Nanny State

No Clever Innovation Goes Unpunished: Maine Shuts Down Really Awesome Food Boat (UPDATE: Reprieve!)

|

Not lobster girl. Lobster woman.
Credit: Joel Page/Press Herald Staff Photographer

The Portland (Maine) Press Herald had a fun slice-of-life feature on their hands. They found a woman, Reilly Harvey, who takes a small boat out into the state's waters full of delicious homemade pies and entire lobster dinners to sell to boaters. Here's a quick, mouth-watering description:

The desserts were just the beginning. Harvey's boat, Mainstay, is rigged with a three-burner propane stove set in the stern, and three pots sat waiting for lobster, clams and butter, all of which Harvey had aboard. There were tubs of cauliflower-curry tofu salads with yogurt-lime-cilantro dressing and homemade biscuits that had come out of the oven less than an hour ago. Very deliberately, Harvey tries to make Mainstay look like a boat you'd see on a Venetian canal, loaded down with beautifully arranged wares. She'd succeeded. The vase full of flowers tipped the whole thing over the top. Her new customers couldn't stop gushing. "This is like a Fellini movie," said Peter Polshek, as the dog made a valiant attempt to board.

By now his wife, Nina Hofer, was perched on the gunwale of the Adeline, smiling like the Cheshire cat, her hands clapped together in glee. "Who are you and where are you coming from?" she asked Harvey.

I want one to show up here right now, even though I'm about eight miles from the Pacific Ocean, very, very far away from Harvey. She started her business in 2012, looking for a way to build a stable life for herself in the area. The Press Herald thoroughly profiles her background and tags along as she serves happy boaters thrilled at the opportunity to buy fresh food without having to leave the water.

The day after the story appeared in the newspaper it was over. The state shut her down. There are rules, man! Where are her sinks? She has to have running water! From the Press Herald's follow-up coverage:

"It makes me feel sick to my stomach and sad," said Reilly Harvey, who runs Mainstay Provisions out of an old boat she keeps on Andrews Island. Harvey said she was contacted by a state health inspector and told she must pass health inspection standards for mobile vendors – think food trucks – and get her vintage 22-foot wooden launch, the Mainstay, fitted with sinks and hot and cold running water if she is going to continue to serve hot food.

That licensing would happen through the Division of Environmental Health's inspection program. If she wants to continue to serve desserts, she must pass an additional inspection by the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry.

There are only 3½ weeks left in her season. Unless she is able to comply with the regulations, it is unlikely she'll be able to operate Mainstay Provisions as usual in 2014.

The state requires her to add to her little boat a three-bay sink and a separate hand sink, and must have hot and cold running water and follow the same rules as food trucks. They also complained about her being barefoot in the boat. They've offered to "expedite" her application as soon as she gets one in, though it's unclear in the story how her small boat could meet these requirements. It sounds like she may be done, at least for this summer season.

(Hat tip to Jayel Aheram)

UPDATE: Ira Stoll has alerted me that Harvey has been granted a reprieve, requiring her to have a wash basin, five gallons of water, a food thermometer and a bucket to drain hot water. The permission-based society is so kind!

NEXT: Riots Erupt After Vigil for Unarmed Teenager Killed by Cops in Ferguson, Mo., Mayor Cancels Rally Today

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Somewhere Tulpa smiles.

    Oh, and al-text WIN.

    1. alt-text

      (al-text is found in ISIS publications)

        1. Seems the more prudent path would have been the Lobster Girl photo with a caption, “May or may not be Reilly Harvey.”

    2. But what about all the brick and mortar floating restaurants? And the city owns the ocean, so they can decide what they do with their own property. It’s the free market!

      \Derlpa

      1. Jesus, of course. Why didn’t I think of this before? Food subs.

        1. The sub-shop sub shop.

          1. Crewed by illegal aliens.

  2. The day after the story appeared in the newspaper it was over.

    Not all positive advertising leads to positive results. She needs to move her business to international waters.

    1. Not when there’s a population of predators waiting in the shadows to sick the power of the state upon you.

    2. But the next day, it was back on, again. They issued her a 90-day temporary permit, allowing her to finish this season, and have time to work things out, for next season. Once in a great while, reason prevails!
      http://www.pressherald.com/201…..ter-bakes/

      1. Reason didn’t prevail. Bad press for the bureaucrats prevailed. They’ll revoke five more vendor licenses tomorrow that we’ll never hear about. Reason will prevail when the notion of needing permission to operate a business is irrelevant.

  3. On days that I don’t love my job, I’ve often thought about starting my own little food business. I know it’s risky, but I think I’d enjoy it. I’m willing to bet central VA is ready to embrace real poutine — it would be a great drunk food. Stories like this are one of the things that keep me from really looking into it. I hate paperwork, I hate navigating asinine bureaucratic rules.

    I feel sorry for this woman. She took a chance to do something she loved and it sounds like it was going well for her. Then it’s all taken away by some uncaring regulator, more concerned about the small chance that something bad *might* happen, while ignoring the real harm they are causing as it stares them in the face.

    1. There was a food truck in my little college town that would park outside the bars and sell drunk food. They had a hot dog called “The Sorostitute” that was a hot dog with mozzarella sticks stuffed in the bun with chili on top of it all.

      Best drunk food ever.

      1. That sounds like the most delicious food ever invented.

      2. Thanks for the recipe!
        I’m a connoisseur of dogs,
        mmmmmm

    2. Then it’s all taken away by some uncaring regulator, more concerned about the small chance that something bad *might* happen, while ignoring the real harm they are causing as it stares them in the face.

      They don’t ignore the harm they cause. They relish it. They have the power to ruin lives, and they love it.

    3. The regulator doesn’t give a fuck about something “bad” happening. They care about their little fiefdom of regulatory power. If they don’t wantonly exercise that power, what power do they have?

