Tony of Publius Endures has written a beautifully-titled rant about my adopted home state’s ban on trans fats, while Nicola Karras has met my call for more Iqra’i blogging with an almost-convincing argument in its favor. But not all the way convincing, and not only because I’m a knee-jerk anti-paternalist, but also because – as I suggested recently in arguing for Schwenkler’s First Rule of Government, and as seems to me to be borne out by each of the news articles I’ve read about the ban – this strikes me as yet another case where the negative economic impacts of the regulatory state hit smaller businesses a good deal harder than bigger ones. That just about every big fast food chain – Burger King seems to be the one exception – had alredy taken steps in the direction of a trans fat-free future should be the first clue: these kinds of policies are implemented more easily when the increased costs can be spread out over economies of scale, and companies with large and highly-paid R&D teams will be able to do a better job of developing cheap and pleasant-tasting replacements for the banned substances. This basic strategy – taking a step on your own, then either actively lobbying or waiting around until your competition is forced to do the same – is a great way to use the nanny state to help you get ahead, and whether or not this sort of approach was a real factor in the case at issue, the inegalitarian effects of such regulation should not be taken lightly. Moreover, as Nicola notes, the prominence of trans fats is itself a product of farm subsidies and misguided nutrition policy – and do we really need to be giving more power to a class of people with such a horrendous history of getting things dreadfully wrong in the past? I think trans fats are icky, too, and in my house we’ve responded to this by getting rid of them and cooking instead with copious amounts of delicious lard and butter: but there’s every reason to worry that whatever positive effects this ban may have on public health are likely to be outweighed by its indirect injustices, not to mention its immediate consequences for the positive good that is negative liberty. Then again, maybe there are some trans fat bootleggers who’ll go underground and make a fortune selling their wares to libertarian yuppies like me. Health hazards aside, that would make it all seem worthwhile.
(Image via Flickrers Jess and Colin.)
Filed under: food, government/law, libertarianism
Recent Comments