Proposition 37

DS1119

Before people jump on me for carrying on about this I was told by one of the moderators if I would like to discuss this issue I can go right ahead and start a new thread. I would like to talk about it.



Be careful what you wish for in CA people. Do your research on the topic. Don't vote blindly for this before you are really sure. Anytime you add more government, more government regulation, more government costs, more redundence, it's never a good thing. To those that are against "factory farming"...who do you think something like this helps? The small farmer....nope....the big ones who can afford this. BTW....food imported into the country will not be regulated under this system so who gets the advantage....foreign farmers and importers.

Plese just do some reading and if you still vote yes....great. Hopefully not though.

riotgrl

I understand your concerns about more government regulations. But as for who it helps, it helps me the consumer. I have the right to know what exactly is in my food. We already label food with nutrition facts and ingredients, this proposition will simply force agribusiness to tell us that they have used genetically modified organisms. Right now it is large corporations who are the protected "person" not me. I respect anyone's right to continue to consume GMO's if they have done their research and feel these are things they are willing to consume. I have done MY research and I am NOT willing to eat GMO's and I deserve to know what is in my food without having to resort to an immense amount of detective work to figure out their code words for GMO's.

CH156378

I'm sure the one or two people from California that read this post will make sure to do some research.

DS1119

riotgrl wrote:

I understand your concerns about more government regulations. But as for who it helps, it helps me the consumer. I have the right to know what exactly is in my food. We already label food with nutrition facts and ingredients, this proposition will simply force agribusiness to tell us that they have used genetically modified organisms. Right now it is large corporations who are the protected "person" not me. I respect anyone's right to continue to consume GMO's if they have done their research and feel these are things they are willing to consume. I have done MY research and I am NOT willing to eat GMO's and I deserve to know what is in my food without having to resort to an immense amount of detective work to figure out their code words for GMO's.

This article from yesterday sums it the best. There are others as well but this kind of puts in a nutshell for me.



http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_p ... ition%2037

aerial

DS1119 wrote:

Before people jump on me for carrying on about this I was told by one of the moderators if I would like to discuss this issue I can go right ahead and start a new thread. I would like to talk about it.



Be careful what you wish for in CA people. Do your research on the topic. Don't vote blindly for this before you are really sure. Anytime you add more government, more government regulation, more government costs, more redundence, it's never a good thing. To those that are against "factory farming"...who do you think something like this helps? The small farmer....nope....the big ones who can afford this. BTW....food imported into the country will not be regulated under this system so who gets the advantage....foreign farmers and importers.

Plese just do some reading and if you still vote yes....great. Hopefully not though.

I would have voted for it (if in cali.) but your information explains what they do not want us to know...thanks for the information.
P.S. I was surprised the last thread went so long...Mods must have had a few days off

DS1119

CH156378 wrote:

I'm sure the one or two people from California that read this post will make sure to do some research.

That would be great actually.

DS1119

aerial wrote:

I would have voted for it (if in cali.) but your information explains what they do not want us to know...thanks for the information.
P.S. I was surprised the last thread went so long...Mods must have had a few days off

:?

CH156378

DS1119 wrote:

CH156378 wrote:

I'm sure the one or two people from California that read this post will make sure to do some research.

That would be great actually.

Yeah! :thumbup: I know I did and i'm not even in California.

brianlux

Anything anyone votes on should be researched. Otherwise there's always the option to leave that space on that ballot blank or unpunched. I had no problem whatsoever voting on this issue and I'm certain this won't be the last we hear on it.

Prince Of Dorkness

I generally only eat organic foods and buy from my local farmer's market when I can.

I'm vegan so I don't need to worry about meat filled with antibiotics and steroids and cancer and ecoli. Although thanks to crops being sludged with cow shit from on high... it's not unheard of for people to die from eColi after eating a cantaloupe.

I voted for Prop 37 because I DO want to know what I'm eating and what I'm being given. I want to make that choice for myself.

Animal genes and even human genes are being inserted into plants or animals creating unimagined transgenic life forms.

Check out this link... http://www.purefood.org/text.html

It's not the smaller farmers who have to worry... most of the are growing organic foods. It's the Frankenfood people who are using Genetically Modified plants that mix animal genes and insect genes with your plants. They don't really know what this does to you. But they say they're sure it's safe. And we trust the people who make those "healthy" foods like "wheat bread" which has no whole grain at all... it's just white bread coloured brown. Or who tried to make people think High Fructose Corn Syrup was safe since it "has the same calories as sugar and honey."

If you really think you have nothing to worry about... then don't check the label. I want to know what it is that i'm eating.

riotgrl

DS1119 wrote:

riotgrl wrote:

I understand your concerns about more government regulations. But as for who it helps, it helps me the consumer. I have the right to know what exactly is in my food. We already label food with nutrition facts and ingredients, this proposition will simply force agribusiness to tell us that they have used genetically modified organisms. Right now it is large corporations who are the protected "person" not me. I respect anyone's right to continue to consume GMO's if they have done their research and feel these are things they are willing to consume. I have done MY research and I am NOT willing to eat GMO's and I deserve to know what is in my food without having to resort to an immense amount of detective work to figure out their code words for GMO's.