      Bureaucrats are abject scum.

      1. Progs and SoCons want to play the culture war game? Libertarians can to. Stories like this can become the face of the war on the little guy, the war on the creative, the war on the risk-takers. Because, as always, the entrenched interests are the ones with the resources to comply with all the rules, if not to write the rules to their own advantage.

        1. And these are the people the collectivists think should own and run everyone’s healthcare too…

        2. Imagine the Prog Bureaucrat fury reading the article in the paper and realizing this woman had not asked their permission! The fucking nerve, the gall!

          Maybe, if she spends all her savings and grovels sufficiently, she’ll be in business in 2015 – if they decide to allow it.

        3. If we cleansed our country of progtards, this would not happen. Need to start by deporting them to commie ahitholes.

      2. Bureaucracies are instituted to provide a result, such as public safety or health. They issue regulations ostensibly to meet their founding charter. Slowly, over time, following the regulations becomes a substitute for achieving the original goal. It is inevitable and completely predictable, yet we continue to institute regulatory bureaucracies in the belief that they will achieve the goals we set for them.

        1. Slowly, over time, following the regulations becomes a substitute for achieving the original goal

          Nailed it.

      3. Aside from that, which I agree is the Central Tenet of Bureaucracism, there’s also the insane and notorious levels of inflexibility that bureaucrats regularly demonstrate. “No, no, must adhere to this rule, no matter how inapplicable it might be under the circumstances.” Remember the National Information Infrastructure?

        Innovation is becoming a dirty word in this country, and that’s one of the worst things that could happen.

      4. Exactly right on all counts

    4. I just don’t understand what happened to the nation’s entrepreneurial spirit.

      /pro-regulation moron

      1. Regulations don’t stifle business, they help!

        /pro-regulation moron

    5. How odd. There is another commenter who is in the process of opening a poutine shop.

      1. Well I better get started.

        1. Absolutely. I can’t wait for the Reason article “Libertarians corner American poutine market, Canadians baffled.”

          1. When they find out that I learned the art of poutine while living in Canada, the trade war will begin in earnest.

            1. Now I have to do a cost benefit analysis of inviting myself over to your place for dinner or vacationing in Canada.

            2. “Canadian Court issue bar order for H&R commenter – no longer allowed entry into country”

              /Future National Post headline

              1. “The Cultural Commission has deemed that poutine is a protected Canadian heritage that only some international citizens can truly enjoy. And that is only when visiting Canada, where the CC has called for a nationwide patent on the dish. International tariffs may apply, where the tax proceeds would fund education for the children of the victims of poutine cultural appropriation.”

        2. Market share. Market share.

      2. Wait – how many people here want to open a poutine shop?

        (I have it on the menu for my greasy spoon project…)

        Or, new Salon article? “Poutine and Libertarians Intersect in Evil”

    6. Then it’s all taken away by some uncaring regulator, more concerned about the small chance that something bad *might* happen some revenue to grow the bureaucracy might be lost

      Happy to FIFY

    7. The regulator is protecting his job and may or may not cherish his role as a destroyer of commerce and civility.

      1. Exactly. If they are not punishing people, their job could be seen as irrelevant.

    8. But those regulators are only trying to protect the poor, witless boaters on Penobscot Bay from food poisoning, or worse! Serving food while barefoot! Holy cow we just HAVE to protect the public from clarified butter and glazed peach tartlets or there will be anarchy!

      I’ve always wondered how much of the stats about the high failure rate of restaurants is because of the complexity of business regulations in the food service industry.

      1. Here in South Carolina there are no laws regarding footware other than OSHA regulations, which only pertain to employees (steel toe boots and such). Might be different in other states. It’s not like she’s sticking her feet in the lobster pot.

  4. How dare someone engage in commerce without asking permission and obeying orders! What does she think this is? A free country? Haaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha! Shut it down.

    1. In the middle of nowhere MT, posted on a bridge where people access a little trout stream, there is a sign posted that tells people to ask to see their fishing guide’s certification…”for your protection”.

      Because no one could help you catch fish without government approval.

      FUCK THEM ALL!

      1. And no guide with proper certification could ever do anything wrong or make any mistakes.

        1. Not with a government stamp of approval that comes post licensing fee.

      2. Y’all fuck them; I’m picky about where I put that part of me.

  5. My brother and I talked about delivering food on the interstate–from a moving vehicle. Prepared and delivered by RVs strategically located throughout the interstate system.

    I have a feeling this wouldn’t be allowed.

  6. Creative Destruction applies to everyone EXCEPT:
    – Local Cronies
    – The Military
    – The Oil Undustry
    – The Banking Industry
    – The Auto Industry

    Look, if ALL OF US COLLECTIVELY can offer each other good safety nets and guarantee Healthcare, minimal housing expenses, food, and a safe and quality services (education,etc.) for our children, have all of the Creative Destruction you want.

    Creative Destruction not only means that PERSON A loses a Job in an industry/trade that they may have spent a lot of money and a lifetime preparing for, it comes with financial hardship, divorce many times once the wife finds someone else to bring home the bacon, your kids looking at you like you are a loser, substance abuse, and sometimes extreme violence. Safety Nets (ones in good faith) help this.

    The Problem is that many people (especially libertarians) would rather eliminate the safety nets so that some people don’t use it as a hammock. I think the opportunity cost (some people using as Hammock) is small compared to the benefits to individuals and capitalism.

    1. This is impressively stupid gibberish. Well done, sockpuppet.

      1. I’m left wondering how a bureaucrat destroying a profitable business qualifies as “creative destruction.”

        But yeah, libertarians were all about the bank bailouts… Jesus our trolls are fucking stupid.

        On a related topic, who here has grown tired of Michael Hihn?

