Small restaurants have trouble surviving in the US because of the sheer cost of trying an experiment, or sustaining even a small kitchen. There are just so ma

Small restaurants have trouble surviving in the US because of the sheer cost of trying an experiment, or sustaining even a small kitchen. There are just so many regulatory (local, really badly managed, even corrupt) hurdles, and investments required. It practically incentivizes restaurants to be big corporations (and sell liquor) in order to survive. If you look at places that have less regulation (or governments which have made this a more conscious priority) or the rent/land ownership structure is different, there are tons of little mom-pop restaurants that can survive situations like this. I'm all for regulation -- when necessary -- but even I can see that local licensing (as Obama administration acknowledged) is hindering affordability of industries where regulation has come to serve only local interests. Look to Southeast Asia, even some parts of Europe. Hole in the wall restaurants can make it, because rent is cheap, they don't have city inspectors coming to ding you on fire supression equipment that is 2 inches out of spec. (Also, they don't have waiters and hosts other than the owners) There are food centers set up to foster small restaurants all located together in a high demand area, where the infrastructure is shared and standardized. In Italy, Spain -- restaurants run for generations in corners of small apartment blocks and aren't in fear of getting evicted for a chain. If we want our cities to look like and cultivate a certain desireable feature, we need to put active work into fixing the things that disincentivize it in small daily doses. Otherwise it's crappy Panera Breads for everyone.