A Republican State Representative in New Hampshire has found a way to create a new front in the war on workers, proposing a bill that would repeal the state’s law requiring that workers get a 30-minute lunch break after five hours of labor.
State Rep. J.R. Hoell (R), a supporter of libertarian-leaning Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) for president, told a New Hampshire General Court committee this week that he believes the law is unnecessary because it is in employers’ interest to treat workers well, according to The Concord Monitor. ...
I think we should go further than that.
Let's abolish safety laws, since it's in an employer's interest to keep workers safe.
Let's abolish food safety laws because, gee whiz, it's in the food producers' interests to, you know, not have icky food.
In fact, now that I think of it, bank laws are stupid. Because it's in a bank's interest to stay solvent. (And if one overreaches and goes bankrupt, it will have to suffer the free-market consequences. Oh, wait! ...)
But now allow me a counter-argument, from personal experience.
Back in the prosperous nineties, I got into an argument with a Disney exec who took exception to my complaints about employees having a "working lunch" from twelve to
noon one. When I pointed out that if Feature Animation was making the merry workers attend a meeting, then it wasn't really "lunch."
Her response was: "But we're supplying food!"
(A second exec finally conceded my point that it wasn't really a "lunch break.")
So, when I run across an Ayn Rand disciple who maintains that things will be much better if we just got rid of all the rules and regulations and let our fine conglomerates (and everyone else) pursue their enlightened self-interest, my answer is always monotonously the same:
Uh ... no.