GMO Labeling PROP 37 Fails in CA

[jllundqu]

California has utterly failed us once again. If the "land of fruits and nuts" can't pass a common sense initiative to simply tell people WTF they are eating, there is no hope left in the fight against GMOs/Food Freedom Advocacy.

California = Epic Fail :eek:

[jllundqu]

I really thought this would pass.

[specsaregood]

wow, that is surprising.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Prop-37-Genetic-food-labels-loses-4014669.php

Sad state of affairs when people vote NO to label if a food is dangerous or not.

[maskander]

California has utterly failed us once again. If the "land of fruits and nuts" can't pass a common sense initiative to simply tell people WTF they are eating, there is no hope left in the fight against GMOs/Food Freedom Advocacy.

California = Epic Fail :eek:Yes this was probably the most disappointing failure of this election. This could be a good thing though, I think the corporations who supported this measure should have just laid down and let it pass. Now we know the progressives will go after the people really responsible for letting these GMOs into our food supply... the FDA. Hopefully very soon we start to see some scandals coming out of the FDA

[Czolgosz]

On principle I don't support the government forcing "food" companies to label stuff.


HOWEVER, considering the fruits and nuts of this land are ok w/ forcing businesses with a bunch of other laws...wtf.

[Zippyjuan]

I was divided on this one. On one hand, I have no problem having the information available. Information is good. But would it be useful information? Simply being GMO is not inheritantly good or bad. There are some good and some bad products. Adding the label would imply that all are bad.

[AGRP]

Not passing government regulation = Fail?

[ninepointfive]

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=47d755c7ed&view=att&th=13adc38fa440b769&attid=0.1&disp=emb&realattid=ii_13adc385bda9f497&zw&atsh=1

[specsaregood]

I was divided on this one. On one hand, I have no problem having the information available. Information is good. But would it be useful information? Simply being GMO is not inheritantly good or bad. There are some good and some bad products. Adding the label would imply that all are bad.

So labels saying that a product is manufactured in a location that also processes nuts, dairy etc is also implying nuts and dairy are "all bad"?

I wasn't a big fan of this legislation; but am quite surprised it failed.

[puppetmaster]

elections are rigged....you forget that. this is all a charade and we are just observers.

[jllundqu]

Not passing government regulation = Fail?

I am a big food-freedom advocate who fights against big-agra, and corporate giants like Monsanto. First off, not all government regulation is bad, IMO. Second, this would have been a STATE action and I am a huge supporter of the 10th Amendment and states rights (look it up!). Third, there is nothing more fundamental to human freedom than having the freedom to choose what we put in our bodies and making educated choices about doing so. I personally think GMOs pose a major threat to global ecosystems, but that is beside the point. People have a right to know whether an evil-agent-orange-pumping-giant has spliced insecticide and fish genes into their freaking avocados!

[gwax23]

Good that it didnt pass. We dont need government regulation. I thought this was the ron paul forum.

Or are you just pointing out that its weird that california would vote AGAINST regulation? In that case then yes tis weird.

[jllundqu]

This is Ron Paul forums... what the heck happened to the 10th Amendment and states rights to press big corporations on important issues?

[Tpoints]

I was divided on this one. On one hand, I have no problem having the information available. Information is good. But would it be useful information? Simply being GMO is not inheritantly good or bad. There are some good and some bad products. Adding the label would imply that all are bad.

is there a law that prohibits companies from labeling "GMO free" or deceptive labels? If there isn't for the former, and there is for the latter, what's the problem?

[dannno]

Not passing government regulation = Fail?

This was state regulation, aka regulation from the people of a business who controls federal regulation of said business.

[jllundqu]

List of big-biz who defeated the prop:
Monsanto $8,112,867
E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. $5,400,000
Pepsico, Inc. $2,145,400
Grocery Manufacturers Association $2,002,000
DOW Agrisciences $2,000,000
Bayer Cropscience $2,000,000
BASF Plant Science $2,000,000
Syngenta Corporation $2,000,000
Kraft Foods Global $1,950,500
Coca-Cola North America $1,700,500
Nestle USA $1,315,600
Conagra Foods $1,176,700
General Mills $1,135,300
Kellogg Company $790,000
Smithfield Foods $683,900
Del Monte Foods $674,100
Campbell's Soup $500,000
Heinz Foods $500,000
Hershey Company $493,900
The J.M. Smucker Company $485,000
Bimbo Bakeries $422,900
Ocean Spray Cranberries $387,100

[specsaregood]

This is Ron Paul forums... what the heck happened to the 10th Amendment and states rights to press big corporations on important issues?

Just because a state can do something constitutionally doesn't mean it should.

[jllundqu]

is there a law that prohibits companies from labeling "GMO free" or deceptive labels? If there isn't for the former, and there is for the latter, what's the problem?

No... lookup non-gmo project. It's a grassroots labeling initiative and I buy those products labeled non-gmo. I guess I'm just shocked that RPF folks are backing Monsanto over food-freedom advocates?? WTF happened here?

[Bruehound]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?

[familydog]

Major fail. Am I supposed to feel bad for corporations that spend tens of millions of dollars getting perks from the government, while regulating local and organic producers out of the market? Before we yell about regulating state-sponsored business, shouldn't we first worry about the farmers that actually care about food safety and nutrition?

[jllundqu]

I am not a minarchist or anarcho-capitalist or even a die-hard libertarian, I don't believe that all goverment is bad, and I am a strong supporter of the people of a state voting to know what they are eating.

Could someone offer up a libertarian solution to the GMO issue? I would be very interested to see the logic in asking Monsanto to self-regulate.

[specsaregood]

No... lookup non-gmo project. It's a grassroots labeling initiative and I buy those products labeled non-gmo. I guess I'm just shocked that RPF folks are backing Monsanto over food-freedom advocates?? WTF happened here?

dunno, I could probably crapout a bunch of possible ways that this legislation could hurt the smalltime producers.

[specsaregood]

Could someone offer up a libertarian solution to the GMO issue?

you already referred to the libertarian solution: "non-gmo project".

[sailingaway]

again just noting that the County Recorder still says only 75% of precincts have been processed in LA County, the most populous.


lacountyrrcc Update: 3,739 precincts reporting (74.88%). 1,836,821 ballots processed.

http://www.lavote.net/

I wonder how that works in?

[sailingaway]

I am not a minarchist or anarcho-capitalist or even a die-hard libertarian, I don't believe that all goverment is bad, and I am a strong supporter of the people of a state voting to know what they are eating.

Could someone offer up a libertarian solution to the GMO issue? I would be very interested to see the logic in asking Monsanto to self-regulate.

the point is getting Monsanto out of the FDA and Ag where their legal eagles now head both policy sectors and regulate competition out of existence. UNTIL that is done so the market can function by pressuring vendors to label and have it matter, I voted for Prop 37

[jllundqu]

you already referred to the libertarian solution: "non-gmo project".

Yes, but the problem is that Monsanto, et al, has the federal government in its corner while at the same time regulating out of existence organic/small local farmers. Prop 37 was the state's answer to this unbalance. The non-gmo project is all well and good, but versus Monsanto and co., hardly a viable solution.

You're saying that big co's like Monsanto, who are extensions of the federal government via their corporations and subsidies, should be exempt from any and all state regulation to try and reign them in?

[dannno]

Could someone offer up a libertarian solution to the GMO issue? I would be very interested to see the logic in asking Monsanto to self-regulate.

Stop giving billions of dollars in federal subsidies to Monsanto. They have been receiving them for decades and have taken over almost our entire food supply.

I'm actually against the proposition and regulation of food, in general, but I voted for this prop because our food system is in such dire straights something needs to be done in the short term to circumvent what is happening at the FDA that we cannot control (no matter who is elected President). Turns out one of Obama's campaign promises was to have GMO food labelled. Hah.

[AGRP]

This was state regulation, aka regulation from the people of a business who controls federal regulation of said business.

So, a smaller, more kindlier version of DC. Makes sense....not.

[sdsubball23]

Can the common people do this with their own research and funds? It would cost the state money to put this into the place. I'm all for knowing what's in our food supply, but should we really create a gov't law for this or should the people do it themselves and inform consumers with their own money?

[Tpoints]

No... lookup non-gmo project. It's a grassroots labeling initiative and I buy those products labeled non-gmo. I guess I'm just shocked that RPF folks are backing Monsanto over food-freedom advocates?? WTF happened here?

not voting for a regulation makes us backing Monsanto?

[jllundqu]

Your argument makes it sound as if you are OK with the status quo. Absent offering solutions to the question on the table, you sound like you are advocating for Monsanto, yes.

I apologize if I have offended your Libertarian sensibilities. ;)

[puppetmaster]

no ingredient lists on labels at all......might as well do that

[jllundqu]

no ingredient lists on labels at all......might as well do that

F*ck it dude.... let's go bowling....

[Elwar]

"consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone." -(guess who)



If I own a lemonade stand and I go to the grocery store and get the cheapest lemons (which happen to be GMO) and make my lemonade to sell on my property. YOU would have men with guns come and throw me in jail for not putting a label on my lemonade?

[jllundqu]

"consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone." -(guess who)



If I own a lemonade stand and I go to the grocery store and get the cheapest lemons (which happen to be GMO) and make my lemonade to sell on my property. YOU would have men with guns come and throw me in jail for not putting a label on my lemonade?

No and you obviously didn't read the proposition. Thanks for the unecessary melodrama, though!

[AGRP]

If I own a lemonade stand and I go to the grocery store and get the cheapest lemons (which happen to be GMO) and make my lemonade to sell on my property. YOU would have men with guns come and throw me in jail for not putting a label on my lemonade?

Well, yeah because its done at the state level dummy. Youre not on Monsanto's side are you?

[sailingaway]

"consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone." -(guess who)



If I own a lemonade stand and I go to the grocery store and get the cheapest lemons (which happen to be GMO) and make my lemonade to sell on my property. YOU would have men with guns come and throw me in jail for not putting a label on my lemonade?

but with Monsanto attorneys heading FDA and AG the market doesn't function, their regulation nullifies consumer input and then some. That's why I voted for the proposition. Get rid of the corporate fascism masquerading as consumer protection and I'd be with you on that.

[jllundqu]

but with Monsanto attorneys heading FDA and AG the market doesn't function, their regulation nullifies consumer input and then some. That's why I voted for the proposition. Get rid of the corporate fascism masquerading as consumer protection and I'd be with you on that.

Me too...

[McChronagle]

Whats with all the support for gov mandated gmo labeling? I thought we were the group of personal responsibility. Go out and find it yourself and if enough people seek out labeling the free market would provide it. Think of it this way, if youre one of the few that actually cares and seek out healthy food you will be better off and healthier than everybody else that couldnt care less. Competitive advantage. Its out there, take back your responsibility and go find it.

Its a poor excuse to say well monsanto or so and so destroys the free market this is needed. slap yourself please. this is the excuse that has been used for everything gov does that we have to deal with. bandaids dont fix a thing i thought most of us would understand this by now.

[twomp]

If I own a lemonade stand and I go to the grocery store and get the cheapest lemons (which happen to be GMO) and make my lemonade to sell on my property. YOU would have men with guns come and throw me in jail for not putting a label on my lemonade?

How would you even KNOW if your lemons are GMO or not?

[AGRP]

Whats with all the support for gov mandated gmo labeling?

A lot of it can be attributed to Alex Jones / Natural News.

[jllundqu]

Whats with all the support for gov mandated gmo labeling? I thought we were the group of personal responsibility. Go out and find it yourself and if enough people seek out labeling the free market would provide it. Think of it this way, if youre one of the few that actually cares and seek out healthy food you will be better off and healthier than everybody else that couldnt care less. Competitive advantage. Its out there, take back your responsibility and go find it.

