Savage's basic point about people relying too much on government giveaways? Of course, I do. Making a "stand" on that point using the lemonade story and the "outrage" by respondents? Of course I was having a little fun with it because I do find it silly.
I AGREE WITH THE AUTHOR 100 PERCENT. I'M TIRED OF BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERALS GIVING AWAY STUFF AND MAKING US ALL SUCK AT THEIR TEAT. IN FACT, I'M SO MAD THAT I'M STARTING A NEW POLITICAL PARTY. JOIN ME AT LEMON PARTY DOT ORG IF YOU WANT TO USE YOUR LEMON LAW RIGHTS TO REPLACE OUR GOVERNMENT, STARTING WITH BARRY SOETORO (WHERE'S THE CERTIFICATE)
Are you that guy who orders the pay-per-view fight for you and your friends but then refuses to let them in until everyone has paid their fair share of the cost? "Well, guys it looks like Bob didn't show up so now there are only 9 of us so instead of the $5 everyone was supposed to pay I'll need $5.50 from each of you to cover his portion. Oh, and the keg is out back but it's $6 to buy a cup from me and I bought red cups so I'll know if you're using your own."
The difference between those who constantly trumpet the virtues of the 'free market' and those who criticize the 'free market' : those who criticize the 'free market' refuse to kiss the boot that stomps on their face all day. Those who trumpet the virtues of the 'free market' believe that if they keep kissing the boot they will one day have boots of their own.
Not a bad idea! However, as far as the pay-per-view fight, it would never happen. I am philosophically opposed to boxing just as I am to dog fighting, **** fighting, bull fighting, fish fighting etc. Injuries and even death occur in all sports, but in boxing it is not only intentional but desired by the audience. Also, the keg would not exist. I have never had a beer in my life. I don't drink as a rule, although I have a glass of wine every three or four years. Obviously, I've never been drunk.
Damn kids, giving away drinks to thirsty people. Why can't they go back to dealing crack and shooting each other up like in the old days?
You're just being overtly intolerant and narrow-minded. Maybe it's Miller Time where you live? She observed something and she used it as a jumping off point. She may have nailed the particulars right on the head. We'll never know... or did you follow-up. It's just a commentary/opinion based on a brief observation. I don't think it will keep these kids out of private school or college.... :grin:
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5jsORc3sPtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5jsORc3sPtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
This "point" is not really made in the referenced article because there is nothing tangible to support it. It's a malarky argument for people like you who rely on slogans and "truthiness" instead of any semblance of reality. It's a blatant appeal to the ignorant and misinformed, the drunk-on-patriotism folks who meld Ayn Rand's morality with masturbatory capitalist fantasies. If she wanted to make this point, she is welcome too - only I would expect at a minimum some factual information to support it, instead of an absolutely ridiculous anecdotal story about her being a giant jackass to a bunch of innocent kids. Until then, arguments such as yours that depend on the use of an "implied" lesson are as daft as Terry herself.
Wow! The author wasn't a jackass to anybody. I doubt that, in reality, she even said to them what the story indicates. For heaven's sake, it's just a commentary on the state of America. What "facts" is the author wrong about? What "facts" has the author supposed even?
Unless the author was lying in the article, she most certainly was a jackass to the kids. Unless of course, you don't consider a person who stops at a lemonade stand and decides to offer children unsolicited lectures on the virtues of capitalism a jackass.
Where is her jackassery? "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!" It appears she never even got out of the car 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. Her visceral response was to her future sister-in-law's remark. "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." Since when is explaining a point of view jackassery? When you disagree with it?
Sounds like an unsolicited jackass lecture on capitalism to me. Jackass is trying to tell the kids they're wrong for what they're doing, and dictate to them what they should be doing instead. And then taking the jackassery to another level, she writes an article about it to that the rest of the free world must suffer the same stupid lecture. Jackass columnist is a jackass.
Amusing that you conveniently clipped the very next line, where she admits she created tension, which her brother then broke. Creating tension for a bunch of kids at a free lemonade stand to promote her own idiotic views without knowing the facts of the situation is pretty much the definition of jackassery.
I think most of it happened in her mind. That isn't a natural way to address children... from the backseat of a car!?! It's a story for gosh sakes... Hope she wins the Pulitzer!
So in order to justify her jackassery, you're now claiming she made up the story? That would make her both a liar and a jackass.
My reading was that the tension was hers as she awaited some kind of response. Instead her brother orders lemonade and she learns, not surprisingly, that the lemonade is still free.
