3 ms·
So did I. The point of my comment was that you can avoid street food and eat at classier restaurants (or fast food outlets, or whatever) if you're so inclined.
by IsaacL 9y ago
So did I. The point of my comment was that you can avoid street food and eat at classier restaurants (or fast food outlets, or whatever) if you're so inclined. Me and a friend avoided street food during a month of travelling in India, and never had any stomach problems.
(Your gut fauna also adapts over time, which is why the locals don't get sick so often).
> because regulations hinder innovation or whatever
How did you get this from my comment? I said that in the case of food, regulations remove cheap options, and remove job opportunities.
To make it concrete: consider a low-income Western neighbourhood. Joe is a young single guy in his 20s working a low-wage job. He's tired after work and doesn't like to cook, but can't afford to eat out. Sally is a grandmother, in her late 50s, and needs a source of income that isn't too demanding. In an Asian country the Sallies could set up fried rice or noodle stalls selling cheap meals to the Joes, for the equivalent of a dollar or two. They've set up a mutual trade for mutual advantage, and they're both better off.
In a Western country Joe and Sally are banned from making this trade, ostensibly to protect Joe's interests. If Joe wants cheap food, his only option is to go to McDonald's, where they've made everything hyper-efficient and standardised to provide cheap food, while meeting minimum wage laws, hygiene regulations, and so on.
(Sometimes Westerners do make this trade. On my UK university campus, some local Indian stay-at-home mothers would cook up extra food and deliver meals to students for £2 ($3) a pop. They were breaking a ton of laws, of course).
- Frondo 9y ago"(Your gut fauna also adapts over time, which is why the locals don't get sick so often)." Heh, this isn't actually true, or not meaningfully so. Where I lived, it was recognized that getting sick regularly was a fact of life. The place I lived had almost no tourism, so people getting sick were, in fact, just getting sick from an essentially unregulated food market. But hey, freeeeee market, right?
- jerryszczerry 9y ago> […] In an Asian country the Sallies could set up fried rice or noodle stalls selling cheap meals to the Joes, for the equivalent of a dollar or two. They've set up a mutual trade for mutual advantage, and they're both better off. > In a Western country Joe and Sally are banned from making this trade, ostensibly to protect Joe's interests. If Joe wants cheap food, his only option is to go to McDonald's, where they've made everything hyper-efficient and standardised to provide cheap food, while meeting minimum wage laws, hygiene regulations, and so on. So, if Sally can provide food cheaper than McDonald's, that means: a. she is more efficient than McDonald's, she being a single woman, they being a multinational corporation, or b. she doesn't conform to the same hygiene and nutrition standards, making less valuable products. Which one seems more probable?