Its a poor excuse to say well monsanto or so and so destroys the free market this is needed. slap yourself please. this is the excuse that has been used for everything gov does that we have to deal with.

In other words... state government serves no purpose in defense of federal/corporate fascism and just hope you can find non-GMO foods in an increasingly shrinking market. Got it. I am all for personal responsibility but this is what the 10th amendment was for, so states could fight back against federal BS!

[McChronagle]

I am not a minarchist or anarcho-capitalist or even a die-hard libertarian, I don't believe that all goverment is bad, and I am a strong supporter of the people of a state voting to know what they are eating.

Could someone offer up a libertarian solution to the GMO issue? I would be very interested to see the logic in asking Monsanto to self-regulate.

its the same solution as any other free market industry. get the government power and influence out of it. you are attributing the monsanto control and problems to free market self regulation. its because of the lack of this.

[jllundqu]

How would you even KNOW if your lemons are GMO or not?

HA! This ^^^

[specsaregood]

You're saying that big co's like Monsanto, who are extensions of the federal government via their corporations and subsidies, should be exempt from any and all state regulation to try and reign them in?

If that's what you got from what i said, then you have a reading comprehension problem.

[jllundqu]

When corporations are in bed with the fed gov, NO FREE MARKET EXISTS, therfore no competition could ever solve the problem.

[AGRP]

How would you even KNOW if your lemons are GMO or not?


HA! This ^^^


When corporations are in bed with the fed gov, NO FREE MARKET EXISTS, therfore no competition could ever solve the problem.

^^^ The AJ type crowd (you two) is really embarrassing themselves here.

[McChronagle]

In other words... state government serves no purpose in defense of federal/corporate fascism and just hope you can find non-GMO foods in an increasingly shrinking market. Got it. I am all for personal responsibility but this is what the 10th amendment was for, so states could fight back against federal BS!

Yeah its fighting back by putting more burden and regulation on business in the process. Cali probably has one of the largest organic marketplaces in the country so I wouldnt be too worried about finding it.

[Elwar]

Well, yeah because its done at the state level dummy. Youre not on Monsanto's side are you?

State level tyranny is fine?

Are you on the side of Hitler?

[McChronagle]

When corporations are in bed with the fed gov, NO FREE MARKET EXISTS, therfore no competition could ever solve the problem.

So you are a proponent of another regulation (band aid) because the system is broken thinking this will solve the problem. How often has this backfired on us in the past?

[Elwar]

How would you even KNOW if your lemons are GMO or not?

Exactly!

I, as a small business owner, would need to research each and every ingredient in my product and create the proper government mandated label for every item.

[anaconda]

California has utterly failed us once again. If the "land of fruits and nuts" can't pass a common sense initiative to simply tell people WTF they are eating, there is no hope left in the fight against GMOs/Food Freedom Advocacy.

California = Epic Fail :eek:

I voted "no." If the market demands it, producers will make it happen. I don't trust bureaucrats to do it right anyway. Pervasive regulations create higher cost, shortages. In the meantime, I research where my food comes from.

[jllundqu]

^^^ The AJ type crowd (you two) is really embarrassing themselves here.

AJ? I assume you mean Alex Jones? Yeah... no. And really?? Embarassing? That's very childish of you. I am actually trying to have a discussion about ideology and solutions and your dropping the ad hominem? I would say you are the one embarassing yourself.

[Brian4Liberty]

no ingredient lists on labels at all......might as well do that

Yeah, that seems like the direction some people want to go. I find the ingredient label helpful myself.

[McChronagle]

Yeah, that seems like the direction some people want to go. I find the ingredient label helpful myself.

I don't know anybody in support of this. I doubt anybody here would but I mightve missed comments like this. I for one want to see whats in my food and if its gmo. I have no problem finding entire stores that do this because despite all the control and manipulation, businesses still see the profitability in this niche.

[Elwar]

Again:

"consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone."

this was Ron Paul on GMO labeling...

[sailingaway]

Again:

"consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand. Of course, makers of genetically-engineered food should be held legally responsible if they fraudulently market their products or harm anyone."

this was Ron Paul on GMO labeling...

Yeah, but he was also against repealing Glass Steagal because the market was so warped by regulation already that the results would be (and turned out to be) disasterous. I see this one the same way. In a free market society, yes, but not as things are. That was my calculation in any event.

[AGRP]

Yeah, but he was also against repealing Glass Steagal because the market was so warped by regulation already that the results would be (and turned out to be) disasterous. I see this one the same way. In a free market society, yes, but not as things are. That was my calculation in any event.

It must be nice to imagine that companies like Monsanto would never buy off or infiltrate powerful governing bodies of gmo testing and labeling that would outlaw any legitimate free market competition.

[gerryb1]

When corporations are in bed with the fed gov, NO FREE MARKET EXISTS, therfore no competition could ever solve the problem.

So let's make more bureaucracies for the corporations to control and stamp out competition.

Epic Fail.

[jllundqu]

So what I gather from everyone is basically, take care of yourself (as far as GMOs are concerned) and let the corporations continue to run-wild...

Status quo = Winning

[jllundqu]

Thank you to everyone on this thread... You have all given me much to consider while I struggle with where I stand in the political spectrum and the role of government.

I don't mean that sarcastically. I appreciate a spirited argument.

[AGRP]

So what I gather from everyone is basically, take care of yourself (as far as GMOs are concerned) and let the corporations continue to run-wild...

Status quo = Winning


Thank you to everyone on this thread... You have all given me much to consider while I struggle with where I stand in the political spectrum and the role of government.

I don't mean that sarcastically. I appreciate a spirited argument.

I dont believe you gathered anything. Your reading comprehension skills are sub par.

[jllundqu]

I dont believe you gathered anything. Your reading comprehension skills are sub par.

Wow... just wow dude.... easy to jab from a keyboard eh? I somehow offended you, apologized for it, thanked you for the discussion, and you still kick me in the balls. No wonder we can't make any strides as a movement... people like you would rather insult and chastize rather than be civil with those who have a SLIGHT difference of opinion on ONE issue.

Ease up man... you're nobody special.

[McChronagle]

So what I gather from everyone is basically, take care of yourself (as far as GMOs are concerned) and let the corporations continue to run-wild...

Status quo = Winning

The status quo is adding more regulation to supposedly band aid a fundamental problem that ultimately backfires with many unintended consequences. More regulation that inevitably gets manipulated and taken advantage of by said corporations. Focus needs to be on the root of the problems instead of asking for more government to alleviate them.

[jllundqu]

The status quo is adding more regulation to supposedly band aid a fundamental problem that ultimately backfires with many unintended consequences. More regulation that inevitably gets manipulated and taken advantage of by said corporations. Focus needs to be on the root of the problems instead of asking for more government to alleviate them.

I agree with that en totale! That was well put.

[jclay2]

I can see how those who are opposed to this legislation justify their opinion, but how do you reconcile that with the fact that companies like Monsanto were dumping money in hand over fist to see this eliminated?

[jllundqu]

I can see how those who are opposed to this legislation justify their opinion, but how do you reconcile that with the fact that companies like Monsanto were dumping money in hand over fist to see this eliminated?

Careful... questioning their logic might get you labeled an Alex Jones conspiracy theorist who is just embarassing yourself!

[RockEnds]

I don't see what the big deal is at all. GMO food is not what it appears to be. It may look like a soybean, but it's really a soybean that's been genetically modified. It should not be labeled as just a soybean. Seems pretty simple to me.

[dannno]

The status quo is adding more regulation to supposedly band aid a fundamental problem that ultimately backfires with many unintended consequences. More regulation that inevitably gets manipulated and taken advantage of by said corporations. Focus needs to be on the root of the problems instead of asking for more government to alleviate them.

The problem is that Monsanto and other large corporations put $40 million towards fighting this proposition, they don't want THIS regulation passed at the state level by the people, they want top-down federal regulation where they get all of the subsidies and they control everything.

Due to Monsanto's control over Federal Regs, any bill that hurts Monsanto's business and helps the little guy I will support. When we have a more free market I will be all for getting rid of all government regulation as it pertains to food. I agree with Ron Paul's position in principle, but I also believe in protecting our food sources.

[jllundqu]

I don't see what the big deal is at all. GMO food is not what it appears to be. It may look like a soybean, but it's really a soybean that's been genetically modified. It should not be labeled as just a soybean. Seems pretty simple to me.

Sounds simple, huh? Given the complexity of the issues surrounding food labeling, especially the fact that Monasanto basically owns the FDA in charge of labeling, I thought this move by California was a reasonable one.

I have since been blasted by folks here for trying to understand the logic better... see pages 1-7

[John F Kennedy III]

Not passing government regulation = Fail?

I'll never understand why people take stances like "I don't want to know if my food is full of poisons or not"

[LBennett76]

I don't know anybody in support of this. I doubt anybody here would but I mightve missed comments like this. I for one want to see whats in my food and if its gmo. I have no problem finding entire stores that do this because despite all the control and manipulation, businesses still see the profitability in this niche.

What stores do this? I have not found one store or product that says whether they're GMO or not. NOT ONE. So where in the hell are you seeing them and what companies are doing it? Because by the logic of refusing to buy their products if they don't label them properly, I would starve to death as there is NOTHING I could eat. I'm really curious what stores and where they are (in relationship to SE Ohio) so I can get my butt there so I don't have to go hungry.

[specsaregood]

What stores do this? I have not found one store or product that says whether they're GMO or not. NOT ONE. So where in the hell are you seeing them and what companies are doing it? Because by the logic of refusing to buy their products if they don't label them properly, I would starve to death as there is NOTHING I could eat. I'm really curious what stores and where they are (in relationship to SE Ohio) so I can get my butt there so I don't have to go hungry.

Here you go:
http://www.nongmoproject.org/find-non-gmo/search-participating-products/
http://www.nongmoproject.org/find-non-gmo/search-retailer-endorsers/

Glad to be of assistance.

[dannno]

I'll never understand why people take stances like "I don't want to know if my food is full of poisons or not"

Nah, they are taking the stance that they don't want government to tell food producers what they need to tell consumers. We should be asking for it ourselves. They are partly correct.

The problem is that Monsanto has taken over federal regulation, gets billions annually in subsidies and has instituted themselves as a monopoly supplier to food producers. They are allowed to fraudulently market their products when they are in fact GMO. They are allowed to do so at a discounted amount due to the federal subsidies, giving consumers a false choice between GMO and non-GMO products. As a response, we are saying at least label your food so when people buy the cheaper product they know they aren't getting the real thing. They can still make their own decisions, but it isn't fair to give the people that decision inside this weird FDA bubble where their choices are manipulated by a false pricing mechanism due to federal subsidies and regulations.

[jllundqu]

What he said ^^

Whole Foods already got busted lying in dozens of store about being 100% GMO free when they have hundreds of products that are mostly GMO.

See video - Organic Spies

[LBennett76]

Thanks!
Now I just have to see if the single grocery store in town carries any of it. I'm too poor to have stuff shipped, so hopefully some will be included in the 3 or 4 brands of each product my store sells. *crossing fingers*

[specsaregood]

Thanks!
Now I just have to see if the single grocery store in town carries any of it. I'm too poor to have stuff shipped, so hopefully some will be included in the 3 or 4 brands of each product my store sells. *crossing fingers*

And it wouldnt' hurt if you speak to your local grocery store manager and request they carry such products, join the non-gmo project and/or specially label or point out nongmo products to you.