        1. Michael Hihn

          I grew tired of that Holocaust denying scum ages ago.

          1. Huh. Didn’t know he was a Holocaust denier, but I suppose it fits in with his ultimate asshole persona.

            Got an example?

            1. A few weeks ago on a Gaza thread his mask slipped. You can do an HnR search if you’re interested.

          2. Careful, he’ll show up accusing you of stalking him for daring to reply to more than one of his comments.

        2. On a related topic, who here has grown tired of Michael Hihn?

          Well, he is no HERC but I still find him pretty amusing. He often posts long rants of which I can’t understand a word. He has posted something multiple times about CATO and Obamacare but, for the life of me, I can’t tell wtf he means.

          1. Amusing is not the word I’d use. He blathers on and on, saying nothing, accusing folks of saying shit they never said. (snicker)

            I’m really hoping he doesn’t become a regular. (laughs)

            And I don’t think he’s EVER made a post to anyone without insulting them. (lol)

            He’s nearly as bad as WI.

      2. I thought it was sarc until I re read it.

    2. This isn’t creative destruction. Creative destruction is when demand for something goes away. Like cars putting buggy whip makers out of business.

      She wasn’t left behind by markets. She was shut down for failing to ask permission from government assholes.

      1. I speak of creative destruction in general and not necessarily of this case.

        This is a typical “you didn’t fill out the forms crap.” I agree.

        And, btw, to your 1st sentence, demand with away from PRODUCT A because PRODUCT B is better, cheaper, etc.

        1. I speak of creative destruction in general and not necessarily of this case.

          Really? Looks to me like you’re backing down after having your stupidity challenged.

          demand with away from PRODUCT A because PRODUCT B is better, cheaper, etc.

          Um, yeah. That’s what creative destruction is.

    3. it comes with financial hardship, divorce many times once the wife finds someone else to bring home the bacon, your kids looking at you like you are a loser, substance abuse, and sometimes extreme violence

      Got a citation for that? The last six years should provide you with plenty of data.

      1. And as to your larger point, if you could point to a safety net program that can actually work on a large scale without bankrupting the country and/or massively distorting sectors of the economy and driving up costs, I might be willing to listen.

        It’s not just that I oppose government-forced charity on moral grounds. I do, but I’m a practical guy; I could tolerate it out of political necessity if it actually worked well. But I don’t see much evidence of that.

    4. You are profoundly, monumentally stupid.

    5. Turd.Burglar.

    6. There’s certainly room for reform, at any rate. I mean, didn’t Obama remove the work requirement for welfare.

    7. “Creative Destruction applies to everyone EXCEPT:- Local Cronies – The Military – The Oil Undustry – The Banking Industry – The Auto Industry”

      Yes, indeed. And look at who bailed out the banking industry and the auto industry and who is handing out money hand over fist to local cronies: progressives, and foremost Obama.

      “Creative Destruction not only means that PERSON A loses a Job in an industry/trade that they may have spent a lot of money and a lifetime preparing for”

      That’s the excuse that Obama and his ilk are using to hand trillions to their cronies in industry.

      “The Problem is that many people (especially libertarians) would rather eliminate the safety nets”

      This “safety net” you speak of is a fraud; politicians are sucking large amounts of money out of your pocket to get you dependent on them, handing most of it to their cronies in industry, and then give you pennies on the dollar in “safety nets”.

      “I think the opportunity cost (some people using as Hammock)”

      You should look up “opportunity cost” because you aren’t using it correctly.

  7. Needs more lobster girl.

  8. Thought this story might end with another cop shoots lobster tragedy.

  9. Bah! Your planet doesn’t deserve freedom until it learns what it is not to have freedom. It’s a lesson, I say!

  10. Maine government just hates people not asking permission.

    http://www.wgme.com/news/featu…..-jbmGPYF7o

    1. Your property at 50 Old Farm Road is located in the rural agricultural district (RA) and in the low density residential district (LDR). The residential use of this property has been permitted; however, you have without permits stablished an off-road vehicle park, a campground and a weapons firing range. ‘Campgrounds subject to a conditional use permit are allowed in the RA and LDR. Public or private facilities for non-intensive outdoor recreation are permitted in the RA subject to a conditional use permit. I note that the definition for non-intensive outdoor recreation as contained in Appendix A, Article II, Section 2 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lewiston, hereinafter referred to as the Code does not specifically include off-road vehicle parks nor does it include weapons firing ranges.

      Therefore, in accordance with Appendix A, Article II, Section 2; Appendix A, Article V, Sections 1,2,4,5, 7, 8, 9 and 10; and, Appendix A, Article XI, Section 1,2, and 22(c) of the Code you are hereby ordered to discontinue the above mentioned use of 50 Old Farm Road as an off-road vehicle park, campground and weapons firing range by not later than June 23, 2014.

      1. ^bullshit bureacratese followed by an order to stop making a living.

        1. He wasn’t even making a living off of it. He took donations to help offset his property tax bill which he cannot afford to pay by himself. Now he has no choice but to sell the property since he can’t afford to pay the taxes on it.

          1. And AFAICT the individual things people were doing there were not illegal to do there. It’s just by combining those activities and having different, unrelated people doing them, it became a “use” of the land that was not permitted. If he subdivided and let those people move in, what they did would apparently have been legal as a residential use of the property.

          2. Reminds me of a friend, Bruce Zaccanino, who built a huge model railroad under his house, had friends over to play with it, and once a year for Xmas used it to raise money for the volunteer fire dept. Then the county decided to assess him as if it were a business, so he moved & set up shop as a real biz.: Northlandz.

            1. And libertarians claim regulations stifle entrepreneurship.

              Sounds to me like he got [puts on shades] stimulated!

