"Raise the price of toys"
Interesting post by Pamela Paul about how we should "Raise the price of toys."As an example, Paul remembers about how special it was, when she was growing up, to buy a new sticker. How she would buy one off of the big roll at a stationary store, and she had to get someone from the store to help you make the big purchase. Paul laments how inexpensive stickers have become now, that we can buy literally hundreds of them for under ten bucks, how they have lost their zing, and how "in our abundance, something has been lost."
According to Paul's article, the average American child receives 70 new toys a year. The U.S has only 4 percent of the world's children, yet we consume 40 percent of the world's toys. Paul suggests only offering toys that are "10% toy, 90% child," meaning they require some imagination. She also suggests that perhaps we need to raise the price of toys, so that we learn to value them again. Or we could just buy less of them.
No matter what, I can't think of a kid that needs 70 toys a year. Yikes. And putting this all in perspective, be sure to read this New York Times article on labor in China, child labor that is.














Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-05-2008 @ 5:25PM
Rick said...
Different time, different income levels, different ecomnomics equlas different values. The 70 new toys a year seems extraordinarily high, but that's the sliding scale from a single stick decades ago. Are parents to spend more to get less to make the fewer items mean more? That's a horrible idea if you ask me.
Reply
5-05-2008 @ 3:44PM
Patricia said...
I'm not sure.
I interpret this, at least the statistics quoted, to mean that we should buy less toys overall, because kids could become overloaded with so many toys every year. Instead, buy toys more carefully, perhaps buying toys of a higher quality, toys that take some imagination.
I agree that paying more for the same exact toys isn't appealing, unless it addresses some other issue (fair trade, eco-friendly, etc).