Proposition 37
DS1119
Posts: 33,497
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.
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.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
I AM MINE
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
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
That would be great actually.
:?
Yeah! :thumbup: I know I did and i'm not even in California.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
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.
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.
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
I AM MINE
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.
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
"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?
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
people who would vote against this - would you go into a restaurant and order a dish that said "meat and stuff"?
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:
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.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
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!
Mmmm, yum, look so good I could...
Yeah, I guess if people want to poison themselves.
We just want to know what's in our food. If someone buys a book from me, they know what they're getting. I note any flaws in books that I sell, even ones that might go unnoticed. We should expect the same from our food.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
no ... it's about giving information to consumers so they can make informed decisions ... as opposed to allowing corporations dictate what is relevant and allowing them to misrepresent their products ...
I believe it. I hope we do get the labeling but yeah, there's always more to any proposition that meets the eye. They're written that way on purpose and most require a degree in law to fully understand them. Very frustrating for those us us who want of make good voting choices. We just have to go with our best educated assessment.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Brian...as god as my witness...if something like this gets passed say goodbye to the local farmer. Say hello to only increased production by the larger farms and say hello to food imported that doesn't fall under the scope of this law.
They have sold us "wheat bread" that was just white bread coloured brown with molasses.
They have sold us "vitamin water" that was just water, sugar and flavor.
They have sold us "healthy choice" food that was just the same sodium, sugar and fat-filled crap in a different package.
I've seen "cholesterol free" peanut butter. No shit.
Have you seen the bags of hard candy labeled "fat free?"
Ec-Fucking-Scuse me if I maybe want them to show a bit of responsibility in their marketing and the poisons they knowingly sell us.
Vote Yes.
Wasn't 4 years ago they were saying that voting for Barack Obama would mean "death to Israel" and 1000 years of darkness" and that voting against Proposition 8 would mean the kids would be forced to watch hardcore gay porn in classrooms?
Honestly. :fp:
Which god?
Interesting, it seem that they are trying to regulate what people put in food through labeling. I don't know enough about it, though it seems to make sense that you have to label what's in your food. Of course, what is important to label and what is not is the real question here. And I think it will cause prices to increase, which as we all know disproportionately affects the poor.
All of these examples have zero to do with this proposition but thank you for playing.
My god. Probably a bad choice in words to try and keep the discussion neutral and I apoligize but it's a phrase I use quite often.