      2. I note that the definition for non-intensive outdoor recreation as contained in Appendix A, Article II, Section 2 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lewiston, hereinafter referred to as the Code does not specifically include off-road vehicle parks nor does it include weapons firing ranges.

        Does it specifically exclude off-road vehicle parks or weapons firing ranges?

        No?

        Then fuck off, bureaucrat.

  11. I don’t understand how this is a clever innovation…

    1. She’s delivering a fine dining experience to people who are on boats who might otherwise just be eating sandwiches. Her customers seem to think it’s a clever innovation.

      1. They aint no McDonalds in the middle of the ocean. Or even just off-shore.

        Its a brilliant fucking idea.

        1. No, apparently that lack was entirely due to the shortage of boats with four sinks.

  12. Fuck all government. That’s it. Is there room in the Anarchy tent for one more?

    1. Don’t do it! The government can, in fact, hurt you even if you don’t believe that it exists!!!

      1. Yeah, but it is somewhat liberating to stop thinking that government is really any different in essence from any other gang of violent thugs.

      1. I will not join any movement that adopts the nomenclature of the great unwashed lower classes

        1. Anything with “capitalism” in it’s name is most decidedly not in danger of being among the unwashed lower class nomenclatures.

      2. Can I replace Epi with her for my initiation process?

        1. You don’t have the bitcoin for that.

        2. How would that be a jumping in?

      3. Nice roots, Bitcoin Bitch.

    2. I’m sure there is, but you should know the jumping in process involves being locked in a room, naked with Episiarch and a candy dish of Viagra.

      Before her initiation, Nicole was not-the-worst.

      1. One area man described the scene as “a flurry of hair, flesh, and semen; it looked like Jackson Pollack killing a golden retriever with bukkakke.”

        1. I am glad I already had lunch before reading that….

      2. I’ve never met Epi so I don’t know what he looks like, but even if I was gay that is probably the scariest scenario that can be prompted in this plane of existence.

        1. He has a greasy sort of wop handsomeness.

          1. You don’t understand. Epi never gets that movie. That part is perfect for him. It’ll make him a big star. I’m gonna run him out of the movies. And let me tell you why. Epi ruined one of Sudden International’s most valuable proteges, nicole. For three years we had her under contract, singing lessons, dancing lessons, acting lessons. I spent hundreds of thousands of dollars. I was gonna make her a big star. And let me be even more frank, just to show you that I’m not a hard-hearted man, that it’s not all dollars and cents. She was beautiful! nicole was young, she was innocent. She was the greatest piece of ass I’ve ever had, and I’ve had ’em all over the world. And then Epi comes along with his olive oil voice and guinea charm and nicole runs off. She threw it all away just to make me look ridiculous. And a man in my position can’t afford to be made to look ridiculous. Now you get the hell out of here! And if that goomba tries any rough stuff, you tell him Sudden ain’t no bandleader. Yeah, I heard that story.

      3. If he could do that to Nicole, I’ll never come to the anarchy side.

    3. If I’m not free to eat lobster with a baby shit sauce then I want off this train! Fuck it!

      1. Please don’t feed the troll.

        1. While it sounded like an inkling of a libertarian tendency, what Tony really meant was “If I’m not able to eat free lobster paid for by babies and shit, I want off this train.”

        1. Typical Prog. Outraged at the idea of any theoretical injustice to “The People”; thinks it’s funny when government harms actual people.

      2. Do you need a push? We’re happy to help you out.

      3. The sad part is you apparently aren’t smart enough to avoid eating Lobster with baby shit sauce.

    4. Fuck all government. That’s it. Is there room in the Anarchy tent for one more?

      Welcome to the party.

  13. I know someone who sets up a tent and vends at music festivals and fairs and so on. Some cities in California can deal with that, and have temporary business licenses that cost maybe $20 and cover a weekend show. Some others do not: everyone is treated as if they operate a storefront all year, and even coming into town to vend for one day means you owe them hundreds of dollars for a license, which makes it uneconomic for many vendors. She found out because state tax authorities are now coordinating with the municipalities to make sure everyone gets their cut, and so may not be able to do one festival that was otherwise a good one.

    1. We have an ice cream guy here who custom built his ice cream cart with off-road tires. He wheels it on the beach, and keeps it down by the water where it’s hard to see. He’s been doing it for about 5 years and still hasn’t been caught. Best rocket pops in town.

      1. Do tell more!

        *clicks ball point pen and opens notebook*

        /nameless beaurocrat

  14. Here’s a quick, mouth-watering description:

    tubs of cauliflower-curry tofu salads with yogurt-lime-cilantro dressing

    My mouth just watered with vomit, hipster.

    1. Even the most annoying groups serve a purpose. Hippies have their music. Hipsters have their coffee and food.

    2. I’ve had it before. It’s actually a delicious salad.

    3. I feel sorry for those who possess the disability that prevents them from enjoying cilantro. I believe one day, advances in medicine will screen for this debilitating illness and in utero gene therapy will prevent people from having to undergo the pain of living with such a horrific condition.

      1. Cilantro definitely tastes like soap. Hate the stuff. That article finally got a couple of people to stop trying to convince me to eat it. Thank God.

        1. I’ve long wondered what people meant by that, since plain soap doesn’t have much taste. Maybe they mean it’s like the ingredients used to perfume Ivory soap, which is often mistakenly believed to be unscented.

      2. My wife has that problem. It is very annoying.

        It actually does taste a bit like soap to me as well, but in a good way.

    4. With the exception of the coagulated bean curd, that doesn’t sound half bad.

      1. The one redeeming thing about the tofu is that if there is enough seasoning and it isn’t in big pieces, you can’t really tell it’s there.

