Proposal for nutrtion info on menus nation wide.............

So the government is working on getting a bill passed so all restaurants in the country(not just NYC and a fell other cities any more) have to post their nutrition facts on the menu if they have more than 20 chains :-). I think that is a great idea. Below is a link to the article and please share your opinions!

http://harkin.senate.gov/pr/p.cfm?i=314244

Original Post by pgeorgian:

Original Post by theholla:

I think this is a bit of a straw man, since that information is already out there and can easily be accessed by any consumer who is interested. By contrast, the nutritional content of a restaurant's food is known only to that restaurant, and in numerous cases is never made available to the consumer, unless they live in a city or state that mandates it.

the information is out there, but to assume that it can be easily accessed by any consumer is dead wrong.  the link between obesity and low socio-economic status is well established, and much of the nutritional information for restaurants (not to mention food in general - hello, how did we all find ourselves here?) is most-easily available on-line.  not everyone has a home computer with internet; it's still a luxury.  those of us with two or three computers may find this hard to believe, but the reality is that for some people accessing this information means making a trip to a public library or other access point and then - what?  writing down the information for every meal they think they might ever want to eat?  printing page after page (at--i dunno--20c/page?) and taking it all home, hoping you have what you need?  then sifting through it at the drive-thru or the table while your family tries to order?

this legislation is about public health.  if some businesses have to make adjustments, that's unfortunate, but lots of other businesses have made adjustments to accomodate the changing social context.  and the restaurants that didn't contribute to the problem won't suffer any consequences.

I do support requiring chain restaurants to disclose nutrition information on premises, I just thought that lysistrata's suggestion that the restaurants be mandated to educate consumers on nutrition was a sarcastic example of either a straw man or reductio ad absurdum (my formal logic is a little rusty).

I used to teach in a West Philadelphia K-8 school where something like 85% of the student body lived below the poverty line, and have seen first hand what the obesity epidemic looks like. While there were nutrition classes, which was pretty neat, it wasn't enough to overcome the crap school lunch program, lack of physical activity, and limited healthy options nearby. So yeah - I absolutely agree with you here.

Original Post by floggingsully:

Original Post by ds1973:

The restaurant owner should have the freedom to post (or not) nutritional information, and you, the consumer, have the freedom to eat there (or not).

Wait, are you arguing that the free market is the best solution or that individual freedoms are? 

They are not exclusive.  

A free market, by definition, is free from government intervention and is the only system of trade that allows individuals to trade with one another free from coercion. 

A free market, or laissez-faire capitalism is a result of freedom loving individuals using their skills, time and property to sustain their own lives and trading with one another free from coercion.

The role of government in the economy is limited to the courts to mediate contractual disputes and allegations of force or fraud.  The military and police are there to defend against those who would willingly initiate force to violate life or property.

Original Post by ds1973:

They are not exclusive.  

A free market, by definition, is free from government intervention and is the only system of trade that allows individuals to trade with one another free from coercion. 

But the free market works better when there is government intervention, thus if the free market is the best solution government intervention is required. 

I think this is a good idea because you really think before ordering something once the calories posted is in your face. When i used to work in NYC i remember walking through Penn station and seeing the calorie counts listed at dunkin donuts for each donut- it made me think twice about ordering a reduced fat blueberry muffin! However a lot of businesses have complained because they say they are losing out on business because people will not buy their products anymore (such as a place like dunkin donuts)

Original Post by theholla:

Original Post by pgeorgian:

Original Post by theholla:

I think this is a bit of a straw man, since that information is already out there and can easily be accessed by any consumer who is interested. By contrast, the nutritional content of a restaurant's food is known only to that restaurant, and in numerous cases is never made available to the consumer, unless they live in a city or state that mandates it.

the information is out there, but to assume that it can be easily accessed by any consumer is dead wrong.  the link between obesity and low socio-economic status is well established, and much of the nutritional information for restaurants (not to mention food in general - hello, how did we all find ourselves here?) is most-easily available on-line.  not everyone has a home computer with internet; it's still a luxury.  those of us with two or three computers may find this hard to believe, but the reality is that for some people accessing this information means making a trip to a public library or other access point and then - what?  writing down the information for every meal they think they might ever want to eat?  printing page after page (at--i dunno--20c/page?) and taking it all home, hoping you have what you need?  then sifting through it at the drive-thru or the table while your family tries to order?

this legislation is about public health.  if some businesses have to make adjustments, that's unfortunate, but lots of other businesses have made adjustments to accomodate the changing social context.  and the restaurants that didn't contribute to the problem won't suffer any consequences.

