Why should business defend itself—even if it is for the right to sell super-sized sodas?

by | Jun 20, 2012

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced recently a plan to ban large sodas (16 oz. or more) from New York City’s restaurants, movie theaters, and street carts, in an effort to combat obesity.It has created a wide-spread backlash among businesses—rightly so—led by Coca-Cola and MacDonald’s. They Tweeted, respectively: “Unlike @MikeBloomberg, @CocaColaCo thinks #NewYorkers can make […]

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced recently a plan to ban large sodas (16 oz. or more) from New York City’s restaurants, movie theaters, and street carts, in an effort to combat obesity.It has created a wide-spread backlash among businesses—rightly so—led by Coca-Cola and MacDonald’s. They Tweeted, respectively: “Unlike @MikeBloomberg, @CocaColaCo thinks #NewYorkers can make their own choices about what they drink. #NYC deserves better.” And: “@MikeBloomberg We trust our customers to make the choices that are best for them.”

Although Coke, MacDonald’s and NYC businesses stand to lose some money if they cannot sell large sodas, that is not the most fundamental issue here—being able to trade freely is.

Government dictating to business what size soft drinks they can sell violates the individual rights of these companies. And once the principle of liberty has been compromised, the door is open to further erosion of freedom.

If the government can ban sales of large sodas, it can also ban sales of foods and other products it does not deem healthy. And the next step is to dictate what products we must buy in order to stay healthy or lose weight.

Why can’t we tolerate any initiation of force by government on business, even when it seems to be for a good cause such as reducing obesity? Freedom from physical force, whether initiated by criminals or government, is essential for survival and flourishing of individuals and businesses. For counter examples, think of statist regimes (such as Syria, Cuba, Iran, North Korea) and the miserable existence of their citizens.

It is freedom, including free competition—not government’s use of force—that makes it possible for business to thrive: to come up with new, innovative, cheaper products and maximize long-term profitability. It is freedom—not government’s use of force—that makes it possible for individuals to make choices that benefit their lives (and to be responsible for those choices that do not).

Therefore business, and we as individuals, should protest vigorously when the government oversteps the boundaries of its only proper role: protection of the rights of individuals—including those of business.

Jaana Woiceshyn teaches business ethics and competitive strategy at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, Canada. How to Be Profitable and Moral” is her first solo-authored book. Visit her website at profitableandmoral.com.

The views expressed above represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors and publishers of Capitalism Magazine. Capitalism Magazine sometimes publishes articles we disagree with because we think the article provides information, or a contrasting point of view, that may be of value to our readers.

Have a comment?

Post your response in our Capitalism Community on X.

Related articles

Dollar Stores are a Beautiful Thing

Dollar Stores are a Beautiful Thing

Carlson is entitled to his view of dollar stores as being ugly, but for individuals and families who appreciate the offerings, services, and availability of a discount retailer in their neighborhood, it is surely a beautiful thing.

The Multifront Attack on Business Hero Elon Musk

The Multifront Attack on Business Hero Elon Musk

The attacks on Elon Musk seem like something straight out of an Ayn Rand novel. The successful and innovative entrepreneur is attacked on all sides by institutions and people who live off the system rather than innovate around and beyond it. 

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pin It on Pinterest