Christmas Economics

Christmas time is supposed to be about giving right? Even though the original meaning of the holiday has for the most part disappeared (at least from American culture), it is still somewhat visible in the time honored tradition of "Christmas presents". Ironically, this ritual that was supposed to be symbolic of Jesus giving his life for the sins of the world has become a symbol of materialism. But enough of my bashing what Christianity has turned into. Here is the dilemma:

So I spent $40 this year in buying gifts for both of my parents, roughly $20 each. I purchased all of their gifts at Borders bookstore. Interestingly enough, one of the gifts they gave to me this year was a $40 gift card to the same bookstore. This means that I broke even and got back what I gave...or did I?

In reality I had to give up $40 in liquid capital (a term that I may have just invented which denotes something that can be traded for goods and services anywhere). Yes, I do have $40 that I can use at Borders now, but I cannot use it anywhere else. So therefore, that $40 that I could have used anywhere has been reduced into a form that can only be used at Borders. This means that I didn't exactly "break even". (Maybe if I had decided to use that $40 at Borders to buy something for myself before buying gifts, it would be a different issue, but I'll leave this variable up to the micro-economists).

I was thinking about all of this, and then it hit me. I could just save the gift card until next Christmas, and then use it to purchase Christmas presents for my parents. The $40 in liquid capitol I'd save in the process would keep me from taking a loss next year.

But then I thought some more about it, and I realized that maybe the sacrifice of having to spend $40, only at Borders is my outward Christmas gift/sacrifice (thinking in economic terms of course...my parents loved the books and golden retriever calender). It's not nearly as big of a gift as Jesus gave, but maybe it's the best an unemployed 19 year old can do.