Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares – Public Service and The Market

[michaelsuede]

In my article for Libertarian News, I comment on the beautiful free market aspects that are highlighted by the show Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.

Recently I’ve gotten hooked on a British TV show which is produced by the world famous chef Gordon Ramsay. In the show, Chef Ramsay helps struggling restaurants get themselves back on their feet.

While this may sound only mildly interesting at first glance, the way Chef Ramsay goes about making his corrections turns the show into something more akin to watching a professional wrestling match. Ramsay curses continually, harasses employees, destroys useless property, berates people who he sees as not performing up to snuff and generally acts like a big angry alpha male.

Yet every show, the outcome is the same.

The article compares the recipe for private business to succeed with the coercion of the State, and demonstrates why private markets always promote the improvement of service, value and quality, while the State brings about the exact opposite.

 

[falkowsi]

Consider that the government never asks each individual tax payer if they want to buy a new red-light traffic camera. Government makes that decision for the tax payer on their own without any consultation

It would be grossly inefficient if government consulted individual tax payer about every decision they make. Not only would that be inefficient, but most individuals do not have the expertise, nor the time, to judge on all these decisions.

Instead, we appoint members of the government based on easy to understand goals, such as "reduce number of traffic fatalities", and we let them consult experts on how to achieve those. If they don't do a good job, we'll pick somebody else next time.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In my article for Libertarian News, I comment on the beautiful free market aspects that are highlighted by the show Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.



The article compares the recipe for private business to succeed with the coercion of the State, and demonstrates why private markets always promote the improvement of service, value and quality, while the State brings about the exact opposite.

 

[Spindrift]

And those private markets show what a success Gordon Ramsay has been:
http://www.zeitgasm.com/?p=793

 

[Sledge]

 

[stilicho]

In my article for Libertarian News, I comment on the beautiful free market aspects that are highlighted by the show Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares....

My review:

Angry person doesn't like traffic cameras. Cites cooking show and YouTube.

 

[michaelsuede]

It would be grossly inefficient

I think that pretty much sums up government in a nutshell.

No need to go any further.

 

[michaelsuede]

My review:

Angry person doesn't like traffic cameras. Cites cooking show and YouTube.

My review:

A person who loves traffic cameras. Cites JREF forum post to demonstrate his love for them.

 

[Aepervius]

"and demonstrates why private markets always promote the improvement of service, value and quality, while the State brings about the exact opposite."


Demonstrably wrong, unless you replace "always" with "sometime".

 

[elbe]

I think that pretty much sums up government in a nutshell.

No need to go any further.

So you're arguing that because the government doesn't do something horribly inefficient that that's evidence that it is inefficient?

That's pretty backwards.

 

[Chaos]

How about instead of starting thread after thread shilling your articles, you go back to the other threads you started, and adress people´s reactions to what you posted?

Or are you waiting for the free market to come up with a solution for that?

 

[michaelsuede]

How about instead of starting thread after thread shilling your articles, you go back to the other threads you started, and adress people´s reactions to what you posted?

Or are you waiting for the free market to come up with a solution for that?

How about sticking to the thread topic at hand.

I'm eagerly awaiting a free market solution to that problem.

So far, none has been forth coming.

Perhaps we'll see progress in a few years after the congress finishes killing the dollar off.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

And those private markets show what a success Gordon Ramsay has been:
http://www.zeitgasm.com/?p=793

Ooops!

Sounds like a great example of Libertopia in action.

I would advise the OP to rewrite his "article", but, this being a Skeptics forum, I'm pretty sure no one has actually bothered to read it. So, he really doesn't have to bother.

 

[Ryokan]

Ooops!

Note that the restaurants visited by Ramsay are on the brink of bankruptcy when he arrives. Actually, that's the reason why he's there. Even if he's giving them golden nuggets, they still might not be able to turn it around fast enough to avoid going under.

The fact that some of them manage to do that shows that it's not all bad.

But does it say anything about libertarianism? Not really.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Actually, I'm interested to know.
How would a free market institute traffic lights?

Anyone willing to pay gets to put one up, wherever they want?
Two (or more) rival companies set up competing networks to interfere with each other's traffic flow?
Online bidding wars to keep your lane green longer?
And that neatly removes the need to have any form of expertise in traffic flow or inner city design. If your lights cause congestion, just blame it on the competition or users.
Of course these companies would need to make money, so will they be accompanied by some form of gate system, charging you to pass a traffic light?

As for Gordon's show, has it ever occured to you that they might A: only pick restaurants where they think it will actually work? and B: Only show actual successes?

 

[Dunstan]

Assuming you can actually infer anything meaningful from a heavily edited television show with cherry-picked subjects, if anything Kitchen Nightmares is an example of how "the market" doesn't always work.