[Tpoints]

I'll never understand why people take stances like "I don't want to know if my food is full of poisons or not"

You never heard of "I'm too poor to choose" or "I grow my own" or "I buy from people I trust, I don't need the government to force people to label"? You must love the FDA then, since you want to know if the drugs people take is full of poisons or tested safe.

[Tpoints]

Whats with all the support for gov mandated gmo labeling? I thought we were the group of personal responsibility. Go out and find it yourself and if enough people seek out labeling the free market would provide it. Think of it this way, if youre one of the few that actually cares and seek out healthy food you will be better off and healthier than everybody else that couldnt care less. Competitive advantage. Its out there, take back your responsibility and go find it.

Its a poor excuse to say well monsanto or so and so destroys the free market this is needed. slap yourself please. this is the excuse that has been used for everything gov does that we have to deal with. bandaids dont fix a thing i thought most of us would understand this by now.

Fight government with more government! We're all for personal responsibility until we are not.

[AGRP]

And it wouldnt' hurt if you speak to your local grocery store manager and request they carry such products, join the non-gmo project and/or specially label or point out nongmo products to you.

Or people can join humanity and talk to local farmers. Maybe they can grow or make their own food.

[jllundqu]

Fight government with more government! We're all for personal responsibility until we are not.

No.... it's fight the federal government/Monsanto with local reasoned initiatives that benefit the people. Jesus with your logic you would have been against Thomas Jefferson's Kentucky/Virginia Resolutions calling it "fighting government with more government"

Just curious, are you a Libertarian or an Anarchist? That's a serious question.

[specsaregood]

Or people can join humanity and talk to local farmers.

sure, or join a CSA. but for most people, what I suggested should be a good start.

[jllundqu]

sure, or join a CSA. but for most people, what I suggested should be a good start.

I am a part of a CSA, grow my own food, and support my local farmers market... I still think Prop 37 was not 'perfect' by purists standards, but it was a step in the right direction.

[LBennett76]

So the closest store is 2 hours away. I've never even heard of a single one of these brands. The store I shop at is a family owned business. They own 4 stores in the Ohio Valley I believe. They offer a minimal amount of brands for each product. If you want something as simple as shredded cheese for pizza, the choices are Kraft or the generic brand. That's it. I think we have 4 choices for bread, one being generic.They won't bring in anything unless there is a demand for it. Being that I'm in a village of less than 5000 people and about half are over the age of 50, I don't see anyone going for it. Switching from familiar brands to things you've never tried is a tough thing. So I'm just stuck not knowing and unable to purchase the kind where I would know. Kinda sucks.

[Tpoints]

No.... it's fight the federal government/Monsanto with local reasoned initiatives that benefit the people. Jesus with your logic you would have been against Thomas Jefferson's Kentucky/Virginia Resolutions calling it "fighting government with government"

Just curious, are you a Libertarian or an Anarchist? That's a serious question.

http://static.neatorama.com/images/2007-06/no-exit-libertarianism-anarchy-for-rich-people.GIF

[dannno]

Fight government with more government! We're all for personal responsibility until we are not.

Dude, that has nothing to do with it.

I don't want the GMO labels for ME, I am already aware of where my food comes from. I already buy non-GMO for the most part. The problem is that there is less non-GMO items available because of the federal subsidies for GMO products. You subsidize something, you get more of it. So it reduces my choices in the market, and that is fucked up.

I want to help make OTHER PEOPLE more aware that when they are buying something really cheap that is only really cheap because of MY tax dollars and THEIR tax dollars that went to subsidize it and that it might not be what it claims to be.

There is a libertarian case to be made for this bill, if you consider that GMO corn /= corn and selling it as such = fraud. I would prefer the government stay out in a free market, let consumers define what "corn" is.. But when you have Monsanto defining what corn is at the federal level and nobody else gets to decide, then I have no problem with individuals at the local level fighting their monopolization of the food industry. I want more choices of non-GMO products like what we know the free market would be able to provide if we allowed it, but realizing that we as individuals have little to no say as to what happens at the FDA.

[RockEnds]

Oh, for Pete's sake. When the farmer buys the seeds, if it's GMO, it's labeled as such. And believe me, if you take a bag of Monsanto Round-up resistant soybeans that you grew yourself on your own farm to the local produce company and have it cleaned and bagged to plant next year without buying it from Monsanto as their brand of packaged Round-up resistant soybeans, they'll have your @ss. You'll be owing them big time.

If they're so proud of their GMO seeds when they're selling them to farmers, they should be at least as proud of them when they product goes on the store shelf for human consumption.

[AGRP]

So the closest store is 2 hours away. I've never even heard of a single one of these brands. The store I shop at is a family owned business. They own 4 stores in the Ohio Valley I believe. They offer a minimal amount of brands for each product. If you want something as simple as shredded cheese for pizza, the choices are Kraft or the generic brand. That's it. I think we have 4 choices for bread, one being generic.They won't bring in anything unless there is a demand for it. Being that I'm in a village of less than 5000 people and about half are over the age of 50, I don't see anyone going for it. Switching from familiar brands to things you've never tried is a tough thing. So I'm just stuck not knowing and unable to purchase the kind where I would know. Kinda sucks.

Buy what you want in bulk and store it in a freezer.

[LBennett76]

I would grow my own food I could. I can't get any kind of plant to survive. My only attempt at gardening ended with me going to check for green beans only to discover that deer had eaten them. 12 plants and not one bean harvested. lol We've got Amish around here if you like things made with lard. There are local farmers but you have to catch them in the right season and often the food is grown only for their families. Fortunately I do buy all my meat from the local butcher so at least I know my meat is good.
I really wish I could grow my own stuff... But cheese and bread won't grow for me. LOL

[Tpoints]

Dude, that has nothing to do with it.

I don't want the GMO labels for ME, I am already aware of where my food comes from. I already buy non-GMO for the most part. The problem is that there is less non-GMO items available because of the federal subsidies for GMO products. You subsidize something, you get more of it. So it reduces my choices in the market, and that is fucked up.

I want to help make OTHER PEOPLE more aware that when they are buying something really cheap that is only really cheap because of MY tax dollars and THEIR tax dollars that went to subsidize it and that it might not be what it claims to be.

There is a libertarian case to be made for this bill, if you consider that GMO corn /= corn and selling it as such = fraud. I would prefer the government stay out in a free market, let consumers define what "corn" is.. But when you have Monsanto defining what corn is at the federal level and nobody else gets to decide, then I have no problem with individuals at the local level fighting their monopolization of the food industry. I want more choices of non-GMO products like what we know the free market would be able to provide if we allowed it, but realizing that we as individuals have little to no say as to what happens at the FDA.

you want OTHER PEOPLE to be protected by government, how benevolent. I don't consider GMO corn to be non-corn, is there a law that says who gets to call something corn? I'm sure you want more non-GMO products, but doesn't look like the market agrees with you (if they did, demand would make non-GMO more profitable).

[jllundqu]

Dude, that has nothing to do with it.

I don't want the GMO labels for ME, I am already aware of where my food comes from. I already buy non-GMO for the most part. The problem is that there is less non-GMO items available because of the federal subsidies for GMO products. You subsidize something, you get more of it. So it reduces my choices in the market, and that is fucked up.

I want to help make OTHER PEOPLE more aware that when they are buying something really cheap that is only really cheap because of MY tax dollars and THEIR tax dollars that went to subsidize it and that it might not be what it claims to be.

There is a libertarian case to be made for this bill, if you consider that GMO corn /= corn and selling it as such = fraud. I would prefer the government stay out in a free market, let consumers define what "corn" is.. But when you have Monsanto defining what corn is at the federal level and nobody else gets to decide, then I have no problem with individuals at the local level fighting their monopolization of the food industry. I want more choices of non-GMO products like what we know the free market would be able to provide if we allowed it, but realizing that we as individuals have little to no say as to what happens at the FDA.

"Jordan fades back! Takes the shot! Swoosh.... and THAT'S the game!!!! No further questions, your honor."

[gerryb1]

Dude, that has nothing to do with it.

I don't want the GMO labels for ME, I am already aware of where my food comes from. I already buy non-GMO for the most part. The problem is that there is less non-GMO items available because of the federal subsidies for GMO products. You subsidize something, you get more of it. So it reduces my choices in the market, and that is fucked up.

I want to help make OTHER PEOPLE more aware that when they are buying something really cheap that is only really cheap because of MY tax dollars and THEIR tax dollars that went to subsidize it and that it might not be what it claims to be.


And you want to use MY tax and/or consumer dollars to do it? If you want to educate others, might I suggest http://lmgtfy.com/

[LBennett76]

Save what up? I live paycheck to paycheck as a single mom. There's no such thing as saving.

[specsaregood]

So the closest store is 2 hours away. I've never even heard of a single one of these brands. The store I shop at is a family owned business. They own 4 stores in the Ohio Valley I believe. They offer a minimal amount of brands for each product. If you want something as simple as shredded cheese for pizza, the choices are Kraft or the generic brand. That's it. I think we have 4 choices for bread, one being generic.They won't bring in anything unless there is a demand for it. Being that I'm in a village of less than 5000 people and about half are over the age of 50, I don't see anyone going for it. Switching from familiar brands to things you've never tried is a tough thing. So I'm just stuck not knowing and unable to purchase the kind where I would know. Kinda sucks.

It seems to me it costs you nothing but a little time to still talk to the store manager, bring them some information on the nongmo project and politely request they look into offering some of the products or signing up. http://www.nongmoproject.org/take-action/action-for-retailers/

Same thing goes for the manufacturers of the products you buy.

[LBennett76]

It would require talking to the head of the company. I'll have to look up who that is. My store's had various managers and none are in charge of what they stock the shelves with. Maybe they have a website and I can shoot an email.
I do like the idea of emailing brandname companies though.

[jllundqu]

Just a reminder that even Thomas Jefferson believed in a state's right to challenge federal power using the state government as a tool. I mean, come on... you wouldn't argue with TJ would ya?? ;)

[anaconda]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?


Bingo.

[jllundqu]

Bingo.

Again your solution is??? Poking holes in logic is easy, but without a counter-argument this discussion moves nowhere.

[dannno]

you want OTHER PEOPLE to be protected by government, how benevolent. I don't consider GMO corn to be non-corn, is there a law that says who gets to call something corn? I'm sure you want more non-GMO products, but doesn't look like the market agrees with you (if they did, demand would make non-GMO more profitable).

Wow, the entire point of my post ***WHHIIZZZZZ**** right over your head!!

I'm not trying to protect other people from themselves, I'm trying to protect them from Monsanto and their false pricing system that the subsidies and regulations have created which helps people make decisions about what they buy.

The free market can't fix our food production system because WE DON'T HAVE A FREE MARKET. Right now the FDA has ultimate authority, thus Monsanto has ultimate authority over our food.

I want a free market in food production at least as much if not more than you do.. but right now I can't do jack shit about the FDA and Monsanto.. BUT I can do something at the state level so that people at least realize that what they are buying might not be what they say they are selling.

[specsaregood]

Again your solution is??? Poking holes in logic is easy, but without a counter-argument this discussion moves nowhere.

Solution? first, what is the problem?

[Tpoints]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?

I didn't know that was debateable :eek:

[jllundqu]

Ummm..... if your corn has the genes of a rainbow-trout and grows it's own insecticide.... it's GMO.

There are already dozens of groups in the organic food industry that certify things as non-GMO. The standards are already in place.

