A seemingly benign statist regulation is the requirement to describe on the labels of food what the ingredients are. Of course, every statist regulation is anything but benign, backed by the the threat of theft, imprisonment, and ultimately death that they are, but food labeling is desirable, it seems, by almost everybody in society. In which case, why make it mandatory? If it’s truly in demand, those who provide it will profit, and those who don’t, won’t. In fact, the current standard only requires the labeling of what is relatively easy to determine. What isn’t required on the label is the nutritional costs and benefits of each ingredient. That information is much harder to determine. You would think that the more difficult of information to obtain would take precedent in a mandatory labeling scheme. Isn’t that the point? Consumers need help determining whether or not the food they buy is safe, right? The latter question is more important in that regard than the former. Thankfully, entrepreneurs have spotted the demand for more information and have created resources to supply it, resources like Natural News, Marks Daily Apple, and Consumer Reports. Apparently, there is profit in providing consumers what they want. Whodathunkit? And that’s today’s two cents.
Skyler.
