Comments on: Call me Street Food libertarian

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:46:08 +0000

I couldn’t understand some parts of this article Call me Street Food libertarian, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.

By: …no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #9

…no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #9 — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:52:18 +0000

[...] “The Rats of El Toro,” Angelica’s response to my critique of her “street-food-libertarianism,” the Rad Geek rips new ones (read his entire response!) …Even though you’re not [...]

By: The Art of the Possible » Blog Archive » George Washington vs. the Licensing Cartels

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:17:10 +0000

[...] of a couple of recent posts by Angelica, and of extensive discussion in the comments: “Call Me Street Food Libertarian“ and “The Rats of El [...]

By: …no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #8

…no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #8 — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:56:59 +0000

[...] who was irate over a recent ban on street vendors selling bacon-wrapped hot-dogs in California, has not shed her [...]

By: The Art of the Possible » Blog Archive » The Rats of El Toro

The Art of the Possible » Blog Archive » The Rats of El Toro — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:31:27 +0000

[...] battlepanda: Heh. I’m not really afraid to be associated with the political stuff on Battlepanda, but the thought of potential future employers… [...]

By: battlepanda

battlepanda — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 02:29:05 +0000

Heh. I’m not really afraid to be associated with the political stuff on Battlepanda, but the thought of potential future employers finding personal tidbits on there squicks me out. It’s all ineffectual in anycase.

By: knzn

knzn — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:56:27 +0000

As an opponent of liberty, I support the ban on general principle. I wouldn’t let these street-grillers get a foot in the door: it would put us on the slippery slope that leads to the abolition of the income tax, replacement of police with private security forces, and God knows what else. But then I suppose, as an opponent of liberty, I shouldn’t be commenting on this blog anyhow.

BTW Who is this “Angelica”? You need to be anonymous at Battlepanda but not here?

By: Mona

Mona — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:22:05 +0000

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Despite all their “free market” rhetoric, if there were even the remotest threat of a genuine free market, the Fortune 500 would sponsor a coup d’etat.

Why, yes. There is a reason why virtually no CEOs of large corporations are libertarians.

By: …no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #7

…no third solution » Blog Archive » Comments on Comments #7 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:19:01 +0000

[...] is a self-professed “cheerful statist,” yet she exhibits at least some libertarian tendencies when questioning the seeming arbitrariness of the bacon-dog-bans in the DPRC. What’s wrong with [...]

By: Kevin Carson

Kevin Carson — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:03:23 +0000

Yeah, imagine what would have if they had to endure free competition from people with low overhead. Why… why… stuff would (gasp) COST LESS and the sellers would get LESS PROFIT!

I’m surprised the RIAA isn’t seeking “public interest”/”safety” regulation to prevent Radiohead from marketing their own music over the Internet. With that “low overhead,” they’re undermining the whole proprietary model of scarcity rents on artificial forms of property.

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:46:07 +0000

Bacon is the “gateway” sin food.

By: Angelica

Angelica — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:55:37 +0000

I have a feeling you’re right, Kevin. Get a load of this from the LAPD justifying why they crack down on the bacon-dog vendors:
Merchants in the Fashion District sometimes ask for enforcement against illegal hot-dog vendors, Smith says, because the burning grease from their makeshift grills soils fabrics in storefronts.

“If somebody comes in with no overhead and no bills and no sanitary counters and starts selling hot dogs,” Smith says, “you certainly can’t complete with any of that.”
Wha? The burning grease is supposedly a concern to stores selling garments, right? So what’s all this about carts having no overhead being too competitive? That sounds like it came straight out of a restaurant owner who don’t like people buying a dog on the street instead of going to his establishment.

By: Kevin Carson

Kevin Carson — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 06:38:51 +0000

My guess is that the main purpose served by the “steaming and boiling only” rule is to restrict the number of ways street vendors can compete with indoor sitdown restaurants. It’s for the “public safety,” of course–the old Baptists and bootleggers thing.

Here in NW Arkansas, a woman who ran a senior daycare center out of her home (for three people–hardly a traffic problem) was shut down for violating the zoning laws. Her clients’ families were effusive in their praise, giving her credit for keeping the elders out of a nursing home. And guess who turned her in? You guessed it–a nursing home administrator.

By: Mona

Mona — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:24:07 +0000

Oh, Angelica, it can indeed be true. Benito Giuliani, as Mayor of NYC, proposed to ban hot dog and other street vendors in Manhattan. I was living there then and everyone thought it was crazy — except for the Deli owners who, of course, would benefit.

Hot dog and hot nut vendors are the quintessential NYC experience, and Rudy would have shut them down!