  15. No victory is too small for a collectivist busybody.

  16. Look at it from the perspective of all the food truck guys who’ve had to comply with regulations. She should get an exemption because why? She has fresh flowers and it’s all very charming? Do you people really want to see what small food vendor business anarchy looks like? Because they have hot grease.

    Anyway the lesson here is if you want to do a nice little food business, don’t be too charming to get the attention of the press.

    1. Don’t be so charming you get the attention of the press*

      1. Fuck off Tony.

    2. Anyway the lesson here is if you want to do a nice little food business, don’t be too charming to get the attention of the press.

      So your take away is that someone shouldn’t try to excel. And if someone does excel, they deserve to be stomped on by the State.

      Classy, guy.

      1. You have to balance the tragedy of this woman’s little business being shut down (where does she wash her hands anyway?) against the diarrhea-strewn hellscape that food service would be without food service regulations.

        1. Beg that question!

        2. I bought and consumed many perishable foodstuffs from vendors in Bangkok’s Floating Market.

          I didn’t die.

          1. I, on the other hand, bought and consumed some fried bananas on the street in Bangkok and had the shits for three days running. The other people on my flights back to the US were not amused.

            1. I bought a chili cheese burger Friday night that gave me the runs all day Saturday. Oh wait, it couldn’t have been the cheese burger because the kitchen had a sink and a sign that read, “Employees must wash hands before handling food.” The sign was in Spanish, too!

            2. I bought a burrito from a vender getting off my plane in Portland International. Made me so sick they had to replace me with another pilot in the middle of my shift.

              But that’s unpossible…because…the vender was certified.

              1. My worst fear is getting halfway through a flight and having a gastrointestinal problem that requires landing at an unfamiliar field while trying not to shit myself.

                1. I’ve known fighter pilots who’ve shit in their helmet bags when crossing the pond.

                  1. Wait, both of you are pilots? Fuck, I’m neveer flying again.

                    1. I’m just a private pilot. The worst I could do is collide with you, or accidentally crash into your house.

              2. I was not suggesting that this was due to the banana-seller being unregulated – for all I know they could well have been regulated – or implying that they need to be regulated. I only know that one needs to be more careful when encountering materials of unknown heritage. Brand names and trademarks are voluntary means of assuring the quality of things without the need for regulations.

            3. Granted, you need time to acclimate. It works the other way too. When we moved back here, it took a few days for my wife’s stomach to get used to all the various microorganisms present in our food supply.

          2. Should’ve included a trigger warning on that one, HM. Tony sees crowds of people engaging in trade without asking permission from the local gang and goes into conniption fits.

            1. No, Tony’s safe. Thailand is far from Libertopia and I’m certain that none of those boats get into the market without the corrupt police getting their daily or weekly vig.

          3. That is freakin’ cool, HM!

            “I am sure this woman poisons the shit out of her customers – that is why they keep coming back!” Derp some more for us, Tony.

        3. I must have missed the part about how her business caused a diarrhea-strewn hellscape. Can you provide a citation?

          1. I said it was a tragedy. If I were tooling around on the boat and someone like this was around serving up yummy things I’d probably throw caution to the wind. But I also don’t think we ought to eliminate the entire food safety regime either. I don’t think that would be a better world.

            1. You mean, you would knowingly jeopardize your own health, by eating non-certified food? If you got sick, I’d have to pay for your healthcare you selfish son of a bitch! We need a law that FORCES you to eat only government approved food!

        4. This may come as a surprise to you Tony, but lots of people choose not to return to places where they get sick. Not only that, but they tell their friends. Before long the place gets a reputation and business suffers. All without any intervention from your god government. It’s true.

          1. People often can’t pinpoint what made them sick. Different kinds of food poisoning set in at different times. Some kinds of food poisoning are fatal. It is technically true that a dead person will not be giving their business to the culprit vendor again.

            Your regime is one way of handling things. We tried it for a long, long time. I suppose the innovation of sanitation infrastructure and regulations was just a commie plot and not a practical way of addressing the vast problem of shit in food. Those dastardly meddlers.

            1. So your argument is that no one would use any sanitation if they were not ordered to by government? I don’t know about you, but I wash my hands and wash my dishes at home. I wash my hands after I take a shit. Surprisingly enough, I am not required to by law. Yet if I operated a business I would suddenly stop doing all those things unless the government told me to?

              Do you ever engage your brain?

              1. Do you ever engage your brain?

                Engage!

              2. God fuck off strawman police. Some businesses would be clean as a whistle even if it costs them more than the business down the street. Which makes the most profit is up to capitalism. Regulations level the playing field a bit so that the less scrupulous don’t have an edge. We’re talking about serving the public. Restaurant kitchens are disgusting enough without government and the market endorsing cutting corners by making it profitable. And it’s more efficient too, since I don’t want to have to inspect the kitchens and hands in every restaurant I go into before I eat.

                1. And it’s more efficient too, since I don’t want to have to inspect the kitchens and hands in every restaurant I go into before I eat.

                  You realize that inspections can be handled by private organizations, right? You don’t see the Risk-Averse-Morons Inc seal of approval at a place, don’t eat there.

                  1. I see that someone’s been reading the hip new magazine Consumer Reports.

                2. Regulations level the playing field a bit so that the less scrupulous don’t have an edge.

                  In theory. In practice it prevents poor people who cannot afford to comply with regulations from starting businesses and improving their lives.

                  Why do you hate poor people?

                  1. Because they are dirty. Now if we can implement a real economy instead of continuing to try failed trickle-down cut-welfare bullshit, we can minimize their numbers.

                    1. Uh-huh. And now when you are called out on that disgusting sentiment, claim that you were being ‘sarcastic’ and that no one was acute enough to appreciate your brilliant sense of irony.

                    2. Poor people being dirty and near me is just one of the many problems poverty causes for society, a minor example of something we can prevent by minimizing poverty.

