Editor, The New York Times 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Dear Editor: Elizabeth Newton opines that "In a perfectly functioning economic world, all consumers would receive perfect education about good nutrition and then simultaneously demand that fast-food companies and grocery stores start offering healthy options, thus forcing Big Food to supply what the people demand. Until that happens, we need regulation of Nestlé, Monsanto, McDonald’s and the rest of the moguls that dictate our diets" (Letters, Aug. 11). If economic arrogance were calories, Ms. Newton's letter would make a Baconator burger seem like a broccoli floret. She assumes that "Big Food" earns higher profits by selling products that consumers really don't want than by selling products that consumers really do want. This startling proposition requires for its justification more than Ms. Newton's presumption that she knows other people's true preferences better than do those people themselves, and better than do the entrepreneurs who, in competitive markets, earn their livings by satisfying those preferences. In fact, the likes of Ms. Newton are simply pests preening as know-it-all "Progressives." Her superciliousness highlights the truth of H.L. Mencken's observation that "one man who minds his own business is more valuable to the world than 10,000 cocksure moralists."* Sincerely, Donald J. Boudreaux Professor of Economics George Mason University