[Carson]

If people are really that concerned wouldn't it be in the interest of manufacturing to select what goes into their product and advertise Genetically Modified Organism free?

genetically modified organism (j-nt-k-l)

An organism whose genetic characteristics have been altered using the techniques of genetic engineering.
A Closer Look Scientists today have the ability to modify the genetic makeup of plants and animals, and even to transfer genes from one species to another. Not since nuclear power has a technology been so controversial, with opponents concerned about the creation of so-called Frankenfoods and proponents promising a better tomorrow through science. The term genetically modified organism (GMO) is used to refer to any microorganism, plant, or animal in which genetic engineering techniques have been used to introduce, remove, or modify specific parts of its genome. Examples include plants being modified for pest resistance; lab animals being manipulated to exhibit human diseases, such as sickle cell anemia; and even glowing jellyfish genes inserted in a rabbit for an art piece. GMOs show great promise in improving agriculture. Plants could be engineered to better tolerate temperature or weather extremes, to contain various vitamins, or to dispense medicines and vaccines. Many think genetically modified foods have the potential to end world hunger. On the other hand, there are fears that the disease- or pest-resistant genes inserted into crop plants might escape into other plants, creating hard-to-control superweeds. There is also the possibility of unexpected effects on other flora and fauna, the risk of agriculture being controlled by biotech companies, and, as with any new technology, problems that are yet unknown.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Genetically+Modified+Organism

[truthspeaker]

Whats with all the support for gov mandated gmo labeling? I thought we were the group of personal responsibility. Go out and find it yourself and if enough people seek out labeling the free market would provide it. Think of it this way, if youre one of the few that actually cares and seek out healthy food you will be better off and healthier than everybody else that couldnt care less. Competitive advantage. Its out there, take back your responsibility and go find it.

Its a poor excuse to say well monsanto or so and so destroys the free market this is needed. slap yourself please. this is the excuse that has been used for everything gov does that we have to deal with. bandaids dont fix a thing i thought most of us would understand this by now.

I support labeling for "consumer rights". As a buyer, I have a right to be properly informed of what I purchase. I may be cynical about this, but we all know that without standards, everything is suddenly called "natural or organic".

Not all of us are libertarian in the purist form.

[Deborah K]

http://i48.tinypic.com/4kfd3k.jpg

[Deborah K]

but with Monsanto attorneys heading FDA and AG the market doesn't function, their regulation nullifies consumer input and then some. That's why I voted for the proposition. Get rid of the corporate fascism masquerading as consumer protection and I'd be with you on that.

It's kind of like what Ron does with earmarks, puts them in and then votes against them on principle knowing they will pass and his district will get some of its money back that was confiscated by the federal gov't.

You play the hand you're dealt the best you can.

I voted for this proposition as well.

I have a question for those of you arguing against it: What do you think about the states whose gov'ts just "legalized" weed? Same principle.

[NoOneButPaul]

Im all for labeling but the governments can't do it. The regulator just would have been bought off by Monsato and you would have ended up eating GMO food labeled organic.

If you really want labels then get together all the like minded people in the state, put some money into a pile, and hire someone to maintain a website offering a list of all the safe and unsafe foods for free.

All this bickering about how the government should have done this or that just makes me realize how far even we have to go... governments DO NOT work. They would have fucked the labeling up the same way they fuck everything else up. Only free people with the proper motivation can institute real change.

[specsaregood]

I have a question for those of you arguing against it: What do you think about the states whose gov'ts just "legalized" weed? Same principle.

I dont get the comparison. one is limiting restrictions and the other is adding a burden on producers. if anything they are the complete opposite.

[Deborah K]

I dont get the comparison. one is limiting restrictions and the other is adding a burden on producers. if anything they are the complete opposite.

Legalizing weed involves regulation and taxation aka government control.

[Deborah K]

Im all for labeling but the governments can't do it. The regulator just would have been bought off by Monsato and you would have ended up eating GMO food labeled organic.

If you really want labels then get together all the like minded people in the state, put some money into a pile, and hire someone to maintain a website offering a list of all the safe and unsafe foods for free.

All this bickering about how the government should have done this or that just makes me realize how far even we have to go... governments DO NOT work. They would have fucked the labeling up the same way they fuck everything else up. Only free people with the proper motivation can institute real change.

Right now food packaging has ingredients and calories labeled. Adding genetic modification and poisons to the labeling wouldn't be a big deal - EXCEPT to the creep corps like Monsanto who don't want the public to know what they're doing to the food.

[familydog]

Monsanto is essentially a division of the Department of Agriculture. Why should I treat them the same as small farmers with little to no government influence?

[RockEnds]

I dont get the comparison. one is limiting restrictions and the other is adding a burden on producers. if anything they are the complete opposite.

If anyone is placing a burden on producers, it's Monsanto. That company is insistent that its seed is not the seed of normal plants. Monsanto is pretty darned sure that the seeds it produces remain the property of Monsanto right up until they go into the grocery store. Why is it that the farmer is still bound by the contract with Monsanto after the crop from this super special, extraordinary, anything but common seed is grown and harvested, but the consumer is supposed to believe that food produced from this seed is just the same as the food produced from a commodity seed? The hypocrisy is pretty amazing.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/Monsanto%20November%202007%20update.pdf

[erowe1]

California has utterly failed us once again. If the "land of fruits and nuts" can't pass a common sense initiative to simply tell people WTF they are eating, there is no hope left in the fight against GMOs/Food Freedom Advocacy.

California = Epic Fail :eek:

I don't think you get it.

We wanted that to fail. Somehow, maybe by accident, the voters of California got this one right.

[Tpoints]

http://i48.tinypic.com/4kfd3k.jpg

they're not forcing you to buy, so yes, none of your business. It's not as if there's not already laws that prohibit poison and false labeling.

[GunnyFreedom]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?

how about...


The term 'genetically modified food' means food the genetic structure of which has been modified by direct human manipulation in a manner that does not occur under natural conditions, including through any of the following genetic engineering methods: recombinant DNA and RNA techniques, cell fusion, gene deletion or doubling, introduction of exogenous genetic material, alteration of the position of a gene, or similar procedure. The term also includes food that is, or is from, the progeny or genetic line of an animal or plant described in the preceding sentence."

[Deborah K]

they're not forcing you to buy, so yes, none of your business. It's not as if there's not already laws that prohibit poison and false labeling.

They're not forcing us now, but once they have total control over the food industry, then what? Shall we wait until then to do what we can? Are you okay with a corporation pattoning seed, and suing the shit out of farmers, putting them out of business? If you haven't seen this documentary, please watch it. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1286537/

This issue runs a little deeper than most people realize. Monsanto uses their influence with the federal and state gov'ts to get laws passed in their favor, often to our detriment and to the detriment of family farms. They're in bed with the gov't - which means WE have to play the hand that's been dealt us, which is what Ron has been doing all these years.

[jllundqu]

Not all of us are libertarian in the purist form.

This +rep

[jllundqu]

I don't think you get it.

We wanted that to fail. Somehow, maybe by accident, the voters of California got this one right.

Very patronizing... I 'get it' thank you very much. If you'd bothered to read the first 10 pages of this thread you would see that.

[AFPVet]

We require a nutrition label on food products so why can't we do the same for GMO? Interestingly, some businesses have already taken the bull by the horns and placed "non GMO" labels on their products... this is the free market attempting to correct some of the damage :)

[donnay]

California has utterly failed us once again. If the "land of fruits and nuts" can't pass a common sense initiative to simply tell people WTF they are eating, there is no hope left in the fight against GMOs/Food Freedom Advocacy.

California = Epic Fail :eek:

The opponents spent over $8 million to dissuade people not to vote for it. I also think there was some voting fraud going on. These bastards don't want you to know what is in your food, because GMO's are very harmful and they know it and will do what ever it takes to stop the exposure.

Take it to your own state!

[mad cow]

Ummm..... if your corn has the genes of a rainbow-trout and grows it's own insecticide.... it's GMO.

There are already dozens of groups in the organic food industry that certify things as non-GMO. The standards are already in place.

There's your answer right there.Just buy foodstuffs that these dozens of groups certify as non-GMO and leave the government,and the taxpayers that don't care about this issue but would have to pay for it,out of it.

[jllundqu]

The opponents spent over $8 million to dissuade people not to vote for it. I also think there was some voting fraud going on. These bastards don't want you to know what is in your food, because GMO's are very harmful and they know it and will do what ever it takes to stop the exposure.

Take it to your own state!

Actually your numbers are wrong. The proponents raised approx 8 million, mostly from the organic food groups, small farms, freedom activists, etc. The "no on prop 37" campaign raised more than $45 million from Monsanto, DuPont, Dow Chemical, etc... I'm sorry but this is a no brainer.

[jllundqu]

There's your answer right there.Just buy foodstuffs that these dozens of groups certify as non-GMO and leave the government,and the taxpayers that don't care about this issue but would have to pay for it,out of it.

Enjoy your corporate tyranny and your fish-gene-insecticide-growing-vegetables! Once Monsanto corners the maarket, we will no longer have a choice to buy food from organic producers, especially since you CANNOT stop cross-contamination of GMO seed into non-GMO/organic fields. Monsanto knows it is only a matter of time until everything is GMO, even what you grow in your own garden.

Enjoy!

[mad cow]

Don't trust the Free Market much,huh?

[specsaregood]

Enjoy!

I shall, thank you for the encouraging words.

[jllundqu]

Don't trust the Free Market much,huh?

You think we have a free market???? HAHAHA! That's funny.... No, if we did have a free market, I would have no worries, but since Monsanto is basically the FDA and the USDA, what we have is what Ron Paul repeately calls Corporate Cronyism! The free market died a long time ago. You can preach free market at the top of your lung until there is literally nothing left of individual liberty or state sovereignty, because that is where this is headed.

Again, with your logic, you would have opposed the Kentucky/Virginia Resolutions that Thomas Jefferson wrote as the state's answer to federeal power grabs.

[specsaregood]

I just bought a bunch of this stock:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=MON

I think it has a great future.

[jllundqu]

I just bought a bunch of this stock:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=MON

I think it has a great future.

Buys Monsanto stock.... funny. +rep ah good times.

[gerryb1]

You think we have a free market???? HAHAHA! That's funny.... No, if we did have a free market, I would have no worries, but since Monsanto is basically the FDA and the USDA, what we have is what Ron Paul repeately calls Corporate Cronyism! The free market died a long time ago.


You keep saying this. Do you know what it means? Why do you keep advocating for more of it?

[jllundqu]

You keep saying this. Do you know what it means? Why do you keep advocating for more of it?

How am I advocating for more of it?

[mad cow]

Hey,too bad it didn't pass,I am sure that there are plenty of powerful CA.pols who would have been happy to appoint their meth-addicted trophy wives to head this new Government agency.

I am also sure that the stringent laws to assure that your product met Ca. specs would cost Farmer John,who sold $2000 worth of honey a year,and Nature's Own Bountiful Elixir Honey Corp.(a fully owned subsidiary of Monsanto Corp.)that sold $500 million worth of honey annually,the selfsame $5000 a year to meet.

[compromise]

Would have lead to regulatory capture anyway, I'm glad it failed.

[klamath]

People are funny, anti big government until their issue is on the ballot to regulate someone else.. It is the only GOOD thing that came out of the election is California.

[compromise]

People are funny, anti big government until their issue is on the ballot to regulate someone else.. It is the only GOOD thing that came out of the election is California.

Well, that and Tom McClintock's re-election.

[Tpoints]

We require a nutrition label on food products so why can't we do the same for GMO? Interestingly, some businesses have already taken the bull by the horns and placed "non GMO" labels on their products... this is the free market attempting to correct some of the damage :)

who said I favor nutrition labels?

You're basically saying "Hey, we have taxes already, why can't we have more!?"

