Originally posted by finnegan You are such a philosophical bunch. Given an empirical, practical topic you immediately seek first principles, fundamental concepts, deep abstractions.
I think Chevron are an evil bunch for spoiling an amazing environment in the selfish pursuit of profit. I think Amazon are an utterly anti social anti competitive bunch, seeking to abuse monopoly powers ...[text shortened]... upted and beyond the pale then you are lost in ideology and beyond the reach of common humanity.
or some have identified the level of boring your thread has and tried to make it interesting by discussing such abstractions.
if you want to pick a clear winner of evil between stealing the water of poor people and giving cancer to communities, go on buzzfeed. i am sure you can find lists of "10 most evilest corporations", arranged in order of evilness
Originally posted by finnegan Monsanto is terrorizing farmers across the planet. Monsanto and its allies sued Vermont for trying to stop a new law that required genetically engineered foods be labeled...
This is a freedom of expression issue and 'Monsanto and its allies' should be commended for making a stand. You can question there motivation but the principle behind this is absolutely essential to a free society, it's unfortunate the Left are so blasé about freedom of expression, they were once often associated the right to free expression, I guess it only counts when they're the ones that want it.
The tobacco companies have just folded on this. In Australia tobacco products all come in the same brown packet, a certain percentage of the packet is given over to guvamint graffiti and the manufacturers must all use the same font.
Of course Australia doesn't have a first amendment, let's hope this assault on freedom of expression can at least be stemmed in the US.
Originally posted by Wajoma This is a freedom of expression issue and 'Monsanto and its allies' should be commended for making a stand. You can question there motivation but the principle behind this is absolutely essential to a free society, it's unfortunate the Left are so blasé about freedom of expression, they were once often associated the right to free expression, I guess it only ...[text shortened]... this assault on freedom of expression can at least be stemmed in the US.
Hoorah for Monsanto.
So Monsanto has a "right" to put whatever it wants into our food and we have no corresponding "right" to know what we are being invited to eat?
When you arrive at the position of ascribing human rights to a corporation, you have lost the plot.
Originally posted by Wajoma ...and it bores the doodoo out of me but it better be done to preempt the intellectuals from being too clever.
They are not allowed to make false claims about their product. This would be a type of fraud.
GE free manufacturers are free to label their product as GE free if they wish.
..and they can promote healthy fat free options to encourage the worried well to buy more, while failing to explain the use of sugar and other poisons as a substitute for fat. Then blame the sudden obesity epidemic on an unaccountable outbreak of laziness on the part of ill informed ("stupid" ) consumers.
The food industry makes false claims every day of the week, every week of the year. Only thus can they induce the consumer to accept the crap they put on our plates.
Originally posted by Wajoma Any space no matter how small they have to give over to guvamint graffiti on their product limits their ability to express themselves freely.
It's in the interests of people selling things that the people buying them are poorly informed about the product they are buying. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to force people who are selling products to provide essential information about their product to customers, so they can make an informed decision. Is genetic modification such essential information? I don't think so, but to link the forced provision of information about a product to people buying it to a limitation of freedom of speech is laughable at best.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra It's in the interests of people selling things that the people buying them are poorly informed about the product they are buying. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to force people who are selling products to provide essential information about their product to customers, so they can make an informed decision. Is genetic modification such essential info ...[text shortened]... n about a product to people buying it to a limitation of freedom of speech is laughable at best.
Like I said...
...blasé
Fortunately other people take freedom of expression seriously.
Fortunately other people take freedom of expression seriously.
Yes, wouldn't that be great, a world where arsenic is sold as baby food (not that it could be produced if your proposed ban on manufacturing goes through) and freedom of expression is "taken seriously."
Originally posted by KazetNagorra Yes, wouldn't that be great, a world where arsenic is sold as baby food (not that it could be produced if your proposed ban on manufacturing goes through) and freedom of expression is "taken seriously."
But don't you see KN, you're hemming and hawing over compulsory labeling for GE products, No1 is spitting tacks over compulsory labeling stating place of origin and someone else wants labeling for something else all together.
Here's how it is, if the label does not have the information you require do not buy that product.
Originally posted by Wajoma But don't you see KN, you're hemming and hawing over compulsory labeling for GE products, No1 is spitting tacks over compulsory labeling stating place of origin and someone else wants labeling for something else all together.
Here's how it is, if the label does not have the information you require do not buy that product.
I just told you I oppose mandatory labeling of products containing GMO's...
Ok, you're in the supermarktet, and you can choose three varieties of baby food.
One says on the label "Super Tasty Baby Food" and contains arsenic.
Another one says "Super Healthy Baby Food" and contains arsenic.
The last one says "Arsenic" and contains arsenic.
Which one do you buy? Do you just let your baby starve because there is no product which says on the label that it does NOT contain arsenic?
Originally posted by KazetNagorra I just told you I oppose mandatory labeling of products containing GMO's...
That was exactly my point, you might be opposed to it but there are others who regard GE as frankenstein food, don't you see, for you it's not important for someone else it is, for No1 it's country of origin, for someone else it's something else.
Originally posted by Wajoma That was exactly my point, you might be opposed to it but there are others who regard GE as frankenstein food, don't you see, for you it's not important for someone else it is, for No1 it's country of origin, for someone else it's something else.
Is arsenic Baby Food?
That was exactly my point, you might be opposed to it but there are others who regard GE as frankenstein food, don't you see, for you it's not important for someone else it is, for No1 it's country of origin, for someone else it's something else.
Fortunately, we have developed a nifty tool called "democracy" to reach a compromise about what we consider to be essential information and what is not essential information.
Is arsenic Baby Food?
In your ideal world, it can be sold as such. So which version would you buy?
Worst Corporation 2014
26 Dec '14 13:24
Back to Top