                    3. Now if we can implement a real economy instead of continuing to try failed trickle-down cut-welfare bullshit, we can minimize their numbers.

                      Which has absolutely nothing to do with crafting regulations for the purpose of disallowing poor people from starting businesses that may eventually compete with established cronies. Gotcha.

                    4. Yes, real economies are those where there is a permanent class of low income and unemployed people.

                3. Yeah the less scrupulous have an edge. Because people tend to frequent places that make them sick.

                  God you are a blathering idiot.

                4. So, my willingness to eat food from a vendor who isn’t regulated is unacceptable and must be violently repressed because you might also choose to eat there? You can’t just look for the inspection sticker in the window that proves they paid off the inspector? I have to pay for it too just because you want it? What the fuck is wrong with you?

            2. just because someone in the govt passed a rule that she must have 3 sinks doesn’t mean that she is unsanitary, or that their rule is the only way to be sanitary. but they’ve decided it’s their way or no way.

              Reminds me of the Dept of Agriculture inventing the idea of “food deserts”, place were people just can’t access enough food. Someone sat in their office DC, conjured up a definition, ran some data, and produced laughable maps. One area down the road from me is a “desert”, even though the neighborhood begins only two blocks from a major grocery store. In another, they must have assumed all the people were evenly distributed in the township, while in reality 80% is uninhabited mountainside. Of the two inhabited neighborhoods, each has a good sized grocery store. They also seemed to disregard that people can ride the city buses to the grocery store, or even have their groceries delivered. No, someone in DC came up with a way to show that their job was essential.

              1. just because someone in the govt passed a rule that she must have 3 sinks doesn’t mean that she is unsanitary, or that their rule is the only way to be sanitary. but they’ve decided it’s their way or no way.

                +1 sink

                The rule is that there be 3 sinks, but what does it say about using three sinks. And who is enforcing the use of three sinks. Random inspections to see if all three sinks are being used properly?

                So if someplace has three sinks but uses only one of them, is anyone worse off? Patrons are no more informed about the cleanliness than if there were no rule in the first place. Stupid rules to make stupid people feel better.

        5. Yeah, where do people OUT IN THE OCEAN wash their hands, anyway?

        6. Fuck off Tony.

        7. Oh, BS. One of the joys of sailing in the Caribbean is that there are lots of ‘boat boys’ in the anchorages selling ice, baguettes, and fresh fish if you ask. Also there are little beach BBQ places serving lobster cooked on grills made out of old oil drums. It’s effing delicious and it’s no more dangerous than eating food grilled at my neighbor’s house (neither of which have to pass muster with any food police).

          1. “neither of which have to pass muster with any food police”

            Yet.

        8. Never had a problem with that even in third world countries.

          In the US and Europe, Yelp, Zagat, and the like take care of that far better than any health inspection anyway.

      2. The progs like Tony don’t even try to hide it anymore. They know it’s not about safety. It’s about power. The power to bend others to their will.

        That’s it.

        1. He really is a sick, twisted little fuck.

      3. No, the point is that if some people get fucked over, then everyone has to get fucked over.

        I have seen what small food vendor anarchy looks like. And it’s great. Especially the ones with the hot grease, because their food is less likely to give you an intestinal parasite.

    3. Do you people really want to see what small food vendor business anarchy looks like?

      As a matter of fact, yes. I would love to see what kind of wonderful things people could come up with if they were allowed to operate food vendor businesses without having to ask permission and obey orders from men with guns. I think it would be awesome.

      1. I live in a medium-sized city and can get almost anything my heart desires, and all from places that comply with sanitation requirements.

        Some of us think you shouldn’t be able to make a profit if you can’t do so without poisoning people (or their environment, or without paying minimum wage, etc.) Some of us think that makes for a more sophisticated and happy society than one that rewards cutting such corners.

        1. I live in a medium-sized city and can get almost anything my heart desires, and all from places that comply with sanitation requirements.

          Obviously, everyone has exactly the same tastes as you and every possible innovation in food has occurred at this point in time.

          1. As far as I know, nobody is stopping you from adding a dollop of feces to whatever food you’d like to consume. I for one am comforted that food safety regulations mean I get a choice in the matter.

            1. There is nothing stopping any restaurant from mixing shit into anything they serve you. You think that restaurant inspectors are there 24/7?

              Have you ever seen a restaurant health inspection? I have and it went like this. Inspector takes a quick look around to make sure all the required equipment and signs are there and that stuff in the fridge is dated. Then quizzes the staff on some food safety items. When they get questions wrong he tells them the answer and keeps asking the same questions until they get them right.

              It does not stop restaurants from doing unsanitary things at all. In fact, it just gives them an excuse if they do make a customer sick because they were complying with the regulations.

              You have to remember that before food safety regulation, things like refrigeration and disinfectants and knowledge about the germ theory of disease were a lot less widespread. A loosening of food regulation is not going to return us to the early 20th century.

            2. I live in a medium-sized city and can get almost anything my heart desires, and all from places that comply with sanitation requirements.

              One would assume that feces free food would be on the anything your heard desires list, but apparently restaurants only refrain from putting poop on food because some guy stopped in for 10 minutes last year and said that’s a no-no.

        2. Some of us think feel you shouldn’t be able to make a profit if you can’t do so without poisoning people (or their environment, or without paying minimum wage, etc.)

          Those of us who think, and that excludes you, understand that poisoning people doesn’t get a lot of return business.

          Those of us who think, and that excludes you, understand that pollution is less of a problem when the people downstream from polluters are allowed to sue.

          Those of us who think, and that excludes you, understand that placing a floor on the price of labor hurts only the young and inexperienced it is intended to help.

          Stop pretending that you think, fool.