[gerryb1]

How am I advocating for more of it?

By expanding their power, and giving them a hammer to smash small farms and retailers.

[Tpoints]

By expanding their power, and giving them a hammer to smash small farms and retailers.

is GMO labeling enforced by USDA, FDA or Monsanto?

[gerryb1]

is GMO labeling enforced by USDA, FDA or Monsanto?

It would be enforced by whomever brought a lawsuit(read Monsanto agents), or whoever the CA legislature decides(read Monsanto regulatory captured CA agencies)

This is the law you are agreeing to if you were in favor of prop 37
"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article"

If you believe the FDA and USDA are captured by Monsanto et. al -- this bill is insanity.

[Deborah K]

Watch 'Food Inc.', then tell us that GMO labeling isn't a damned good start! Some of you are spouting off "free market" without having all the facts about Monsanto. The black market is the only "free market" anymore, I'm sorry to say. And don't be hypocrites - you want weed legalized don't you? You think it isn't going to be regulated and taxed?? Monsanto is taking over your food and your seed.

[gerryb1]

The black market is the only "free market" anymore, I'm sorry to say.

Again, why do you want to make it worse, by giving Monsanto more weapons?

[Deborah K]

It would be enforced by whomever brought a lawsuit(read Monsanto agents), or whoever the CA legislature decides(read Monsanto regulatory captured CA agencies)

This is the law you are agreeing to if you were in favor of prop 37
"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article"

If you believe the FDA and USDA are captured by Monsanto et. al -- this bill is insanity.

Source this please.

[gerryb1]

Source this please.

Source what? You've watched Food Inc. - you know Monsanto owns the FDA and USDA and court system. You really think lower level regulators are impervious to capture?

[Deborah K]

Source what? You've watched Food Inc. - you know Monsanto owns the FDA and USDA. You really think lower level regulators are impervious to capture?

You're making a claim here:


This is the law you are agreeing to if you were in favor of prop 37
"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article"

Back it up with a source.

[gerryb1]

You're making a claim here:

"This is the law you are agreeing to if you were in favor of prop 37
"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article"

Back it up with a source.

Wait -- you haven't read the bill you are speaking in favor of?

[Deborah K]

Watch and learn:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Oq24hITFTY

[Deborah K]

Wait -- you haven't read the bill you are speaking in favor of?

I have, and I can't find that phrase.

[donnay]

Actually your numbers are wrong. The proponents raised approx 8 million, mostly from the organic food groups, small farms, freedom activists, etc. The "no on prop 37" campaign raised more than $45 million from Monsanto, DuPont, Dow Chemical, etc... I'm sorry but this is a no brainer.

My mistake, you're right.

http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/prop-37-funding-genetically-engineered-food.html

[gerryb1]

http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/complete-vig-v2.pdf

[Deborah K]

http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/complete-vig-v2.pdf

I was hoping you could pin-point it.

I found your phrase here: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Text_of_California_Proposition_37_(November_2012) but not in its entirety:

The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article, provided that the department shall not be authorized to create any exemptions beyond those specified in Section 110809.2.

[Tpoints]

I have, and I can't find that phrase.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/111318126/Full-Text-Prop-37

http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/prop-37-read-the-text.html

[mad cow]

"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article, provided that the department shall not be authorized to create any exemptions beyond those specified in Section 110809.2."

How this sentence does not send chills of fear and disgust among liberty lovers everywhere,no matter their dietary habits,is beyond my ken.It sounds straight out of 1984.

Yay Section 110809.2!

[Tpoints]

"The department may adopt any regulations that it determines are necessary for the enforcement and interpretation of this article, provided that the department shall not be authorized to create any exemptions beyond those specified in Section 110809.2."

How this sentence does not send chills of fear and disgust among liberty lovers everywhere,no matter their dietary habits,is beyond my ken.It sounds straight out of 1984.

Yay Section 110809.2!

Here's why : regardless of what the bill actually says, it doesn't change the fact that major food companies Hersheys, Pepsi Co, Monsanto, Nestle, Kelloggs, Bayer, Kraft, General Mills, Coca Cola (if Coke and Pepsi agree on something, it's probably a bad idea) ALL OPPOSE IT.

Some people prefer to judge a bill by its supporters, not the actual consequences.

[Deborah K]

Here's why : regardless of what the bill actually says, it doesn't change the fact that major food companies Hersheys, Pepsi Co, Monsanto, Nestle, Kelloggs, Bayer, Kraft, General Mills, Coca Cola (if Coke and Pepsi agree on something, it's probably a bad idea) ALL OPPOSE IT.

Some people prefer to judge a bill by its supporters, not the actual consequences.

What do you deem are the consequences of a bill like this passing?

[Deborah K]

Are you thinking 'fox guarding the henhouse' scenario? Is that your issue?

[mad cow]

"You might have read Section 110807.4(d) very carefully indeed and thought you were not subject to asset forfeiture,$50,000 fine and the two years in prison,but you should have read Section 110809.2 a little more carefully.Ignorance of the Law is no excuse,now bend over and spread them!"

[Deborah K]

"You might have read Section 110807.4(d) very carefully indeed and thought you were not subject to asset forfeiture,$50,000 fine and the two years in prison,but you should have read Section 110809.2 a little more carefully.Ignorance of the Law is no excuse,now bend over and spread them!"

Is your point that the law is badly written? Or that big food corporations shouldn't be regulated, and buyer beware? In La-La land, I would agree, but we have to play the hand we're dealt and sometimes that requires beating these MF'rs at their own game. I used this example earlier to try and make my point:



It's kind of like what Ron does with earmarks, puts them in and then votes against them on principle knowing they will pass and his district will get some of its money back that was confiscated by the federal gov't.


The point being, that he beat them at their own game.

If it's because you believe it's the fox guarding the henhouse, then that's another issue.

[gerryb1]

Or that big food corporations shouldn't be regulated, and buyer beware?

So without a law, you can't choose what food to buy on your own?



The point being, that he beat them at their own game.


This IS their game. You beat them by educating consumers, not by destroying the free market.

[mad cow]

"There are already dozens of groups in the organic food industry that certify things as non-GMO. The standards are already in place."

There is your Libertarian answer,from post #103 from somebody who was actually supporting the Statist approach.

Laws that force minorities to conform to the whims of the majority when the minority is harming nobody are an anathema in a free society,Laws that force majorities to conform to the tastes of a minority,which I think is the case here,are even farther beyond the pale.

[Tpoints]

What do you deem are the consequences of a bill like this passing?

arbitrary enforcement, or delay in delivery of foods when some people are too hungry or desperate to wait.

[donnay]

"There are already dozens of groups in the organic food industry that certify things as non-GMO. The standards are already in place."

There is your Libertarian answer,from post #103 from somebody who was actually supporting the Statist approach.

Laws that force minorities to conform to the whims of the majority when the minority is harming nobody are an anathema in a free society,Laws that force majorities to conform to the tastes of a minority,which I think is the case here,are even farther beyond the pale.


I think the point you are missing is the Big Corporations have government to enforce their rules on all of us. We have a right to know what we are eating and whether or not it is dangerous to our health.

There is enough scientific studies that have been done on animals showing that GMO wreck havoc on their internal organs.

[gerryb1]

I think the point you are missing is the Big Corporations have government to enforce their rules on all of us.

This is the point YOU are missing. It's called regulatory capture, and you want to provide for more of it.



We have a right to know what we are eating and whether or not it is dangerous to our health.

Why can't you do this now? I can.

[Tpoints]

I think the point you are missing is the Big Corporations have government to enforce their rules on all of us. We have a right to know what we are eating and whether or not it is dangerous to our health.

There is enough scientific studies that have been done on animals showing that GMO wreck havoc on their internal organs.

there is? Or do you only find that in propaganda films?

[Liberty74]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?

Ugh GMO is pretty straight forward. It's a seed made in a lab. I totally supported "the people" in the state to mandate this. It wasn't coming from the government bullies themselves. Bill Gates and Rockefeller have a bigger agenda with GMO ----> it makes people ill. It causes cancers and tumors. (http://www.infowars.com/new-gmo-study-rats-fed-lifetime-of-gm-corn-grow-tumors-70-of-females-die-early/) What do you think that does? Feed the industrial pharmaceutical complex and kills you prematurely i.e. depopulation. These people are pure eugenicists.

The issue goes much deeper than a simple label that would not cost a dime to corporations because a label is already on the damn food packages. All that would be added would be a GMO or Non GMO print. But then again, if you were making foods that make people ill, would you want that added to the package? :mad:

[donnay]

This is the point YOU are missing. It's called regulatory capture, and you want to provide for more of it.

There are already labels on food, is there not?


Why can't you do this now? I can.

You know beyond a shadow of a doubt the food you are buying is not genetically engineered?

[dannno]

Here's why : regardless of what the bill actually says, it doesn't change the fact that major food companies Hersheys, Pepsi Co, Monsanto, Nestle, Kelloggs, Bayer, Kraft, General Mills, Coca Cola (if Coke and Pepsi agree on something, it's probably a bad idea) ALL OPPOSE IT.

Some people prefer to judge a bill by its supporters, not the actual consequences.

Exactly.. and if somebody reads the bill and provides the language and can convince me that it will help big agra and be hurtful to smaller food producers, I can certainly see a scenario where Monsanto and big food producers are sneaky and would purposely fight a bill just to get people to vote for it... That happens with man made global warming. Why haven't all the big corporations come out with at least relatively convincing science and propaganda against man-made global warming? Because they support it, the type of regulation that will come out of it is good for them. Instead, we do see some convincing science that opposes man-made global warming, but it is very sparse and under-reported.

[mad cow]

I think the point you are missing is the Big Corporations have government to enforce their rules on all of us. We have a right to know what we are eating and whether or not it is dangerous to our health.

There is enough scientific studies that have been done on animals showing that GMO wreck havoc on their internal organs.

So you propose fighting Big Government with Big Government? Sounds like a WIN-WIN for the Fascists.

[Tpoints]

There are already labels on food, is there not?

You know beyond a shadow of a doubt the food you are buying is not genetically engineered?

Maybe I don't know, but if I wanted to know, how would I? Who do I trust to set the standards, inspect and enforce?

I can probably either grow it myself or buy locally, but other than that, I just have to trust the labels. If they say organic I just have to trust they're not lying to me to charge me more, or if they say "GMO free" I just have to trust they did their best to make sure it's beyond their reasonable doubt.

[gerryb1]

You know beyond a shadow of a doubt the food you are buying is not genetically engineered?

Much better then any label with dubious definition green-lighted by some bureaucrats owned by Monsanto would.

The problem is people like you make it much more difficult, and enable raids on the people who provide me my food.

[Tpoints]

So you propose fighting Big Government with Big Government? Sounds like a WIN-WIN for the Fascists.

I called this one first (I didn't say big or Fascist though)

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?394900-GMO-Labeling-PROP-37-Fails-in-CA&p=4720911&viewfull=1#post4720911

I know you don't like labeling, because mad cows won't sell too well :P

[donnay]

there is? Or do you only find that in propaganda films?

Genetically modified foods…
Are they safe?

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) doesn’t think so. The Academy reported that “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM asked physicians to advise patients to avoid GM foods.

Before the FDA decided to allow GMOs into food without labeling, FDA scientists had repeatedly warned that GM foods can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged long-term safety studies, but were ignored.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/

Institute For Responsible Technology
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs


It's interesting that the workers at Monsanto will NOT eat GMO's in their cafeteria--to me that's REALLY TELLING.

