to pay money via taxes (except for the rich, of course.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Are you all missing the point?
The people who actually do work get to pay both the government and the rich, yet when they engage in constructive social behaviors like sharing (be it lemonade or information) they are ridiculed by those same people for their entitlement mentality.
Ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
The children did chores around their house and were given lemonade materials in return. They decided to give this lemonade away.
See? Anyone can make assumptions!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
No, she didn't present any evidence whatsoever that the children had stolen the lemonade (you're just making stuff up).
Her point was that she was outraged that anyone would give anything to anyone else for free. In Savage's world, the parents of these children should be keeping track of the cost of raising them and demanding repayment, plus profits, as soon as the children are old enough to begin working.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you all missing the point?
The whole story is stupid. Kids gave away lemonade, America is going to hell, blah-blah-blah. Let kids be kids.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free fall
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, it's precisely The Rich who are "entitled".
What's that to do with the topic? Well, at least it clears up the definition of "entitlement", which is bandied around only as a pejorative against the poor getting *subsistence*, while The Rich, who get thousands of times more for no reason either, are never made to feel like they're mooching.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Choices
I may buy a co-worker a soda, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give them a new car.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
legal age
I have to add that the picture of a couple of 18 year olds giving away lemonade with their nanny is amusing however.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: legal age
Somehow, it is still ok to sell it though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cost of life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness
"Wait, what? You know what the Declaration of Independence also didn't include? Anything about how much 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' costs"
Actually, it does, and its fairly expensive… it's only one of the famous lines: "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
</pedantry>
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hope you know my name
Sounds like the columnist got what they wanted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Go with the bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Go with the bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
''Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.''
KJV
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Special Gift Meal
Well, at any rate, the girls had done the whole thing from start to finish: they had planned, cooked, and served a slap-up dinner, "nutritionally balanced" as one of the moms put it, watching her daughter chow down on french fries, and entirely aware of the irony. I don't know who paid for the groceries, but the work of cooking from scratch would be more significant in any case. That's the kind of thing people do in small towns.
I don't know what Terry Savage would make of this. I know pretty well what Ayn Rand would have made of it, of course ("...a voice commanding... 'to a gas chamber go'," as Whitaker Chambers put it).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free is the grease that keeps the wheels of commerce turning.
I wonder how "wrong" it is when my local grocery store has "BUY 1 GET 1 FREE" deals on select items to move more product, much like they did on countless high-demand items for the 4th of July holiday.
I really have to wonder how that "FREE Canon Printer with Laptop Purchase" deal at Office Depot can possibly be wrong. You get something free as incentive to buy a (likely overpriced) laptop.
How about the "FREE" cellphone I got with my 2 year contract with AT&T? Must be that AT&T has no freaking clue what they're doing... or that this lady is a moron masquerading as "financial expert".
I bet my cable company is a true example of "what is wrong with America" because I got a "FREE" DVR cable box, a "FREE" cable modem and a "FREE" VoIP unit when I ordered their tri-service bundle.
Free is everywhere. Leveraging it's power is what separates the failures from the successful. The fact that the article which attacks "FREE" so deliberately from a column which is, in fact, free to view just goes to show how disconnected the writer must be from reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have to admit that if I caught him standing in front of our home giving away lemonade to our neighbors, I would rush out to buy him more lemons, sugar and cups. How would it really be any different than a cookout or any other neighborly get together which has costs associated with it? We're talking about less than $50 in materials for my child to learn a very important lesson in morality which is aligned with my own.
Nothing is truly free, but there is a point where it becomes about principle. I believe principles should always trump profit.
Sharing is caring, and I seriously have to wonder if the virtues of generosity were simply not taught in Terry Savage's home. I suppose it's possible they merely got it backwards... profit trumps principles. Or perhaps profit is the only principle known to her.
Either way, I'm very proud to be so different from this line of thinking. The biggest failure for me would be to see my son develop into a callous, profit-centric a-hole when it is so different from my own and my wife's feelings on the importance of generosity and compassion above material possessions and profitable remuneration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um... not sure if we covered this
Granted the following... They were supplied the materials at no cost. Then they sold the product for no cost. They investited their time - and were paid in smiles and thanks.
Geez I hope my kids figure this one out... smiles and thanks are infitite and yet each and every one of them is both unique and valuable.
Just HTF (How the Fluffy-duck) can anyone realistically claim they did NOT make a profit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do values still mean anything?
No one is trying to teach them to be entitled brats. It's a lesson about *community* and sharing something nice with others.
Our church holds a potluck once a month for our congregation of around 200 people. We know that not everyone can afford to chip in and that not everyone who chips in can donate a lot. Maybe I go to one of those "liberalized" churches, but I think it really fosters a sense of friendship and trust in our church.
What Savage has done is taken something completely harmless and extrapolated it out to it's most illogical extreme. You don't know the children's parents personally. You don't know how they raise them or with which values they are being raised. It's based completely on assumption.
I taught my children to be fiscally responsible as well as moral individuals. Since when did Christian kindness become socialistic in this society? How many cynics must there be to produce this kind of hostile viewpoint? It's a sad day for America when we accuse kids of destroying our nation.
This is just the view of one ol' libertarian gal. Maybe I've become jaded with age, but it just seems wrong to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]