Consumers' Freedom of Choice: Comment

Abstract

Dr. Potter's excellent paper on Consumer Freedom of Choice and Social Needs/' wide-ranging as it does over entire consumer land? scape from value structure of family to restrictive practices of oligopolists, to government's role in guiding consumer choice, and to consumer education, again illustrates how topics in welfare economics become snarled with philosophic suppositions and implications. It con? firms conviction that treatment of such problems calls for mutual cooperation and interplay between Philosophy and Economics. Philos? ophy is needed in its architectonic function of denning ultimate goals and purposes, in this case human freedom and welfare. Economics is needed to specify constraints which scarcity?in its strict scientific sense as wants outpacing means?imposes on freedom and welfare. Without philosophic guidance, freedom often comes to mean that for which we are not accountable. The economist will ordinarily and, on whole, legitimately assume free choice as an absolute human value. Then, following his scientific instincts, search for a measuring stick, alighting upon some form of free income, disposable income or, as Dr. Potter has in her formula, uncommitted income. This entirely defensible procedure, however, will more than likely embroil him in difficulties. For instance, with Dr. Potter's formula we have anomalous situation that contracting for an Arthur Murray dancing course removes this act from area of free choice, but income reserved to satisfy elementary needs of food, clothing and shelter is considered uncommitted and hence allow? ing freedom of choice. For my part, I confess that even though my meal menus vary I am very much committed to some compulsive, habitual expenditures on breakfast, lunch, and dinner. As for dancing, on other hand, this remains very much a free and strongly willed act (my wife's, not my own) as I am dragged, heels-braced, periodically to studio. Without Economics, on other hand, freedom is often viewed as something impossibly ethereal, like the lark on wing hardly touched by gravitational pull of matter. Economics, however, points out hard fact that every free act labors under constraints imposed by scarcity. It goes beyond affirming that there is no such thing as a free lunch to warning that every act incurs costs in time, energy, concentra 82