The Maintenance Shop seems to be in need of some maintenance. The M-Shop, a music venue by night and restaurant/bar by day, is facing a budget deficit, prompting consideration by ISU Dining administrators to end its lunch services.

The announcement that the M-Shop may no longer offer sandwiches and beer on campus ignited a flurry of protest from a variety of sources. The Daily Editorial Board, naming the M-Shop an “ISU institution,” wrote that the cost of ending lunch services to save money “is too great and the benefit too little.” A columnist reminded readers that “Some things are more important than money,” urging administrators to reconsider. Several M-Shop diners wrote letters in protest, referring to the restaurant as a “cultural institution” and a “cultural treasure.”

Meanwhile, administrators are faced with a large deficit which must be corrected. The M-Shop, like any other business, exists to make profit. Without a profit or someone willing to take a loss on its survival, any business is forced to close. Yet at the mere mention of this possibility, many have reacted angrily — not at any allegedly poor management practices, but at the notion that a business entity could be unwilling to provide them with a sandwich for less than it cost to make.

Although I am generally critical of the attitudes of the M-Shop defenders, I have to acknowledge their creativity. I never thought I would hear someone demand what amounts to a subsidized meal by calling it a “cultural treasure,” nor did I imagine that a business would be begged to sustain a loss due to its attaining the status of a “cultural institution.”

No one disputes that the M-Shop is an enjoyable place to have lunch or meet with friends. But it is at least somewhat suspect to refer to it as an “institution” when the problem it faces is a lack of customers.

It would be fine for a loyal customer of a business to offer advice and encouragement in times of financial trouble. But it is obscene to demand that it throw away its bottom line and instead take a loss in accordance with the customers’ wishes.

Director of Campus Dining Jon Lewis’ response to critics — that if the M-Shop is important to them, they should find money to subsidize it — was absolutely justified. The budget leaks must be plugged somehow, and closing the M-Shop for lunch is one way to help achieve that goal.

The dangerous theme that runs through this issue is the idea that in business there should be something higher than profit, captured by the phrase “Some things are more important than money.” This is a manifestation of the doctrine of altruism, which holds that the individual’s interest is trumped by service to others.

In the social realm, we see this as the view that the charity worker is the example of the moral person, while the business owner seeking profit is the epitome of vice and greed. In foreign policy, it is manifested by the existence of the U.S. Agency for International Development, a government bureaucracy whose sole function is to give away taxpayer money to foreign nations. In domestic policy, it is manifested by the Medicare and Social Security programs, which justify their spending with the moral imperative to provide health care and retirement plans to all comers.

The doctrine of altruism is destructive in every realm it operates, whether social or economic. The antidote is the principle that each person has the moral right to pursue his or her own interest. In economics, this principle reads: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

Those in pursuit of a free lunch typically employ the strategy of invoking collective ownership, exemplified by the claim that the M-Shop belongs “to the students, faculty, staff and alumni of Iowa State, as well as to the city of Ames.” The more people believe this, the fewer objections they will have to paying for it. The same goes for Medicare, Social Security and all similar programs.

One M-Shop diner, referring to its potential closing, demanded to know: “Is nothing sacred?” The answer: not if that which is sacred must be provided at someone else’s expense.