I do support requiring chain restaurants to disclose nutrition information on premises, I just thought that lysistrata's suggestion that the restaurants be mandated to educate consumers on nutrition was a sarcastic example of either a straw man or reductio ad absurdum (my formal logic is a little rusty).

I used to teach in a West Philadelphia K-8 school where something like 85% of the student body lived below the poverty line, and have seen first hand what the obesity epidemic looks like. While there were nutrition classes, which was pretty neat, it wasn't enough to overcome the crap school lunch program, lack of physical activity, and limited healthy options nearby. So yeah - I absolutely agree with you here.

Bingo!

I was thinking of it as a slippery slope, myself.  Meaning, if the goal is to make the information accessible, at what point is accessibility established?  I think pg illustrated what I was getting at very well.

edited to add follow-up thought

The problem, though, is that if the laws only apply to chain restaurants, it will not allow the market to direct people toward healthier choices.  Your local mom-and-pop burger joint is probably not any less loaded with salty, high-calorie, saturated fatty junk than the chain restaurant.  But mom and pop get to keep the calorie content of their food a secret.  If anything, the proposed law is potentially misleading in that it suggests mom and pop have nothing to hide ... and that simply may not be the case.

Original Post by floggingsully:

But the free market works better when there is government intervention, thus if the free market is the best solution government intervention is required. 

I dispute this statement.  Define "works better".  Government regulation skews incentives causing unintended behavior to arise, leading to more cries for government regulation to "fix" the unintended consequences from the first intervention.

Please also stop using the term "free market" when you really mean "mixed market".

Original Post by ds1973:

Define "works better". 

 works better = more efficiently.

Can you give an example from anywhere in the world where a pure free market works at all?

Original Post by floggingsully:

Can you give an example from anywhere in the world where a pure free market works at all?

Heck, I'd settle for an example of where a true free market has ever even existed in a form other than a rhetorical device.

"A system that consistently protects individual rights, that legally prohibits any initiation of governmental force, has never existed.

...The northern states of the United States in the 19th century were the closest to a laissez-faire form of government that mankind has come. But even there, federal and state authorities often retained the legal power to coercively regulate industry and trade—and to abridge individual rights in other forms."

"The essence of a free market is not "perfect" competition, but freedom of competition -- freedom to produce and trade without coercion."

When governments deregulate and respect property rights, good things can happen:

Anaheim, a Free-Market Laboratory

How governments can screw up the market:

Examples of government predation

New state regulations during "deregulation" are the cause of California's energy crisis.

I'm not quite sure this is the best of ideas. Although I think the intention is to have people eat a more healthy diet, I think that the emphasis on calories does not necessarily reveal how "healthy" a dish is. More and more people are becoming focused on the calorie content of food vs. the actual health benefits of the foods they are eating. And while calories are important, it is also important to focus on the types and amounts of fat, sugar, cholesterol, sodium, protein etc. necessary for a balanced meal.

The individuals calling for the restaurants to post nutritional information on menus/menu boards are most likely young adults and older adults who are health conscious and seeking healthy dietary choices, and I am not criticizing this group by any means (I mean, I'm one of them). And I do believe that restaurants should have nutritional info readily available for customers WHO ASK for it! These adults, who are deliberately seeking healthy choices are fully capable of asking for the information if they deem it necessary... so why place the information on the menu, in plain view?

I also do not think this idea is the best way to address the obesity concern, as it brings the topic of calorie-counting out into a larger public domain. This will enable young children to develop certain patterns of eating, young children who may not fully understand the "big-picture" when it comes to living nutritiously. It would be sad to see an increase in the number of young children being impacted by disordered eating, at the expense of providing knowledgable adults with the calorie information they demand. Now, an increase in the cases of young children with disordered eating patterns is just an example of what could happen, and I'm not suggesting that it will... but I wouldn't want to take the chance and create a world full of calorie-counting little tykes. Children need to be free to enjoy their wonder years and without having the adult world, of calorie-obsession, encroach upon their little world.