          1. There you go again with the weird implication that courts aren’t part of government. Just how big, do you suppose, would the court system have to be to handle all the torts that regulations otherwise prevent? How much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the extra government necessary to handle all that? Or are you perhaps advocating a system so laughably unworkable that it amounts to letting the polluters get off with a slap on the wrist?

            And I suppose you’re definitely not in favor of tort reform. Clearly you must be in favor of easing access to the courts.

            1. the torts that regulations otherwise prevent

              I see. So you support crony capitalism where businesses and their political cronies craft regulations that allow them to pollute while disallowing those downstream from being able to sue.

              1. I don’t want to disallow anyone to sue (that would be the tort reformers on your team). I just think it’s laughably unworkable to the point of obvious deliberate nonsense to think that victims of pollution would be able to show specific harm and would be able and willing to access the court system to the degree that it would actually serve to deter future pollution.

                1. I don’t want to disallow anyone to sue

                  No, you just said that you did. You prefer regulation over allowing people to sue.

                  I just think it’s laughably unworkable to the point of obvious deliberate nonsense to think that victims of pollution would be able to show specific harm and would be able and willing to access the court system to the degree that it would actually serve to deter future pollution.

                  It actually worked for hundreds of years before progressives came along. Rivers didn’t catch fire until after progressives took away the right to sue polluters.

                  1. Progressives? The only people seeking to limit the right to sue polluters are pro-corporate conservatives, you idiot. And what worked? Are you suggesting that things were better as far as water contamination before regulations? Are you high? How apt anyway, considering Krugman’s column referenced elsewhere on this site. Who gets to claim Lake Erie? How do people whose water is being poisoned determine which farm specifically put the phosphorous there? How many of them can afford a lawyer and a successful case against big companies? Isn’t regulation like a thousand times more efficient and effective than torts? (Which, to repeat, is a fucking government solution.)

                    1. (Which, to repeat, is a fucking government solution.)

                      A government solution that doesn’t stifle commerce. Moron!

                    2. The (ridiculous, obviously agenda-driven) assumption is that torts will produce equal or better outcomes than regulations (meaning there won’t be any more pollution than under the current system). So how does it affect commerce any differently?

                    3. So how does it affect commerce any differently?

                      Because the legitimate businesses aren’t paying for the actions of the bad actors you fucking moron! Complying with regulation costs a shit-ton of money. Are you really this ignorant?

                    4. Complying with regulations means not committing the harm. Bad actors are fined. Instead, you want plaintiffs (footing the bill for lawyers and taking time out of their lives) to sue for damages. There’s no inherent difference except in one system companies get away with more.

                    5. Complying with regulations means not committing the harm.

                      Christ, you are a fucking moron. Of course you’ve NEVER considered the possibility that the system is OVERfuckingregulated and the business is paying twice as much as is needed to keep the customer safe, because of the one size fits all nature of regulation.

                      Allowing the market to work ensures that the precautions are right-sized for each business freeing up capital for reinvestment and growth.

                      Could you possibly be more ignorant?

                      Instead, you want plaintiffs (footing the bill for lawyers and taking time out of their lives) to sue for damages.

                      YES, that’s EXACTLY what I want. If they have a legitimate case, they will win and recover their damages. If their case is bullshit, they will waste their time and money, thus disincentivizing future frivolous suits.

                    6. The (ridiculous, obviously agenda-driven) assumption is that torts will produce equal or better outcomes than regulations (meaning there won’t be any more pollution than under the current system).

                      Believe it or not, there might even be less.

                      If pollution from upstream is causing you harm, but the polluter is in compliance with regulation, then there’s not a damn thing you can do about it.

                      But if the outcomes were determined by tortes instead of regulation, you might be able to do something about it.

                      That’s right. We might have cleaner water if we’d never abandoned torte lawsuits for pollution.

                2. tort reformers on your team

                  I don’t know about sarcasmic but no one on “my team” supports tort “reform”.

            2. Courts are a hell of a lot cheaper than agencies staffed with jobsworths who look at porn all day and draw gold-plated benefits. Of course, you are erroneously assuming that all 80,000+ pages of regulations, and the uncountable number of pages of laws have anything at all to do with protecting people.

              1. Cite for being cheaper assuming we replace the entire regulatory system with a court system big enough to handle enough claims to produce superior outcomes?

                1. Make the loser pay the court costs. Done.

                2. You may be the most ignorant ass-hat to ever walk the earth.

                  The number of suits would be a very small fraction of the number of businesses in existence.

                  You want to regulate all business and you claim a small fraction of lawsuits would cost more than regulating everybody? You are a fucking moron!

                  American businessmen spend $1.8 TRILLION (p7) a year complying with federal (that’s federal only) regulation. That’s 13% of GDP. You are a goddamned idiot.

                3. OK Tony, here’s a brief (and no doubt wasted) history lesson. Once upon a time, common law allowed people downstream from polluters to sue them. Unfortunately for polluters, this affected the bottom line. So they got their cronies in government to stop these lawsuits. Next thing you know fish are dying and rivers are catching fire. So the government comes in and creates massive regulatory agencies to fix the problem they caused. The end.

                  1. Government is a nice place to get rid of pesky inconveniences like competition and liability.

                    1. Tony, just have the owner carry some form of liability insurance to pay for damages. Then, instantly, the owner has a direct financial incentive to improve safety, in order to reduce the cost of the insurance. Victims of food poisoning and guarenteed restitution, and the insurers have an incentive to determine food safety rules that objectively minimize risk and correctly price that risk into the insurance premium.

                      The nature of insurance is that it converts uncertain future costs into present-cday fixed costs, and thereby regulates present behavior to reduce future risks. it’s a beautiful system and it costs taxpayers nothing.

                    2. To elaborate on this a bit, imagine that all this woman had to do is carry some kind of food-poisoning liability insurance.

