It was the lyrics to a Billy Holiday song.
Them that's got shall get/ Them that's not shall lose/ So the Bible said and it still is news/ Mama may have, Papa may have/ But God bless the child that's got his own/ That's got his own
Yes, the strong gets more/ While the weak ones fade/ Empty pockets don't ever make the grade/ Mama may have, Papa may have/ But God bless the child that's got his own/ That's got his own
Money, you've got lots of friends/ Crowding round the door/ When you're gone, spending ends/ They don't come no more/ Rich relations give/ Crust of bread and such/ You can help yourself/
But don't take too much/ Mama may have, Papa may have/ But God bless the child that's got his own/ That's got his own
Mama may have, Papa may have/ But God bless the child that's got his own/ That's got his own/ He just worry 'bout nothin'/ Cause he's got his own
This is quite poignant on several levels. I love this song, but I associate it most

As you can imagine, this gives the song a very snide, capitalistic and awfully selfish slant, which are fully justified in that environment. However, I find that unfair towards the song, as the implications are certainly more than the simple finger pointing the film has employed the song for.
Independence
It also discusses an aspect which I feel is much more related to my own situation, which is that of wanting to be independent. Known for its capitalistic morality, which is a deeply lodged assumption in the song, Billy Holiday sings in her rough beautiful voice about "having" being a position to strive for. Not once does she mention work but clearly outlines their background, which increases the song's deeply capitalistic ideal. Ironically, the song implies the relief of worry when one "has their own". What has never ceased to amaze me (read any good biography) is how family members throughout history have tended to believe that financial help in a financially tight situation will ease the worry of whomever that 'generosity' is bestowed upon. However, such is certainly not the case. In fact, the worry heaps fourfold in any normal human being (yes, I'm judgmental of freeloaders who are cool with being such).
1. "How can a relationship possibly be healthy under conditions of expectations of gratitude?"
2. "How hard do I need to work and how much do I have to succeed in order to justify and gratefully convert the opportunity and investment to it's full extent? Am I providing a high enough ROI, in whichever terms?"
3. "When I'm nice, I want to know for certain that THEY know it is NOT because of money, but because I enjoy their company. How can I prevent that awful oil swimming on the surface of the relationship when money is involved?"
4. "I can't possibly spend a single penny on anything beyond survival needs. If I did, it would be like betrayal"
Fashion is capitalism
That last point is the one which applies to fashion lovers the most. Fashion is, to a great extent, about consumption of goods and more importantly, about ENJOYING that investment. In order to do so, money must be earned. You can see where this is going. However casual, sometimes a mere side effect or even necessary evil, that capitalistic need of the fashionista to OWN and SHOP, the participation is certainly unavoidable in a culture as consumer focused as fashion. My point is - there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you achieve it based on your own merits, your own hard work and the knowledge that there is NO aspect whatsoever which would allow what has been acquired to belong or have to be justified to anybody but myself. This is the only psychological situation in which I can truly release a big chunk of worry, which still doesn't cancel out the debt of the cost, time and emotional investment in the upbringing of little Lira to Lira Leirner.

Yes, I may work hard, and yes, I have a wardrobe bigger than most boutiques and a shoe collection that could rival the fictional one of Carrie. But my dear family, as Billy says herself: I "have my own", I am without worry. Fashion is capitalism, but I can see it changing.