MONSANTO CAFETERIA BANS GMO FOODS
http://gizadeathstar.com/2012/02/monsanto-cafeteria-bans-gmo-foods/

[donnay]

Much better then any label with dubious definition green-lighted by some bureaucrats owned by Monsanto would.

The problem is people like you make it much more difficult, and enable raids on the people who provide me my food.


Oh really, then why is the government going after raw milk producers? Organic farmers and their Co-ops?

[gerryb1]

It's interesting that the workers at Monsanto will NOT eat GMO's in their cafeteria--to me that's REALLY TELLING.

MONSANTO CAFETERIA BANS GMO FOODS
http://gizadeathstar.com/2012/02/monsanto-cafeteria-bans-gmo-foods/

Wait, how do they know their aren't GMO's without a government mandated label? How could they ban something if their isn't a label?

We need to expand prop 37 to include prepared foods so they'll know!

[donnay]

Maybe I don't know, but if I wanted to know, how would I? Who do I trust to set the standards, inspect and enforce?

I can probably either grow it myself or buy locally, but other than that, I just have to trust the labels. If they say organic I just have to trust they're not lying to me to charge me more, or if they say "GMO free" I just have to trust they did their best to make sure it's beyond their reasonable doubt.

With labeling we would have legal recourse!! Now as it stands we are SOL. You get sick and die, oh it was due to natural causes.

[donnay]

Wait, how do they know their aren't GMO's without a government mandated label? How could they ban something if their isn't a label?

We need to expand prop 37 to include prepared foods so they'll know!

They don't that's the kicker. But I am sure the employees have some idea of the side effects to warrant no GMO's in their cafeteria.

[Tpoints]

Genetically modified foods…
Are they safe?

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) doesn’t think so. The Academy reported that “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM asked physicians to advise patients to avoid GM foods.

Before the FDA decided to allow GMOs into food without labeling, FDA scientists had repeatedly warned that GM foods can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged long-term safety studies, but were ignored.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/

Institute For Responsible Technology
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs


It's interesting that the workers at Monsanto will NOT eat GMO's in their cafeteria--to me that's REALLY TELLING.

MONSANTO CAFETERIA BANS GMO FOODS
http://gizadeathstar.com/2012/02/monsanto-cafeteria-bans-gmo-foods/

that's a little different than saying wreaking havoc on internal organs. Do they have a specific one you can point to? Either a symptom or an organism would be fine.

[Tpoints]

With labeling we would have legal recourse!! Now as it stands we are SOL. You get sick and die, oh it was due to natural causes.

Uh yeah, I think that's how this country was founded, it's called buyer beware, personal responsibility. The idea of product liability and consumer protection is a liberalist scheme to destroy capitalism and relieve consumer responsibility.

I bet if I asked you who died from marijuana, you can tell me "nobody", but if I asked how who died from GMO products, can you tell me?

[donnay]

Maybe I don't know, but if I wanted to know, how would I? Who do I trust to set the standards, inspect and enforce?

I can probably either grow it myself or buy locally, but other than that, I just have to trust the labels. If they say organic I just have to trust they're not lying to me to charge me more, or if they say "GMO free" I just have to trust they did their best to make sure it's beyond their reasonable doubt.


Just because it says "Organic" doesn't necessary mean it is good for you. I know a lot of Organic products that sneak in MSG (all by another name). However, I knew they did because I know the different names they use to pass MSG off as. But if no food was labeled how would anyone know? There has to be some guidelines. Labels are our only recourse to sue them if their product harms us or our family.

[gerryb1]

They don't that's the kicker. But I am sure the employees have some idea of the side effects to warrant no GMO's in their cafeteria.

So having government force a label is the ONLY way of knowing if GMO's are in the food you consume?

So you have no idea right now if you are consuming GMO's?

[Tpoints]

Just because it says "Organic" doesn't necessary mean it is good for you. I know a lot of Organic products that sneak in MSG (all by another name). However, I knew they did because I know the different names they use to pass MSG off as. But if no food was labeled how would anyone know? There has to be some guidelines. Labels are our only recourse to sue them if their product harms us or our family.

Thanks, I appreciate that.

So isn't it true that GMO products are not always unsafe either?

[Tpoints]

So having government force a label is the ONLY way of knowing if GMO's are in the food you consume?

So you have no idea right now if you are consuming GMO's?

Maybe not the only way, just in some people's minds, the best way, the fastest way, the most effective and most protective way.

[specsaregood]

Labels are our only recourse to sue them if their product harms us or our family.

You dont really believe that do you? You think you could prove a GMO food item you ate hurt you and think you could find recourse against the food giants? come on now.

[mad cow]

I called this one first (I didn't say big or Fascist though)

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?394900-GMO-Labeling-PROP-37-Fails-in-CA&p=4720911&viewfull=1#post4720911



I know you don't like labeling, because mad cows won't sell too well :P

And so you did.:)

However Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy is much maligned by Big Government Western Medicine Propagandists and may actually be enjoyed by many here,if they only tried it.

Eat Mor Branes.

[Tpoints]

You dont really believe that do you? You think you could prove a GMO food item you ate hurt you and think you could find recourse against the food giants? come on now.

yeah, because after you eat the fruit, they'll be able to trace the genes and residue left in your body, and the genes are patented by the same few conglomerates, so you'll be able to prove it came from the GM-er! Patents biting back can be a real bitch! That's the easy part, the hard part is ruling out competing possible explanations.

[gerryb1]

yeah, because after you eat the fruit, they'll be able to trace the genes and residue left in your body, and the genes are patented by the same few conglomerates, so you'll be able to prove it came from the GM-er! Patents biting back can be a real bitch! That's the easy part, the hard part is ruling out competing possible explanations.

More likely is Monsanto will win and you'll owe license fee's. That's what happens to the farmers when GM seeds cross pollinate with their crops...

[Tpoints]

More likely is Monsanto will win and you'll owe license fee's. That's what happens to the farmers when GM seeds cross pollinate with their crops...

so you're saying when I want to sue Monsanto for polluting my body or land, they'll sue me for their trespass?

[donnay]

that's a little different than saying wreaking havoc on internal organs. Do they have a specific one you can point to? Either a symptom or an organism would be fine.

Monsanto Corn Study In France Finds Tumors And Organ Damage In Rats

(...)

The animals on the GM diet suffered mammary tumours, as well as severe liver and kidney damage.

(...)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/monsanto-corn-study-france_n_1896115.html?utm_hp_ref=green

Sources:
http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-gmcrops-safety-idUSBRE88I0L020120919
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2205509/Cancer-row-GM-foods-French-study-claims-did-THIS-rats--cause-organ-damage-early-death-humans.html
http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/topics/technology-and-supply-chain/monsanto-weedkiller-and-gm-maize-in-shocking-cancer-study/232603.article

[donnay]

Thanks, I appreciate that.

So isn't it true that GMO products are not always unsafe either?

Anything made in a lab with people playing God is definitely not a good thing, IMHO.

[donnay]

You dont really believe that do you? You think you could prove a GMO food item you ate hurt you and think you could find recourse against the food giants? come on now.

With the independent studies coming out, and pointing out what this stuff does, yes, I believe we would have some recourse.

[donnay]

So having government force a label is the ONLY way of knowing if GMO's are in the food you consume?

So you have no idea right now if you are consuming GMO's?

I know this...that 90% of the corn and soy grown in the USA is genetically engineered. So, I stay away from products with labels that tell me it contains, soy, corn or soy lecithin or vegetable oil. I know that Canola Oil (http://www.bhawkindustries.com/blank?pageid=41&catstart=0&prodstart=0) was genetically engineered so I steer clear from anything that is labeled "Canola Oil."

With labels on these items it allows me to use discernment as to what I want my family to have.

[gerryb1]

I know this...that 90% of the corn and soy grown in the USA is genetically engineered. So, I stay away from products with labels that tell me it contains, soy, corn or soy lecithin or vegetable oil. I know that Canola Oil (http://www.bhawkindustries.com/blank?pageid=41&catstart=0&prodstart=0) was genetically engineered so I steer clear from anything that is labeled "Canola Oil."

With labels on these items it allows me to use discernment as to what I want my family to have.

IF that's all you are doing, I don't believe you are actually concerned about this issue at all.

[donnay]

IF that's all you are doing, I don't believe you are actually concerned about this issue at all.

LOL! Guess you don't do much grocery store shopping. Because they are filled with GMO products.

[gerryb1]

LOL! Guess you don't do much grocery store shopping. Because they are filled with GMO products.

Are you a member of a CSA? Do you buy anything direct from a farm? Buy organic? Go to stores that carry products labeled GMO free?

If you aren't doing any of this, and you suspect all the products have GMO -- why do you advocate for government to confirm it with a label?(And run the risk of destroying WHAT I DO to avoid GMO products, as other similar regulations have already done for many products such as raw milk, almonds, pomegranate etc.)

[Tpoints]

Are you a member of a CSA? Do you buy anything direct from a farm? Buy organic? Go to stores that carry products labeled GMO free?

If you aren't doing any of this, and you suspect all the products have GMO -- why do you advocate for government to confirm it with a label?(And run the risk of destroying WHAT I DO to avoid GMO products, as other similar regulations have already done for many products such as raw milk, almonds, pomegranate etc.)

because he wants to protect other people who are not as smart and picky as he is.

[gerryb1]

because he wants to protect other people who are not as smart and picky as he is.

And he thinks his message will make it through versus billion dollar budgets of coca cola and pepsi turning GMO into a patriotic and civic duty? "Why do you want the world to starve?"

[Tpoints]

And he thinks his message will make it through versus billion dollar budgets of coca cola and pepsi turning GMO into a patriotic and civic duty? "Why do you want the world to starve?"

I think that's the point, he knows he can't beat the PR stunt with his voice, so he wants laws to speak for him and the government muscle to beat up corporate bullies for him.

[idiom]

We have voluntary labelling of food here for the most part. If its not labelled, don't buy it.

Nobody is forcing you to buy unlabelled products.

Everybody wants the government to baby-sit them.

You want a government agent to come and check all the milk in the fridge is still good too?

[UWDude]

For all those in favor of this nonsensical government mandated labeling, stop and ask yourselves one simple question: Who would get to write the definition as to what is and what is not GMO?

Why does Monsanto get do define what is and is not "corn"?

Should companies be allowed to sell pear juice and call it strawberry if it tastes like strawberry?

[Tpoints]

Why does Monsanto get do define what is and is not "corn"?

Should companies be allowed to sell pear juice and call it strawberry if it tastes like strawberry?

.......who should then?? what are you? anti-free speech? you want milk industry to stop soy milk?

[UWDude]

This is the point YOU are missing. It's called regulatory capture, and you want to provide for more of it.


regulatory capture is when corporations own the regulators. I don't know what you are talking about.

[gerryb1]

Why does Monsanto get do define what is and is not "corn"?

Should companies be allowed to sell pear juice and call it strawberry if it tastes like strawberry?

Now we need a new set of regulations to define what juice is?(Oh wait, we do.. and a label saying 100% juice is not necessarily 100% juice..)

[UWDude]

.......who should then??

The people selling the snake oil, I suppose.

[gerryb1]

regulatory capture is when corporations own the regulators. I don't know what you are talking about.

Ok you defined the term correctly.

Now bust the assertion that if they can capture the FDA and USDA, that they can't capture a piddly state level agency in charge of GMO labels..

[UWDude]

Now we need a new set of regulations to define what juice is?(Oh wait, we do.. and a label saying 100% juice is not necessarily 100% juice..)