                      Now, depending on what she can reasonably do to improve safety, she can make tradeoffs between reducing the insurance premiums and adding the safety improvements to the boat. There isn’t a one-size fits all solution. Instead, the added cost of the insurance gets priced into the cost of the food, and falls on the consumers that patronize her business, instead of on the general public.

                    3. That’s all very nice, but it’s still the heavy hand of government forcing businesses to comply with regulations at some expense, minus the benefit of prevention.

                      A conversation about the virtues of one form of government regulation (require insurance) vs. another (require refraining from the activity) depends on the outcomes. We’re no longer talking about big vs. small government. And this whole conversation hinges on the fact that corporations (naturally) want to avoid regulations, and that the idea that the courts will fill in is a fantasy they concocted in order to have an excuse for doing so.

                    4. As they simultaneously push for tort reform, of course.

                    5. the idea that the courts will fill in is a fantasy they concocted in order to have an excuse for doing so.

                      No Tony, you’ve got it backwards. As usual. Courts worked just fine for hundreds of years. Regulation is a fantasy concocted by the corporations to avoid being sued by injured parties. “I’m in compliance with the regulations I helped to write. Sorry about the dead fish. Now fuck off please.”

                    6. You name me one decade you’d prefer to live in prior to 50 years ago vis a vis food safety.

                    7. …50 years ago…

                      Well, genius, since the FDA was founded at the turn of the century, it obviously didn’t have much of an impact in your mind, so I’ll take pretty much whenever.

                    8. Food safety isn’t something I worry about. You eat something bad, you get sick. Big deal. Very, very few ever die from it. My ROI is CERTAINLY not worth what I pay for in regulation.

                    9. Tony, surely you can see that simply requiring businesses to carry liability insurance is MASSIVELY less burdensome than having several LARGE government agencies at the federal, state, and local level regulating in minute detail how every food stuff or ingredient must be prepared.

                      Surely, you are not that painfully retarded.

                    10. simply requiring

                      Know how I know you aren’t a libertarian?

                      Oh, and before you say it, FUCK NOZICK.

                    11. as I said about, when resorting to govt regulation, the regulators insist that their method is the only one available that will succeed in guaranteeing safety. Insurance doesn’t make that assumption, it’s results orientated.

            3. “Just how big, do you suppose, would the court system have to be to handle all the torts that regulations otherwise prevent?”

              Not bigger at all, since most regulations prevent things that are either totally unimportant or so minor that they don’t matter.

              “Or are you perhaps advocating a system so laughably unworkable that it amounts to letting the polluters get off with a slap on the wrist?”

              What do polluters have to do with food regulation?

        3. Fuck off Tony.

        4. Could you spew more sanctimonious bullshit?

    4. She’s not competing vs. food trucks complying with regs. She’s out on the water where no food trucks go, supplying a service that the regs may make unaffordable for any vendor.

    5. Precisely. It would be unfair if only some state governments enforced segregation, so Tony would have preferred a federal law enforcing uniform racism nationwide. Otherwise it wouldn’t be fair.

  17. Innovation is becoming a dirty word in this country

    LOOPHOLES! Those so-called “innovators” are just circumventing the intent of the law.

  18. Sounds like Maine has changed a bit since I lived there a while back. Or, maybe not Maine, maybe a few too many people “from away” have moved there. Either way, something has clearly been lost.

    1. Put the blame on Maine.

      1. The blame in Maine falls mostly on the lame.

        /Spain

    2. Most states probably have similar rules about food service businesses, so this could happen anywhere. But Maine does seem to have an awful lot of stupid nanny crap these days. At least most of it is still empty of people.

  19. Some of us think you shouldn’t be able to make a profit if you can’t do so without poisoning people (or their environment, or without paying minimum wage, etc.) Some of us think that makes for a more sophisticated and happy society than one that rewards cutting such corners.

    Thank God the authorities managed to hunt this woman down and put an end to her depredations. The trail of dead bodies led right to her door.

  20. Regulation: Ruining everything that’s awesome, a little bit at a time.

    Thanks, progressives!

  21. “Everything not forbidden is compulsory.”

  22. This is why you never speak to the press.

  23. Sounds like she needs to move to Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

  24. The only thing this woman did wrong was to get caught. You want to know what “Food Anarchy” looks like ? It looks fucking delicious. There is a lot of it going on. More then most people realize.

  25. She needs this t-shirt

  26. Two words: international waters.

  27. I’m surprised the Portland Press Herald reported the state’s requirements given that it is owned by Dem Congresswoman Chellie Pingree’s billionaire husband.

    I know someone that used to work at Maine’s CDC – Division of Environmental Health. Not a surprise.

  28. This depressing. I always thought that Maine was sort of the opposite of California and New York.

  29. Even the states with the least intrusive governments–if that’s not the world’s most misleading phrase–do stuff like this all the time. Salatin writes about his battles with Virginia regulators in most of his books, and most of that is exactly the kind of lunacy that makes you think that we’re not so far from a Randian dystopia. Egg regulators down on all fours counting and then debating the number of calcium deposits on a hyper-organic eggshell as though they were hanging chads.

    In my neck of the woods in Tennessee, it’s still illegal to sell raw milk even with a commercial license. The best you can do, and what plenty of homeschooler back-to-the-earth types do, is buy your own cow or cowshare and get the milk from there. Google tells me that we have one licensed raw-cheese producer in the state. Yay for licensing.

    And the awful truth is that, compared to California’s raids of Rawesome Foods and comic-book-villain style of governance, Tennessee is a virtual libertarian paradise.

  30. Sorry to be vulgar, but fuck this fucking government. It is ridiculous. With internet reviews, do we really need the government to regulate restaurants?

    1. Wow. Much shoes. Awesome squirrels. Wow.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.