Cmdr. Maegil wrote:Callas wrote:It's commerical, in that someone else is making a profit by doing so. The cost of buying lunch is the price of the commodities and the service that you buy.
If a friend calls you to lunch/dine at his home, it doesn't matter how much HE paid for it, for you it comes for free. But, by your reaction, you don't seem to have ever enjoyed that experience...
I would care how much my friend paid for the lunch he bought me. If he paid too much, I would be concerned - if he paid too little, insulted!
You are thinking in a narrow sense, and in that sense, you are correct; I turn up, I pay nothing.
But in the larger sense, what has actually happened is that your friend has transfered wealth to you, by paying a bill you would otherwise pay, and this is the point made by that quote in the context it was originally (by the author) given; that nothing is free. You may not pay for it, but *someone* paid for it.
Cmdr. Maegil wrote:callas wrote:When you pay for your lunch, it's on a voluntary basis.
No, it's not. If a friend invites me, I wouldn't INSULT him by paying. If I'm at a restaurant or buy groceries, I pay because I'm compelled to do so least the manager calls the police!
No. Your action is voluntary, because you are not compelled to buy the food from the retailer.
You are compelled to pay for the food, because you agreed to do so when you choose to buy it; if you had no agreed to do so, the retailer would not have given you the food.
Of course, what can then be said is - "but I am compelled to buy food, or I will die!"
This is where we come back to "there's no such thing as a free lunch".
You are indeed compelled to buy food, unless you wish to die. However, food isn't free, and that means you have to put in some work to obtain food. Such is life.
To argue that other people should be compelled to feed you (the lament that you are "forced" to pay) is in fact to say that they should do the work you could do, to obtain your food, which is essentially to say they are your slaves in this matter.
Cmdr. Maegil wrote:Sorry if I offend you, but the impression you pass is of someone who has just learnt at school about the capitalism/marxism dicotomy, got dazed by it and is trying to lecture us in a absurdly pedant way. Please, keep the subject to non-realworld stuff, as we play games to get away from it.
I'm not offended at all. You are wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm upset. You are jumping to an enourmous conclusion from three BB posts.