Falafel feud shows what pro-market really means.
A San Francisco restaurateur is eager to stop a competitor from opening up down the street. The city's byzantine permitting process might let him do just that.
Here is a good example of why being pro-market does not mean being pro-business, but pro-consumer. Falafel shop owner tries to stop competitor from opening up, says another falafel shop is the last thing the neighbourhood needs.
But who is he to speak for all the consumers of the neighbourhood? If it's truly the last thing that need, it will fail. If it's something they actually want, it will succeed. If all the shops, current plus new, succeed, then the neighbourhood clearly did need another falafel shop.
What this shop owner is really worried about is that the neighbourhood doesn't need another shop, but they'll want the new one more than they want his, and he'll lose business, and perhaps have to close. But that's a net gain for the neighbourhood: they'll still have all the falafels they want, but they'll have ones they like more.
Who is this falafel vendor or any group of politicians to tell the neighbourhood who they can and can't buy falafels from?