A few years ago, I was your typical office-worker: stressed out, uneven energy, overweight, and inconsistent complexion. Now I'm just your typical 28-year old urban hunter-gatherer on a quest to be healthy, and having a few adventures along the way. See my full bio.
You know my position on gourmet cupcakes: evil of the purest form. Princess of Comfort Foods. Harbinger of Civilizational (Tooth) Decay. Which is why you may be surprised to hear me defend some cupcake makers. Get this:
Welcome to the regulatory state. Where you need a license to live. What a great lesson to teach our children: don't bother. Don't bother taking a risk, starting a little business, and learning how to turn a profit. Pack up your enterprise, turn off your ingenuity, and go play some video games.
Shame on Michael Wolfensohn. But Wolfensohn was just following the rules. The rules are the problem. A bad set of rules looks like this: everything is illegal, with the exception of complex specified licensed activities. Good rules: everything is legal, with the exception of a few simple specified illegal activities.
You might say that this is an isolated incident. It's not. Burdensome regulations have shut down local farmers markets. And if you want some horror stories that are happening all over America, visit the Institute for Justice. IJ has done pro-bono work on economic liberty cases.
The DC Board of Cosmetology? The Louisiana Horticulture Commission? These bureaucracies are parasites. And the people who work there are parasites. It's terrible that we have to even assert this, but people have a right to make an honest living.
As for the 13-year old cupcake makers? I disapprove of what you sell, but I will defend to the death your right to sell it.*
* Except for Sex and the City gourmet cupcakes. If you sell those, you're on your own, boys. I may even tip off the officer myself.
Update: One reader, Bob Ewing, actually works for IJ. Check out his comments, and this excellent video on all the crazy licensing regulations out there.
Comments
This reminds me of one of my
This reminds me of one of my friends being harrassed by the state dept of Revnue because one of their agents saw her guitar lesson flyer posted inside of a grocery store. The agent spent a few hours harrassing my friend throughout the week so the state could collect 6% sales tax on her two guitar lesson students during what was a summer job. She maybe earned $100 and paid $6 in sales tax that summer while this revenue agent cost the taxpayers $40. Bureaucracy run amok.
This reminds me of one of my
This reminds me of one of my friends being harrassed by the state dept of Revnue because one of their agents saw her guitar lesson flyer posted inside of a grocery store. The agent spent a few hours harrassing my friend throughout the week so the state could collect 6% sales tax on her two guitar lesson students during what was a summer job. She maybe earned $100 and paid $6 in sales tax that summer while this revenue agent cost the taxpayers $40. Bureaucracy run amok.
Ok, there was a similar
Ok, there was a similar story in a town, not too far from me, where this girl was selling lemonade in her neighborhood park, and the police shut her down, because "selling lemonade without a license is against city and state law." I understand doing your job, and all, but she was 10, and she was selling something for petty cash. It's like here, in SF, these women were selling their artwork on the street corner, for I think 10-20$ a pop. The police find out, and they got a night in jail, and a fine.I think the only way they should be able to tack a person for not having a license, is if the person was a full business, and they had a structure, and atleast 3 walls.
Ok, there was a similar
Ok, there was a similar story in a town, not too far from me, where this girl was selling lemonade in her neighborhood park, and the police shut her down, because "selling lemonade without a license is against city and state law." I understand doing your job, and all, but she was 10, and she was selling something for petty cash. It's like here, in SF, these women were selling their artwork on the street corner, for I think 10-20$ a pop. The police find out, and they got a night in jail, and a fine.I think the only way they should be able to tack a person for not having a license, is if the person was a full business, and they had a structure, and atleast 3 walls.
Great post John! I work for
Great post John! I work for the Institute for Justice and can tell you that these are not isolated incidents, but part of a big national problem. We litigated a casket licensing case in the 10th circuit a few years ago. There was a group of industry insiders that got a law passed to protect themselves from competition. The federal judge actually wrote this in his opinion: [W]hile baseball may be the national pastime of the citizenry, dishing out special economic benefits to certain in-state industries remains the favored pastime of state and local governments.For a few more recent examples:
The bottom line is that all too often, licensing laws hurt the public rather than help it, creating needless red tape that means less options for consumers and would-be entrepreneurs. At worst, they allow powerful industry insiders to protect themselves from honest competition. Here's a fun animated video we just put together called Why Can't Chuck Get His Business Off the Ground? And here's a longer piece on licensing laws I did for FEE.