Not because many restaurants fail; that part is arguably consistent with free market absolutism, and in any event a restaurant going out of business is a problem for its owners and not society at large.

It's the fact that in many of these episodes -- especially the American series (which is not as good as the BBC version in my opinion) -- one of the first things Ramsay does is point out the filthy unsanitary condition of the kitchen.

According to Libertopians, this shouldn't happen. Libertopians insist that restauranteurs will run clean and sanitary kitchens because otherwise they would get sued by sick customers and develop bad reputations, and since these things would lose them money they won't do it. But practically every week on Kitchen Nightmares, we see these brave entrepreneurs -- you know, the ones who carry us "looters" on their backs -- ignoring the health of their customers despite the supposedly sufficient incentives of lawsuits and reputation. Funny, that.

 

[elbe]

As for Gordon's show, has it ever occured to you that they might A: only pick restaurants where they think it will actually work? and B: Only show actual successes?

The US version, which I believe the zeitgasm site was tracking, appears to pick restaurants based on staff/owners/family drama they can play up on the show.

The UK show seems much more focused on the restaurant's problems instead of the owner's problems. I prefer the UK version, but the US one has it's amusements. I enjoy it when they have an owner trying to run it as a business and undercutting quality for profits.

 

[Babbylonian]

Note that the restaurants visited by Ramsay are on the brink of bankruptcy when he arrives. Actually, that's the reason why he's there. Even if he's giving them golden nuggets, they still might not be able to turn it around fast enough to avoid going under.

Yep. Ramsay dealt with this literally from the start of Kitchen Nightmares in the UK. The very first restaurant he visited closed and the owner blamed him for it. This despite the fact that she had told him that the restaurant couldn't continue the way it was for long, and despite the fact that her "chef" (a snot-nosed kid who Ramsay demonstrated couldn't even cook) didn't follow through on attitude and quality changes.

The other thing to keep in mind is that having one's restaurant featured on a popular national broadcast TV show - especially since the final outcomes of the US version are always bright and positive - should enhance business by itself. If the owners can't keep it together, that can hardly be laid at Gordo's feet.

But does it say anything about libertarianism? Not really.

Not at all. I suppose it might if there was a competing TV show where the evil government comes in and dictates changes to restaurants on penalty of jail time...come to think of it, not only does that sound like a good show, but I've eaten places where the owners should be subject to lengthy prison terms.

ETA: On enhancing business by being on the show...I thought about it for a few minutes and I realized that there have been a few restaurants featured that I wouldn't consider visiting even after the Gordo makeover. Some of them were so filthy and disgusting that I doubt the owners/employees could possibly care enough to keep up the standards; again, another reason no one should be surprised when most of these restaurants go under despite TV intervention.

 

[Chaos]

How about sticking to the thread topic at hand.

I'm eagerly awaiting a free market solution to that problem.

So far, none has been forth coming.

Perhaps we'll see progress in a few years after the congress finishes killing the dollar off.

Why stick to the thread topic? You´ll spend some time spouting the same well-worn AnCap sound bites, then slink off once you realize that, once more, this isn´t enough to answer critical questions, and in a week or two you´ll start the next thread with the same MO as if nothing had happened.

And all the while, you quietly wonder why people here aren´t taking you serious.

 

[michaelsuede]

Assuming you can actually infer anything meaningful from a heavily edited television show with cherry-picked subjects, if anything Kitchen Nightmares is an example of how "the market" doesn't always work.

Not because many restaurants fail; that part is arguably consistent with free market absolutism, and in any event a restaurant going out of business is a problem for its owners and not society at large.

It's the fact that in many of these episodes -- especially the American series (which is not as good as the BBC version in my opinion) -- one of the first things Ramsay does is point out the filthy unsanitary condition of the kitchen.

According to Libertopians, this shouldn't happen. Libertopians insist that restauranteurs will run clean and sanitary kitchens because otherwise they would get sued by sick customers and develop bad reputations, and since these things would lose them money they won't do it. But practically every week on Kitchen Nightmares, we see these brave entrepreneurs -- you know, the ones who carry us "looters" on their backs -- ignoring the health of their customers despite the supposedly sufficient incentives of lawsuits and reputation. Funny, that.

Actually you got that completely inverted.

Fascists don't believe private industry can do anything without 75,000 pages of government regulations telling them how to run their businesses.

In the UK version, nearly every establishment he visits is in violation of the entire UK health code.

Since regulations are supposed to prevent bad food from coming to market, I have to question what good the regulations are doing.

Shouldn't the law make it so that no bad food ever comes to market in the first place?

Of course, believing that the law can keep bad food from coming to market is a Fascist Utopian fantasy. The market is putting those restaurants out of business, not food inspectors.

The market punishes bad quality, bad service and bad value; and it does so consistently every time, without the need of any violent laws or regulations.