This article from yesterday sums it the best. There are others as well but this kind of puts in a nutshell for me.


http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_p ... ition%2037

Will you read this article by Michael Pollan about why Californians should vote yes for Prop 37?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/magazine/why-californias-proposition-37-should-matter-to-anyone-who-cares-about-food.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I've been voting with my dollars for a long time now but it is time that big ag realizes that we will not eat foods that cause cancer and ALS and Alzheimers and Parkinsons and ADD and and on and on. I know those are controversial statements but the more research I have done the more I realize that none of us are safe from the foods that are being created in a laboratory. "They" keep telling us these foods are safe but only after doing minimal, short term studies. We are not safe and by creating a law that requires the food industry to tell us what we are eating then we can force the food industry and our politicians to be honest with us about the effects of these "foods". It's time to look at the long term not juts the short term. Personally, I will not trust a company like Monsanto that created Agent Orange (which BTW has irreparably affected my family because of my dad's exposure during Vietnam) and is now creating our GM crops that we all eat.

Zoso

DS1119 wrote:

Before people jump on me for carrying on about this I was told by one of the moderators if I would like to discuss this issue I can go right ahead and start a new thread. I would like to talk about it.



Be careful what you wish for in CA people. Do your research on the topic. Don't vote blindly for this before you are really sure. Anytime you add more government, more government regulation, more government costs, more redundence, it's never a good thing. To those that are against "factory farming"...who do you think something like this helps? The small farmer....nope....the big ones who can afford this. BTW....food imported into the country will not be regulated under this system so who gets the advantage....foreign farmers and importers.

Plese just do some reading and if you still vote yes....great. Hopefully not though.

I tend to favor this prop 37. It has worked in countries like Australia (I use them a lot I know) and some other countries that are slightly capitalist with some socialist leanings. I also tend to disagree with the idea that too much government regulation is a bad thing. Most countries prospering now have done really well with regulated government managed economies and countries. Wouldn't you want to know what is in your food that you eat? You don't need to scared of government intervention when it actually is for the betterment of that society.. and this very much is.

Godfather.

I just talked to a young gal in front of Vons last night ,think I'll vote no on that one.


"Dog food with meat requires a label, but meat for human consumption does not. It makes no sense."

Godfather.

Zoso

Godfather. wrote:

I just talked to a young gal in front of Vons last night ,think I'll vote no on that one.


"Dog food with meat requires a label, but meat for human consumption does not. It makes no sense."

Godfather.

I read up on it a little but not 100% clear on this prop.. care to elaborate?

polaris_x

i don't see how anyone could vote against this ... sure, if you don't care what you eat and the consequences of that - then feel free to eat whatever you want but people want to know because their health and lives are connected to this ...

people who would vote against this - would you go into a restaurant and order a dish that said "meat and stuff"?

Jason P

I'm not against factory farming and I'm not against those same companies having to label what they are serving us.

If I was still living in Cali, this is a no-brainer "yes".

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

I'm not against factory farming and I'm not against those same companies having to label what they are serving us.

If I was still living in Cali, this is a no-brainer "yes".

you mean you aren't against factory farming YET ...

either way ... :thumbup:

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I'm not against factory farming and I'm not against those same companies having to label what they are serving us.

If I was still living in Cali, this is a no-brainer "yes".

you mean you aren't against factory farming YET ...

either way ... :thumbup:

I've been known to flip flop.

Prince Of Dorkness

Godfather. wrote:

I just talked to a young gal in front of Vons last night ,think I'll vote no on that one.


"Dog food with meat requires a label, but meat for human consumption does not. It makes no sense."

Godfather.

Yeah, she got that from a commercial paid for by the food industry. it's 100% lie. Made up. It's legal to lie in commercials so they said all sorts of crazy things. Including that.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

polaris_x wrote:

people who would vote against this - would you go into a restaurant and order a dish that said "meat and stuff"?

whygohome

polaris_x wrote:

i don't see how anyone could vote against this ... sure, if you don't care what you eat and the consequences of that - then feel free to eat whatever you want but people want to know because their health and lives are connected to this ...

people who would vote against this - would you go into a restaurant and order a dish that said "meat and stuff"?

It all comes down to economics. The cost of labeling will be put on the consumer (how dare we ask a company to take responsibility and inform the consumer of what they are buying!!)

It all comes down to this: We are 'Merica. We are an incredibly unhealthy society and proud of it. It's part of freedom, like filling up the 25 gallon gas tank on my pickup truck.
Diabetes: "The prevalence of diabetes in the United States is estimated to be 10.3% which is relatively high. By comparison, diabetes rates are 3.6% in the United Kingdom, 9.2% in Canada, and 5.7% in Australia. Worldwide, it is estimated that 6.4% of adults are living with diabetes and this figure is predicted to increase to 7.7% by 2030." http://healthhubs.net/diabetes/which-co ... -diabetes/
http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/ ... t-outlined

'Merica. Freedom.
Don't touch our cuisine!