I did make a point (an argument) and you conveniently forget, BTW that statement was from 2 posts ago-before I make my argument the second time-
1) People aren’t stupid.
2) Per the laws of supply and demand, anyone providing a qaulity product in a free market will have a thriving business, anyone producing a poor product will suffer in their sales.
3) In a market where there is freedom of information, knowledge of a bad (unhealthy) product will be punished by lack of customer support
3b) Their competitors that provide a sanitary food product will gain in business and take the customers the first business would have
4)Therefore it benefits business economically to maintain sanitary practice.
5) The job of clean and health food has been done, without the need for government ‘watchdog’ agency
Lets actually answer this time instead of trying to win this argument without actually saying anything substantive, and by avoidind the issue.
“5) The job of clean and health food has been done, without the need for government ‘watchdog’ agency
I can agree with each of your points without agreeing with your conclusion. Certainly, a free market will weed out substandard products (including diners with poor sanitation). That does not mean that the ‘free market’ solution is the best.
One of the greatest weaknesses of a free market solution is that it is essentially reactionary requiring some time to do it’s work. During that time, a diner with poor sanitation can cause all sorts of mischief. The free market can only react to information. A public health department can pre-emptively prevent illness and death.
Another weakness of the a free market solution is the quality of information available to the decision maker. Where does one new to an area get the quality information necessary to make informed decisions on the quality of a food service?
Sure, I can go into a diner and conduct my own health inspection. Why should I want to spend an hour or so doing these inspections when I can see the posted results of a public health inspection? That of course assumes that I would also want to spend the time to develop the training necessary to do my own health inspections.
This is one of the weaknesses of the libertarian approach that tends to automatically assume that a non-public solution is almost always best.
Do you also buy into the belief shared by some libertarians that we can replace our police, fire, and court systems with free market solutions?