I don't know what you are talking about. I am talking about many juices use apple and pear as substitutes for flavoring like banana and strawberry. In libetaritopia, any juice that was 1% banana and 1% strawberry could be called "strawberry banana juice" without any label listing the ingredients. They could package rat shit as peanut butter, and as long as it tasted like peanut butter to consumers, it would sell just fine, especially if it were cheaper.

What a utopia of free markets!

As far as I see it, a label is a contract. If it says you are buying "organic corn", there should be no use of pesticides or genetically modified corn in there. A label is just a shortcut between the buyer and salesman.

[gerryb1]

I don't know what you are talking about. I am talking about many juices use apple and pear as substitutes for flavoring like banana and strawberry. In libetaritopia, any juice that was 1% banana and 1% strawberry could be called "strawberry banana juice" without any label listing the ingredients. They could package rat shit as peanut butter, and as long as it tasted like peanut butter to consumers, it would sell just fine, especially if it were cheaper.

What a utopia of free markets!

So let me get this straight. It says 100% juice, and lists one ingredient. You believe it is that one ingredient?

[UWDude]

Ok you defined the term correctly.

Now bust the assertion that if they can capture the FDA and USDA, that they can't capture a piddly state level agency in charge of GMO labels..

That they could. Therefore, we should not even have labeling.

I myself am glad there are required ingredients and nutrition labels on all foods, that adhere to a code of laws. Yup. That's my tyranist streak showing again, I suppose.

I guess you all never read the labels, eh? You just assume if it is sweet, it's sugar.

[UWDude]

So let me get this straight. It says 100% juice, and lists one ingredient. You believe it is that one ingredient?

Oh, you're right, there could be a tiny bit of mold, maybe even some trace rat feces in there.
Yes, let's toss out food labeling. Because... ...oh yeah, because... wait, what?

Oh yes, because processing can't be perfect, it's the government's fault.

[gerryb1]

Oh, you're right, there could be a tiny bit of mold, maybe even some trace rat feces in there.
Yes, let's toss out food labeling. Because... ...oh yeah, because... wait, what?

I guess you have never read the regulations behind the labels. Yet you are advocating for MORE.

Here's one example. "100% orange juice" -- held in vats for a year, and chemical flavor packs added(but not added to your label)
http://www.naturalnews.com/034703_orange_juice_flavor_packs_ingredients.html

[UWDude]

I guess you have never read the regulations behind the labels. Yet you are advocating for MORE.

Here's one example. "100% orange juice" -- held in vats for a year, and chemical flavor packs added(but not added to your label)
http://www.naturalnews.com/034703_orange_juice_flavor_packs_ingredients.html

Oh bummer. I guess requiring juice makers to note that on their packages would be wrong. I like it better when they do it voluntarily, or when the free market determines consumers don't like what they don't know about. :confused:

DO YOU HAVE A POINT, SON?

[gerryb1]

DO YOU HAVE A POINT, SON?

My point is you had absolutely no knowledge of this - yet you clamor on for more of the same so you get some feel-good reassurance from Monsanto Vis-à-vis captured labels -- rather than changing your own behavior and becoming knowledgeable about what gets shoved down your gullet.

[UWDude]

Oh, I get it. Everybody should be as diligent as you, and thoroughly research the hundreds of thousands of products they consume over a lifetime. Instead of reading the side of the cereal box while they eat.

Yes, what a boon for health it would be if everybody would go on the internet before buying something on the store shelf.

What world are you living in?

And why have you not replied to my assertion that a label is a contract?

If it says "100%" orange juice on it, then it is in the purvey of the government's responsibility to be sure that whoever put that label on there, while trying to get a consumer to buy it, did so honestly? Why do you have a problem with this? Does freedom of speech mean freedom to lie about what you are selling?

If a flyer says "I will mow your lawn for ten bucks", you call them, they come over while you are at work, mow the lawn, you get home, and it is only 75% mowed... ...you consider that free speech?

Ok, so buyer beware. Now let's say, they say, "I will build your house for $100,000" At the end of three months, the house doesn't have a roof, but they claim, "hey, I didn't say I'd put a roof on it!" Hey, buyer beware. Now you payed 100,000 for four walls, and have to shell out another $25,000 for the roof. What a wonderful and free world that would be. A wonderful business climate!

[donnay]

Are you a member of a CSA? Do you buy anything direct from a farm? Buy organic? Go to stores that carry products labeled GMO free?

If you aren't doing any of this, and you suspect all the products have GMO -- why do you advocate for government to confirm it with a label?(And run the risk of destroying WHAT I DO to avoid GMO products, as other similar regulations have already done for many products such as raw milk, almonds, pomegranate etc.)


Yes I am a member of CSA, I shop locally, buy locally and only buy from farmers and ranchers I trust and through word of mouth of people I trust. I advocate for transparency. How are the citizens of the country supposed to be fully informed if they have no idea what is in their food?

Not everyone has the privilege of being rural and having farmers and ranchers they trust around them. The farmers and ranchers I know have absolutely no problem with labeling the ingredients of the things they have prepared. Or providing us with full nutritional information on their packaging.

Another thing is, Big Agra doesn't like these independent guys, nor does Big Pharma--they also hate transparency--because let's face it when these groups have something to hide, they certainly do not want to have it publicize. If GMO's were so good why all the fuss to keep them secret? These are the guys that have no compunction whatsoever to sell you food that will make you sick, poison you and possibly kill you. By making these guys label their products, they know that makes them liable to damages that may have occurred to people using their products.

[gerryb1]

What world are you living in?

I'm living in the world where the example I just gave is the reality.


then it is in the purvey of the government's responsibility to be sure that whoever put that label on there, while trying to get a consumer to buy it, did so honestly?

In your fairy tale, yes. In reality - my example. Just because a multi-national corporation put a label saying something, doesn't make it mean what you want it to mean -- it means what THEY want it to mean.

If you want a label to mean something, buy a product from someone who is trustworthy and does it voluntarily -- who lets you or your agent inspect their production facility etc..

[UWDude]

If you want a label to mean something, buy a product from someone who is trustworthy and does it voluntarily

LoL. Voluntarily. Yeah, uh huh. Right. OK. Good luck convincing people you live in reality.

And you do realize people can lie, don't you? That's the whole point of lying. The person being told the lie does not know they are talking to someone who is untrustworthy.

How do you know your orange juice is 100% fresh squeezed? Let me guess, all food you eat, you observe yourself, from the first seed planted to the last nut roasted and set in your candy bar. Then, after all that, you buy a candy bar... ...and only one from that season, because next season, they may decide to start using arsenic as a flavor enhancer.

LoL

LUDICROUS!

[specsaregood]

LoL. Voluntarily. Yeah, uh huh. Right. OK. Good luck convincing people you live in reality.

that is amusing since just 2 posts before yours donnay said that the farmers she knows have no problem doing just that.

[UWDude]

In your fairy tale, yes. In reality - my example. Just because a multi-national corporation put a label saying something, doesn't make it mean what you want it to mean -- it means what THEY want it to mean.

So only multinational corporations would lie about their product? How small does an orange juice business have to be before you can be assured they are telling the truth?

Your arguments are just ridiculous. They have no logic.

[UWDude]

that is amusing since just 2 posts before yours donnay said that the farmers she knows have no problem doing just that.

What's really amusing is Donnay also mentioned he happened to live in a rural area where there are farmers.

Yes, 'tis better to dismantle cities, then to require honest labeling.

No more supermarkets, let's all go back to driving around and buying from farmer Jones 10 miles away. Because that is a far better alternative, than requiring labels to be truthful about what is inside.

[UWDude]

Here's one example. "100% orange juice" -- held in vats for a year, and chemical flavor packs added(but not added to your label)
http://www.naturalnews.com/034703_orange_juice_flavor_packs_ingredients.html

Why would you be against this information being required on a label as part of contract law?

And I wonder, how does your source, natural news, feel about GMO labeling?

LOL

[gerryb1]

Yes, 'tis better to dismantle cities, then to require honest labeling.

No more supermarkets, let's all go back to driving around and buying from farmer Jones 10 miles away. Because that is a far better alternative, than requiring labels to be truthful about what is inside.

I live in a city.

And your myth of "truthful labels" was debunked.

[specsaregood]

What's really amusing is Donnay also mentioned he happened to live in a rural area where there are farmers.

Yes, 'tis better to dismantle cities, then to require honest labeling.

No more supermarkets, let's all go back to driving around and buying from farmer Jones 10 miles away. Because that is a far better alternative, than requiring labels to be truthful about what is inside.

really? that is your thought process? perhaps you do need mandatory labels.

[UWDude]

I live in a city.

And your myth of "truthful labels" was debunked.

Yeah, so they don't exist. So Californians said they wanted more... ...your reply? To quote an ardent supporter of the initiative, and then claim, that somehow, not requiring more truthful advertising/labeling, would make the world a better place.

And you never answered, how do you know what you eat is exactly what it says it is?

[UWDude]

really? that is your thought process? perhaps you do need mandatory labels.

Really? You didn't figure out from what I have written that I support mandatory labels? Geeze, I thought I was pretty clear.

I hear a lot of criticism, but no solutions... ....except pie in the sky "i'll research everything myself"... ...which, as I have already pointed out, would do nothing for you, since any human being can lie. And they would even be more free to lie if there was absolutely no threat of penalty for lying.

The only other solution is to grow all your own food, or to watch whoever you buy your food from at every step of their process.

[specsaregood]

Yeah, so they don't exist. So Californians said they wanted more...

actually, it seems that they didnt want more since the prop failed.

[gerryb1]

And you never answered, how do you know what you eat is exactly what it says it is?

Because I trust the proprietors of the products I ingest.

How will you know your mandated labels are truthful?

[UWDude]

Because I trust the proprietors of the products I ingest.


Based on what?

Have you ever been cheated on?



How will you know your mandated labels are truthful?

I don't. But I know they are more truthful then they would be if people were allowed to say whatever they wanted on their labels.

[UWDude]

actually, it seems that they didnt want more since the prop failed.

Yes, teh failure of the proposition was a clear sign Californians want to do all the research themselves.

[UWDude]

//Dp

[specsaregood]

Really? You didn't figure out from what I have written that I support mandatory labels? Geeze, I thought I was pretty clear.

I hear a lot of criticism, but no solutions... ....except pie in the sky "i'll research everything myself"... ...which, as I have already pointed out, would do nothing for you, since any human being can lie. And they would even be more free to lie if there was absolutely no threat of penalty for lying.

The only other solution is to grow all your own food, or to watch whoever you buy your food from at every step of their process.

it seems you have not been paying attention then. i really cant help you if you wish to remain ignorant. like i said, perhaps you do need mandatory labeling.

[mad cow]

LoL. Voluntarily. Yeah, uh huh. Right. OK. Good luck convincing people you live in reality.

And you do realize people can lie, don't you? That's the whole point of lying. The person being told the lie does not know they are talking to someone who is untrustworthy.

How do you know your orange juice is 100% fresh squeezed? Let me guess, all food you eat, you observe yourself, from the first seed planted to the last nut roasted and set in your candy bar. Then, after all that, you buy a candy bar... ...and only one from that season, because next season, they may decide to start using arsenic as a flavor enhancer.

LoL

LUDICROUS!

How many years,in your opinion,should a dude with a hotdog stand serve in prison if he doesn't feel like labeling anything?
A roadside produce stand?
A come pick it yourself strawberry farm?
A Restaurant?
Your mom's house for Thanksgiving?
Or are all these regulations just for "Big Agra"because ,like "Big Pharma" and "Big Oil" and "Big Business"we know they are evil because,well,they're Big.

There seems to be a lot of people who want to call the jack-booted thugs of Government force to stomp on the necks of those they disagree with around here for a so called liberty loving site.

