But never having read Marx Mr. Savage misses something. The raw materials of this operation may have been provided by the parents of the three girls but the girls still had to do the work of getting the lemonade to the side of the road and setting up the table, etc. This work was a service given freely. And the nanny is probably also getting a good break by having the girls occupied on this scheme to relieve the thirst of the thirsty. Thus there are transfers of social benefits that have nothing to do with the "de-commodification" of the lemonade that so upsets the "writer" of the column.
Further, Mr. Savage probably doesn't realize how deeply anti-capitalist real-existing capitalism is in the U.S. The rich always hate "free markets" if it infringes on their "rights," "pleasures" and profits a little too much. So most of the "upscale neighborhoods" I know of have their own little regulations against actually selling things on the side of the road.
Finally, I hope that Mr. Savage is consistent enough to be anti-religion since many religions believe in "service" of others in the spirit of charity.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> <
> http://www.suntimes.com/business/savage/2464546,CST-NWS-savage05.savagearticle
> >
>
> There is no 'free' lemonade
> In giving drink away, girls ignore rules of economics -- and sum up what's
> wrong with U.S.
>
> July 5, 2010
> BY TERRY SAVAGE Sun-Times Columnist
>
> This column is a true story -- every word of it. And I think it very
> appropriate to consider around the Fourth of July, Independence Day spirit.
>
> Last week, I was in a car with my brother and his fiancee, driving through
> their upscale neighborhood on a hot summer day. At the corner, we all
> noticed three little girls sitting at a homemade lemonade stand.
>
> Three girls giving away free lemonade isn't cute, it's indicative of the
> lack of economic responsibility we're passing on to future generations.
>
> We follow the same rules in our family, and one of them is: Always stop to
> buy lemonade from kids who are entrepreneurial enough to open up a little
> business.
>
> My brother immediately pulled over to the side of the road and asked about
> the choices.
>
> The three young girls -- under the watchful eye of a nanny, sitting on the
> grass with them -- explained that they had regular lemonade, raspberry
> lemonade, and small chocolate candy bars.
>
> Then my brother asked how much each item cost.
>
> "Oh, no," they replied in unison, "they're all free!"
>
> I sat in the back seat in shock. Free? My brother questioned them again:
> "But you have to charge something? What should I pay for a lemonade? I'm
> really thirsty!"
>
> His fiancee smiled and commented, "Isn't that cute. They have the spirit of
> giving."
>
> That really set me off, as my regular readers can imagine.
>
> "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."
>
> 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.
>
> And so the voters demand more -- more subsidies for mortgages, more
> bailouts, more loan modification and longer periods of unemployment
> benefits.
>
> They're all very nice. But these things aren't free.
>
> The government only gets the money to pay these benefits by raising taxes,
> meaning taxpayers pay for the "free lemonade." Or by printing money -- which
> is essentially a tax on savings, since printing more money devalues the
> wealth we hold in dollars.
>
> If we can't teach our kids the basics of running a lemonade stand, how can
> we ever teach Congress the basics of economics?
>
> Or maybe it's the other way around: The kids are learning from the society
> around them. No one has ever taught them there's no free lunch -- and all
> they see is "free," not the result of hard work, and saving, and scrimping.
>
> 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.
>
> And that's the Savage Truth!
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-