3 ms·
based on that logic it would be perfectly ok for all the food companies to lace their food with fentanyl? or does the government bare some responsibility to re
by sharemywin 4y ago
based on that logic it would be perfectly ok for all the food companies to lace their food with fentanyl?
or does the government bare some responsibility to regulate corporation and protect consumers from harmful business practices.
if you didn't have labeling laws and didn't have laws against addictive food additives why wouldn't all profit seeking corporations maximize shareholder value.
- vfclists 4y agoI don't know what you are going on about. People have a duty to know what their bodies need, and make good choices for themselves. Expecting the government to do everything for them doesn't work. Whether or not government exists or not, the primary responsbility is on the consumer. Just because companies sell it doesn't mean you have to buy it. If the government doesn't enforce labels, sensible consumers can pool their funds and pay laboratories to analyze the food for them, and they can advice their friends and family if those food stuffs are decent enough. Governments themselves are corporate entities whose chief executives seek employment with the very companies they are supposed to regulate. Why do any intelligent consumers believe they can be relied on?
- alpaca128 4y ago> Why do any intelligent consumers believe they can be relied on? Because they know the reason for all those regulations: we started without them and people had such a bad time they decided restrictions on businesses were an improvement. And they were right, in all of human history there probably hasn't been a time when commercially produced food was safer than today. > If the government doesn't enforce labels, sensible consumers can pool their funds and pay laboratories to analyze the food for them We can do that either way, and it is in fact done.