How the State destroys

Zoning, licenses, legal inspections, and building codes destroy entrepreneurship and competition. So it goes in Newmarket. The owner is fighting back.

I'm not quibbling over whether this coffee shop has the right or wrong license. I'm arguing the very existence of the license. Why in the world does the State need to extort money from someone to run a business? Well, t's a nice tax stream for bureaucrats. And, it's a good way for people to use the strong arm of the law to knock down competition in the market.

In the world of voluntary exchange, all you have to ask is: is this business turning a profit? If so, it is satisfying consumers' demands. All these legal hoops reduce consumer satisfaction by increasing the cost of doing business.

"But wait," you say, "think of the children! If not for the State, we'd all be eating e.coli from dirty dishes!" Unlikely, for at least two reasons. First, even a whiff of foul play is terrible advertising--I am curious to know what damage the linked article above might do. Second, without government regulation, people wouldn't be so complacent about assuming that food is safe to eat. There probably would be a great demand for voluntary consumer reporting. In fact there already is: tripadvisor, yelp, google reviews, facebook reviews...all pro bono work, by the way, with no cut of the tax loot.

We don't need no stinkin' State.

Is Darren Winham a coffee nut?

What other reason could there be to have two Aroma Joes bookending town, each near to a Dunkin Donuts? He must also love the theater, too...

To some, Exeter is already far too busy for the size of the town. If true, there is zero reason to “build it up” to “keep its edge” or whatever tired description you might use as a euphemism for top-down molding of this tiny town into Portsmouth. “Increasing revenue” is a another one—it means the Town Rulers will collect more in taxes and spend more, i.e., divert more resources into government consumption. Further, even if  “building up a town” were unanimously supported, it proves far too much: why stop at a Portsmouth-like Exeter? Maybe it should be like Boston, or New York.

Note, it's not Winham's $80k+ salary that's the biggest waste. The real waste is the diversion of production into government chosen channels. He has no clue what type of or how many businesses should be located in Exeter. Nobody does, but entrepreneurs and capitalists, who seek profit by providing goods for voluntary consumers, have the best insights. If Pimentos is closed, it doesn’t mean something should replace it (let alone another bar food place). Maybe it’s just a bad location, and resources are better diverted elsewhere at this point. Maybe that lot won't be productive for ten years. There are infinite desires by consumers and precious few goods to produce them. Only market prices can help allocate goods to consumers' most urgent demands.

Exeter bureaucrats should do absolutely nothing to "bring businesses" to Exeter. It doesn't matter what "vision" they have for the town. It is the wrong one.