I know it seems silly in the
I know it seems silly in the context of young kids selling treats but perhaps its better that there is some regulation to ensure that the food they are selling meets health code and provides the necessary nutritional/allergy information. While I know there are plenty of food establishments that pass code and still hand out what should rightfully considered toxic substances, if I were someone with a known severe allergy to a particular ingredient in their food, I would want to know. Such a warning would protect both the consumer and help protect the kids from prosecution.
You can't hold small, local
You can't hold small, local operations to the same standards as the big guys. Expensive regulation is an ADVANTAGE of the big guys because they have the money to pay for expensive equipment, lawyers, and expensive demands.
And people with allergies, when it comes down to it, have to be responsible for eating foods when they know the ingredients. We already have ingredient labeling.
While your sentiment may be well-intentioned, I'm of the opinion it doesn't operate well in reality.
I believe we have to hold
I believe we have to hold small, local operations to the same standards as the big guys. Consider the following situation in the automotive industry. There are small and large automotive parts manufacturers all over the metropolitan Detroit. Many small groups struggle because of the burden of expensive regulation, just as you noted. However, some have succeeded because not only do they design, develop and bring to market a product that meets the expensive codes but also deliver the personal touch that automotive part giants cannot hope to establish. In such a scenario, which plays out in small businesses across America, we end up with a standardly safe product who's wheels don't fall off or in the case of baked goods don't poison us and in the end, people are safe. By way of counterargument, let me be the first to say that this does not happen universally but it does happen more often than not. As far as my sentiment operating poorly in reality, I am personally acquainted via family with a tool and die manufacturer on Groesbeck in Clinton Twp, MI which has survived the automotive holocaust of the 70's and 80's, thrived in the 90's and withstood the most recent Great Recession and are still ticking. And every part is made to code just like those of the big boys (they have to be: the local and national commissions do the same regular inspections). Now before we get too far afield from your original position: I am in agreement that little boys selling treats would more than likely struggle to pass a rigorous FDA inspection and to little gain because their products are very likely safe and delicious. Your position on allergies and the people who live and die by them daily notwishstanding, I would still like to know if my rice crispie treat was made from a rice crispie box that the kids found in their grandmother's basement that has been collecting dust for years (rice crispies likely have enough preservatives that they are still safe but that's a debate for another thread!). Perhaps I'm paranoid or maybe I just don't like experiencing trips to emergency departments due to foodborne illness which is another scenario with which I am intimately acquainted, both as as health care provider and as an unlucky consumer.Is comparing automotive part development and streetside food vending too extreme? Perhaps. Or maybe it highlights that different levels of small-business require regulation administered at doses appropriate to their respective potential for inadvertent risk to public health and safety. Who decides these delineations is outside the scope of this argument but could make for another lively debate!As always, thanks for the thought provoking posts!
I haven't yet figured out why
I haven't yet figured out why there seems to be such a connection between paleo and libertarianism/general anti-government philosophy. Maybe it has something to do with a general distrust of government leading you away from the food pyramid? Don't want to bother with hunting licenses? Just spit-balling here.
Really? This seems obvious
Really? This seems obvious to me. Most people do not question "the way things are". They have no idea why they know the things they know, how they gained that knowledge, or that some things are known with more confidence than others. They don't realize that what they know is mostly a haphazard conglomeration of what they have been told. It never occurs to them that they should question not just things which are counter-intuitive and bizarre, but things which are obvious and ubiquitous.When you start to question everything, two of the easiest things to discover are that our diets are terrrible, and our governments are worse.
Bryan - that was a really,
Bryan - that was a really, really good answer. Of course, there's always the possibility that we're all just counter-cultural snobs, but I like to think Paleo resonates with me because I'm such a smart seeker of truth. Good comment, kudos.
Bryan - that was a really,
Bryan - that was a really, really good answer. Of course, there's always the possibility that we're all just counter-cultural snobs, but I like to think Paleo resonates with me because I'm such a smart seeker of truth. Good comment, kudos.
"...two of the easiest things
"...two of the easiest things to discover are that are diets are terrible, and our governments are worse." Truth. You're probably right that the connection has to do with the type of questioning that leads to particular ideas.
Here's a little girl's
Here's a little girl's lemonade stand shut down by the health inspector:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/portland_lemonade_s...
Again, just doing his job.
Man that is just plain
Man that is just plain depressing.
The councilman is still to
The councilman is still to blame for his actions, just as the policeman who jails someone for growing plants is responsible for his actions. In neither case is "the law" threatening violence against the law enforcer for not enforcing it.
You're like Chomsky defending
You're like Chomsky defending that French holocaust denier.