5 ms·

And they're correct to object, the notion that we need apply authoritarian control over labels is absurd and wrong. You don't need to force GMO products to be

by zorga 8y ago

And they're correct to object, the notion that we need apply authoritarian control over labels is absurd and wrong. You don't need to force GMO products to be labelled when non-GMO products are perfectly free to advertise that on their label. It's one thing to say you can't lie on a label, that's fraud, but it's wrong to mandate what should be on a label and what words they must use. The GMO moniker is a smear intended to take advantage of consumer ignorance to scare them away from perfectly good food. There's no real evidence against GMO, it's just fear mongering. Most of our food is not natural and hasn't been for a very very long time. > if consumers would want to know so they could avoid a product, as admitted by the lobbiest, shouldn’t be entitled to know? They can already know now, by looking for companies voluntarily labeling their products non-GMO. There's more than one way to reach that goal, one requires forced compliance and the other allows freedom; the freedom approach is better. Forcing your competitors to label their products as GMO to take advantage of the irrational fear and superstition of the public is just plain evil. It's funny watching people like you pretend you're being the good guy when you're really the bad guy trying to make everyone else behave the way you want them to rather than simply choosing to do business with the people who are the way you want them to be. Here's an idea for you and everyone who thinks like you; worry about your own behavior and stop trying to tell everyone else how they should behave. You're not forced to buy their products, if you don't like their labels, take your business elsewhere. That's how things work in a free country.

will_brown 8y ago
So do you object to mandated nutritional labels and ingredient lists? To say if you want to enter food and food stuffs into the stream of commerce you need to include nutritional information and ingredients, is that really authoritarian? I personally like consumer rights and don’t pretend there is a level playing field between consumers and corporations. I think it’s a common sense approach to the reality companies put nasty shit in food from preservatives to various types of sugars that consumers base buying decisions on and it’s not authoritarian to require those disclosures...at least you know where we have a quasi democratic process in the form of a constitutional republic. It’s like saying it’s authoritarian to require doctors to inform patients about their options. How dare these authoritarians dictate how doctors practice medicine. >It's funny watching people like you pretend you're being the good guy when you're really the bad guy trying to make everyone else behave the way you want them to rather than simply choosing to do business with the people who are the way you want them to be. Did I say I was good and anyone else was bad. Did I say I wanted to know about gmo’s personally? I just asked a question shouldn’t consumers be able to organize and pass laws requiring disclosures? Pretty sure that’s what a free country is...not the right to sell unlabeled snake oil if they want.
- zorga 8y ago
  > So do you object to mandated nutritional labels and ingredient lists? Absolutely. Do I like them, sure, and I'd happily avoid any product that didn't provide them willingly. > To say if you want to enter food and food stuffs into the stream of commerce you need to include nutritional information and ingredients, is that really authoritarian? Yes, it is, by definition. Forcing a vendor to do anything is authoritarian; the question is is it justified. Forcing someone not to lie, yea that's justified because lying is fraud. Forcing them to add something to a label, that's just authoritarian. Let the market kill them for being stupid. If the market wants nutrition labels they'll do it voluntarily or their competition will. > I personally like consumer rights and don’t pretend there is a level playing field between consumers and corporations. I think it’s a common sense approach to the reality companies put nasty shit in food from preservatives to various types of sugars that consumers base buying decisions on and it’s not authoritarian to require those disclosures...at least you know where we have a quasi democratic process in the form of a constitutional republic. It is authoritarian by definition; though it may be justified authoritarianism in response to bad actors in the market. Not all authoritarianism is unjustified, markets do fail. However, nutrition information being forced on all isn't remotely the same as forcing only some to label something GMO as if that status has any scientific validity whatsoever. The non-GMO movement is superstition and ignorance, not science. Superstition should not be forced onto vendors. > It’s like saying it’s authoritarian to require doctors to inform patients about their options. It is. You seem to not know what that word means. If the government makes you do something, it is by definition authoritarian. > How dare these authoritarians dictate how doctors practice medicine. Yes actually, you should be very concerned when government decides it knows better than doctors about how to treat patients. But you'll note the legal requirement on this actually refers back to the doctors norms, they're only required to inform patients of things that a reasonable doctor would inform them of. > Did I say I was good and anyone else was bad. I didn't say you said it; I said watching you pretend to be, that means that's how your coming off to me. That's my opinion of your behavior.

by zorga 8y ago

will_brown 8y ago

So do you object to mandated nutritional labels and ingredient lists? To say if you want to enter food and food stuffs into the stream of commerce you need to include nutritional information and ingredients, is that really authoritarian? I personally like consumer rights and don’t pretend there is a level playing field between consumers and corporations. I think it’s a common sense approach to the reality companies put nasty shit in food from preservatives to various types of sugars that consumers base buying decisions on and it’s not authoritarian to require those disclosures...at least you know where we have a quasi democratic process in the form of a constitutional republic. It’s like saying it’s authoritarian to require doctors to inform patients about their options. How dare these authoritarians dictate how doctors practice medicine. >It's funny watching people like you pretend you're being the good guy when you're really the bad guy trying to make everyone else behave the way you want them to rather than simply choosing to do business with the people who are the way you want them to be. Did I say I was good and anyone else was bad. Did I say I wanted to know about gmo’s personally? I just asked a question shouldn’t consumers be able to organize and pass laws requiring disclosures? Pretty sure that’s what a free country is...not the right to sell unlabeled snake oil if they want.

zorga 8y ago
> So do you object to mandated nutritional labels and ingredient lists? Absolutely. Do I like them, sure, and I'd happily avoid any product that didn't provide them willingly. > To say if you want to enter food and food stuffs into the stream of commerce you need to include nutritional information and ingredients, is that really authoritarian? Yes, it is, by definition. Forcing a vendor to do anything is authoritarian; the question is is it justified. Forcing someone not to lie, yea that's justified because lying is fraud. Forcing them to add something to a label, that's just authoritarian. Let the market kill them for being stupid. If the market wants nutrition labels they'll do it voluntarily or their competition will. > I personally like consumer rights and don’t pretend there is a level playing field between consumers and corporations. I think it’s a common sense approach to the reality companies put nasty shit in food from preservatives to various types of sugars that consumers base buying decisions on and it’s not authoritarian to require those disclosures...at least you know where we have a quasi democratic process in the form of a constitutional republic. It is authoritarian by definition; though it may be justified authoritarianism in response to bad actors in the market. Not all authoritarianism is unjustified, markets do fail. However, nutrition information being forced on all isn't remotely the same as forcing only some to label something GMO as if that status has any scientific validity whatsoever. The non-GMO movement is superstition and ignorance, not science. Superstition should not be forced onto vendors. > It’s like saying it’s authoritarian to require doctors to inform patients about their options. It is. You seem to not know what that word means. If the government makes you do something, it is by definition authoritarian. > How dare these authoritarians dictate how doctors practice medicine. Yes actually, you should be very concerned when government decides it knows better than doctors about how to treat patients. But you'll note the legal requirement on this actually refers back to the doctors norms, they're only required to inform patients of things that a reasonable doctor would inform them of. > Did I say I was good and anyone else was bad. I didn't say you said it; I said watching you pretend to be, that means that's how your coming off to me. That's my opinion of your behavior.