[mad cow]

..

[gerryb1]

like i said, perhaps you do need mandatory labeling.

And good luck at getting a product inside that is what you think it is..

[UWDude]

How many years,in your opinion,should a dude with a hotdog stand serve in prison if he doesn't feel like labeling anything?

Oh, I get it. Now restaurants can serve dog meat and call it filet mignon, and I'm a fool for thinking that would be wrong.
A hot dog stand should be required to let customers know what brand of hotdogs, relish, etc is being used. A hot dog stand that claims to use 100% organic products, should use items which to his knowledge, are. that is as far as his responsibility should go.




A roadside produce stand?

What are they claiming? If they are claiming to sell morels for $10 a lb, and they are actually portabellos?


A come pick it yourself strawberry farm?

What are they selling? If they are telling you they don't use pesticides, while washing their plants in DDT?


A Restaurant?

What does the restaurant claim? That it uses 100% fresh ground beef, when they are actually sticking a rat in every fifth pound of burger to save money?


Your mom's house for Thanksgiving?

Yeah dude. Uh huh. One day, big bad gubmit is gonna tell my mom to be sure eveything is properly labeled...


Or are all these regulations just for "Big Agra"because ,like "Big Pharma" and "Big Oil" and "Big Business"we know they are evil because,well,they're Big.

They are for anybody who wants to try to sell more product by advertising it as something. If they advertise it as something it is not, they are breaking a contract, and deserve fines and or jail and or prison, until they figure out that isn't cool.


There seems to be a lot of people who want to call the jack-booted thugs of Government force to stomp on the necks of those they disagree with around here for a so called liberty loving site.

You people are hilarious. I am seriously getting some good guffaws and giggles from your alarmist rhetoric and bass-ackwards logic.

"OMG, labels are deceptive... ...lets make change the laws so they can be as deceptive as they want!"

[UWDude]

it seems you have not been paying attention then. i really cant help you if you wish to remain ignorant. like i said, perhaps you do need mandatory labeling.

Hey, a post that meant nothing at all!

Nut-uh, yer ugly!

[mad cow]

There are plenty laws against fraud,local,State and National.
New laws are not needed,neither are laws demanding that somebody tell you what it is in that burger that you are eating.

As it stands now if I sell you a hot dog or a mushroom or anything ,you can ask me what's in it and I can tell you none of your business and you can either buy it or not.
If I tell you it is 100% prime ground sirloin and it is rat meat,as you say,well that is fraud and there has been laws against that for centuries,and I should be punished.

However,if I don't want to say what's in it,you don't have to buy it and forcing me to label what's in it when I don't want to,under threat of being thrown into a cage against my will by your hired armed thugs is an act of aggression that is generally frowned upon by liberty loving sorts.

[UWDude]

Yes, let's just see what happens when companies are allowed to put only the information they want on food products.
Another libertaria ad extremis argument that has absolutely no pragmatic value. Just a bunch of ideological wank yanking.
And the old "there are already plenty of laws" argument.



However,if I don't want to say what's in it,you don't have to buy it and forcing me to label what's in it when I don't want to

Why in the hell would you not want to be completely honest about what is in your product? Why would labeling your product be such a big staunch on your so called liberty? How could telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth be detrimental to your business? If GMO's are completely safe, why not trust the consumer base to look it up, do the research, and find it is so?

Hell, gerryb1 is all about doing your research first, I wonder if he would gladly munch down on tomatoes crossed with mosquito DNA.

[idiom]

Voluntary independent labelling In New Zealand:

Food Saftey:

http://www.asurequality.com/resources/images/Logos/nzgap.jpg

Health:

http://www.heartfoundation.org.nz/uploads/ticklogo1.jpg

Organic:

http://www.tastenature.co.nz/images/302/medium/Demeter-logo.JPG
http://www.tastenature.co.nz/images/301/medium/BioGro-RGB.jpg
http://www.tastenature.co.nz/images/303/medium/OFNZ-logo-rgb-web.jpg
http://www.tastenature.co.nz/images/321/medium/AsureQualityOrganic-NZ1234.jpg

Pretty much all meat produced in New Zealand is certified Halal by the Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand. Nobody checks sources like the religious, but they don't have a label that I know of, just a certificate that is displayed in the store.

There are plenty of others too. If it doesn't have the certs you care about, don't buy it.

Mislabelling food, or deceptively labelling food is fraud here, and will get you serious criminal prosecution. So Cage Eggs have great big happy CAGE EGGS bits in their names.

We have food inspections too which either shut your store down or put a great big A, B, or C in the window. If it doesn't have an A, don't bloody well shop there. Unless its a new store. A store has to get 100% several inspections in a row to get an A. These are government run, but if they packed up shop we would survive I imagine.

This country lives and dies on its export certifications, the government keeps and eye on things and assists with government to government negotiations, but is otherwise hand off or out-sources major certification tasks multiple alternatives.

I suppose it may be reasonable to need to throw all of that away though and ask the USDA to come and certify our produce for the low low price of half our GDP...

[mad cow]

idiom,I am all for voluntary rating services,in foodstuffs or any other product that you can imagine.I like them and I encourage them.

UW,Companies and individuals should certainly be "allowed"to sell whatever they want to whoever they want at whatever terms they can arrive at between themselves and the purchaser without any interference by any outside agents including Government agents.

Now,for the third time in this thread,I like and encourage PRIVATE rating agencies,,whether Kosher or Halal or the 2+dozen GMO food raters mentioned earlier,and any number of the WEB based ratings that you can get for any product under the sun.

However,I will never agree to Government rating of anything I buy,maybe I'm just paranoid,but I think it would end up with the only supplier of what I need coincidentally just happening to be the mayor's Brother-In-Law.

[mad cow]

Yes, let's just see what happens when companies are allowed to put only the information they want on food products.
Another libertaria ad extremis argument that has absolutely no pragmatic value. Just a bunch of ideological wank yanking.
And the old "there are already plenty of laws" argument.




Why in the hell would you not want to be completely honest about what is in your product? Why would labeling your product be such a big staunch on your so called liberty? How could telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth be detrimental to your business? If GMO's are completely safe, why not trust the consumer base to look it up, do the research, and find it is so?

Hell, gerryb1 is all about doing your research first, I wonder if he would gladly munch down on tomatoes crossed with mosquito DNA.

Here is the complete quote:

"However,if I don't want to say what's in it,you don't have to buy it and forcing me to label what's in it when I don't want to,under threat of being thrown into a cage against my will by your hired armed thugs is an act of aggression that is generally frowned upon by liberty loving sorts."

I still stand behind every word.

Why would I not want to label my product?
Who cares?I am a free man!If I don't feel like labeling my product,what business is it of yours OR the Government.
Do I have the power to force you to only buy products that are not labeled?Of course not!
So why should you or your Government Agents have any say-so whatsoever in how I market my products?
If I am marketing my products in a manner that is detrimental to my bottom line,I will fail.
If I am misrepresenting my products in any way that constitutes fraud,I will be punished by law.
If people are happy with my unlabeled products,even though they have no clue what is in them,I will die a very rich man.
Whatever happens,it is no concern of yours or any busybodies in the Government.

[GunnyFreedom]

There are plenty laws against fraud,local,State and National.
New laws are not needed,neither are laws demanding that somebody tell you what it is in that burger that you are eating.

As it stands now if I sell you a hot dog or a mushroom or anything ,you can ask me what's in it and I can tell you none of your business and you can either buy it or not.
If I tell you it is 100% prime ground sirloin and it is rat meat,as you say,well that is fraud and there has been laws against that for centuries,and I should be punished.

However,if I don't want to say what's in it,you don't have to buy it and forcing me to label what's in it when I don't want to,under threat of being thrown into a cage against my will by your hired armed thugs is an act of aggression that is generally frowned upon by liberty loving sorts.

I am well aware that you disagree, but as far as I am concerned, calling a GMO "food" is indeed fraud.

[mad cow]

Then copyright the word 'FOOD',I don't care.
As long as I can sell whatever I want to sell to whoever wants to buy whatever I'm selling I don't care what it is called,and I'm sure that my customers wouldn't care either.

Lets assume it's called 'FEED'.As long as the Government and the health nazis stayed the hell out of the FEED market,well,I bet we could get along just fine.

[GunnyFreedom]

Then copyright the word 'FOOD',I don't care.

That's disingenuous in the extreme. You don't have to copyright the word "cow" for substituting a rat to be fraud.


As long as I can sell whatever I want to sell to whoever wants to buy whatever I'm selling I don't care what it is called,and I'm sure that my customers wouldn't care either.

So sell a pile of feces and call it a chocolate sundae and I am sure your customers will just love you to death.


Lets assume it's called 'FEED'.As long as the Government and the health nazis stayed the hell out of the FEED market,well,I bet we could get along just fine.

As far as I am concerned, calling a GMO "food," is fraud.

[compromise]

You guys should seriously go and join the Green Party if you care so much about environmentalism..

[mad cow]

You guys should seriously go and join the Green Party if you care so much about environmentalism..

Amen!

[GunnyFreedom]

I don't support the federal government forcing "food" companies to label stuff, I do think this is the place of the state to do so, Along with marijuana and other laws, And the federal goverment shouldn't come and override there laws.

Nothing that has been discussed in this entire thread mentions Federal law or regulation.

[GunnyFreedom]

You guys should seriously go and join the Green Party if you care so much about environmentalism..

Who has mentioned anything about environmentalism?

Wow, sometimes you guys blow my mind how far you have to reach to justify a predisposed opinion. :p

[anaconda]

You guys should seriously go and join the Green Party if you care so much about environmentalism..

The environment is a seriously important thing. Thankfully, there are apparently good arguments for optimal libertarian solutions.

[GunnyFreedom]

The environment is a seriously important thing. Thankfully, there are apparently good arguments for optimal libertarian solutions.

This too. Property rights is king. Just like if a company sprays DDT on your property and calls it water, then you are a victim of trespass/fraud/violation. Likewise, your own body is your property, and if someone by deception puts something that you reject into your body, then that is a clear violation of your property rights.

If someone sprays poison on your property and doesn't bother to tell you, we would all say that is an obvious violation, but if someone turns our food into poison and doesn't bother to tell us, suddenly that's OUR fault?

My own body is no less my property than the lot upon which my house sits. Indeed, one may argue that my own body is even more innately my own property than the land upon which I live.

[RockEnds]

Folks who don't want to know what's in his or her food have obviously never lost their can labels in a chivaree. Or ya'll must all be blessed with telepathy and x-ray vision. Personally, I kinda like knowing what I'm about to eat.

[Tpoints]

Folks who don't want to know what's in his or her food have obviously never lost their can labels in a chivaree. Or ya'll must all be blessed with telepathy and x-ray vision. Personally, I kinda like knowing what I'm about to eat.

There's a million things I kinda like, kinda like to have, and kinda like to know, not many of them involve forcing it with government.

[Danan]

Folks who don't want to know what's in his or her food have obviously never lost their can labels in a chivaree. Or ya'll must all be blessed with telepathy and x-ray vision. Personally, I kinda like knowing what I'm about to eat.

People who are against welfare are obviously clueless about the fact that getting a welfare check is better than getting none. Personally I like recieving money.


Nobody here advocates that companies should not label their products. What a libertarian should object to, however, is a law forcing sellers to label against their will, even though there are plenty of costumers who would have bought the non-labeled products too, voluntarily.

If people care enough about labels, producers are going to anticipate this and will do it. If they don't care about it, a law demanding it won't be very popular either. In any event it is completely useless and against libertarian principles to force anyone to label his products.