I see your point, but that’s an empirical claim. And if it’s true, we should see significant changes in what people are ordering once the information gets posted. So far, that claim’s not looking too good (though it’s admittedly hard to tell this soon).

Keep in mind that there’s a market for information, too. Subway has capitalized on it by advertising its healthier options. Hardee’s has, too, in it’s own way. Many chains at least highlight their low-calorie offerings. Other chain restaurants make their information available online or in other materials for the people who want it, while keeping it out of sight for people who don’t care or prefer a restaurant experience that doesn’t so blatantly announce its standardized nature. It’s not at all obvious that this multiplicity of approaches is inferior to the one mandated by the city council.

I should add that even if we do see changes, I still think it’s absurd to legislate that restaurants provide nutritional information about every single dish they serve and post them prominently on their menus. If I owned a restaurant and a customer demanded that kind of treatment I wouldn’t hesitate to tell them to bug off. It’s no different when the city council does it.

Well, kind of sad, actually, but you get my picture here. Listing nutritional information helps consumers make the decisions that they want to make, and will allow the market to better reflect actual consumer demands.

It’s good, I like it… even if it means I might get kicked out of the libertarian club. I’ve been introducing myself as a ‘moderate’ libertarian as of late, anyway.