Proposition 37

2

Comments

  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    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.

    incremental costs to labeling is minimal ...

    i would say the proposition comes down to this:

    the only downside i really see in this proposition is that a producer could be held liable for the false labeling of its source materials ... the necessity to give consumers the information required to make informed decisions trumps that by far tho ... as it relates to foreign products not falling under the same scrutiny - depending on where the food is coming from (gmo may already be banned) otherwise you can thank free trade agreements for the lack of regulation ...

    there is a reason why gmo foods are banned in so many countries ... it's not to say that all gmo foods are bad but the reality is we don't know for certain that they are all safe ... and when you look at incidences of various illnesses whether they be diabetes or allergies ... one can see that those rates are climbing higher in the US vs. other countries ...
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    DS1119 wrote:
    brianlux wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:
    Thi proposition is not as simple as putting a label on food. Far from it.

    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.


    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.

    Agribusiness has helped destroy that local, family farm for the past 30 years. This law is not going to make it worse. Buying from a CSA or a farmers market, as many people on this board have said they do on a regular basis, is the one of the ways to combat the destruction of the local, family farm not voting no to this bill.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    polaris_x wrote:
    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.

    incremental costs to labeling is minimal ...

    i would say the proposition comes down to this:

    the only downside i really see in this proposition is that a producer could be held liable for the false labeling of its source materials ... the necessity to give consumers the information required to make informed decisions trumps that by far tho ... as it relates to foreign products not falling under the same scrutiny - depending on where the food is coming from (gmo may already be banned) otherwise you can thank free trade agreements for the lack of regulation ...

    there is a reason why gmo foods are banned in so many countries ... it's not to say that all gmo foods are bad but the reality is we don't know for certain that they are all safe ... and when you look at incidences of various illnesses whether they be diabetes or allergies ... one can see that those rates are climbing higher in the US vs. other countries ...


    I'm not being a wise ass but have you read the enitre proposition and what it actually proposes? You do realize that imported foods won't be regulated? You do realize this country already has a standard for organic foods sold? It's a redundant law that will only hurt the small farmer...will only cost more to the consumer and taxpayer for the same or even LESSER a product...and will only increase imported food into the country. It's an absolutely ridiculous proposition sold on people's fears.
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    riotgrl wrote:

    Agribusiness has helped destroy that local, family farm for the past 30 years. This law is not going to make it worse. Buying from a CSA or a farmers market, as many people on this board have said they do on a regular basis, is the one of the ways to combat the destruction of the local, family farm not voting no to this bill.


    And you truly believe the local farmer has the money to adhere to these standards? This law gets passed say goodbye to farmer's markets.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    And you truly believe the local farmer has the money to adhere to these standards? This law gets passed say goodbye to farmer's markets.


    Oh please. Can you drop the silly "if you don't vote those this... say goodbye to your FREEDOM!!!!"

    If the last four years of saying "vote to protect the mega corporations or the world you know it will end and the angels will weep" and people giving you the finger has taught you nothing... I'll teach you this... that shit does't work. It just makes you look nuts.
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    DS1119 wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:

    Agribusiness has helped destroy that local, family farm for the past 30 years. This law is not going to make it worse. Buying from a CSA or a farmers market, as many people on this board have said they do on a regular basis, is the one of the ways to combat the destruction of the local, family farm not voting no to this bill.


    And you truly believe the local farmer has the money to adhere to these standards? This law gets passed say goodbye to farmer's markets.

    Many local farmers already label their products as such. Who's spending all the money to convince people to vote no - Monsanto, Kraft, Kelloggs, Coke, Pepsi, etc. And most of the additional cost from labeling is because of the need to change ingredient formulations not the labeling process itself. These companies sell cheap, convenient products and using non-GMO ingredients will cost more which will cut into their enormous profits. But we know that the price will be passed onto consumers which is how they are scaring people into voting against Prop 37.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    DS1119 wrote:
    I'm not being a wise ass but have you read the enitre proposition and what it actually proposes? You do realize that imported foods won't be regulated? You do realize this country already has a standard for organic foods sold? It's a redundant law that will only hurt the small farmer...will only cost more to the consumer and taxpayer for the same or even LESSER a product...and will only increase imported food into the country. It's an absolutely ridiculous proposition sold on people's fears.

    actually i did ... there is quite a bit of legalese in there that is open to exploitation but by in large it essentially says that we don't really know the long term health consequences of gmo foods ... part of that reason is because there is no mandatory labeling now ... so, when all of a sudden the number of kids who are allergic to peanuts skyrockets - we don't really know why because the gmo food has been systematically introduced into every day foods without consumer knowledge ...

    i already commented about imported foods ...

    what does the standards of organics have anything to do with this? ... it's not redundant unless one is to believe that ALL food that is not organic is in fact GMO ... if that is the case - perhaps there is redundancy ...

    and we don't know if food costs will change ... costs related to a change in labels is miniscule ... labels change all the time ... it's printing ...

    but you're right about the fear campaigning ... which is pretty much the NO campaign ...
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    DS1119 wrote:
    And you truly believe the local farmer has the money to adhere to these standards? This law gets passed say goodbye to farmer's markets.


    Oh please. Can you drop the silly "if you don't vote those this... say goodbye to your FREEDOM!!!!"

    If the last four years of saying "vote to protect the mega corporations or the world you know it will end and the angels will weep" and people giving you the finger has taught you nothing... I'll teach you this... that shit does't work. It just makes you look nuts.

    yeah ... for someone railing against a "fear" campaign ... it's completely asinine to make this leap ... especially considering many of the farmers who sell at markets support this proposition ...
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,492
    IS there a good source for how much $ this labeling is expected to cost? Not that everything should come down to money, just interested. I used my google machine but so far none of the articles I've read actually list the estimates.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    IS there a good source for how much $ this labeling is expected to cost? Not that everything should come down to money, just interested. I used my google machine but so far none of the articles I've read actually list the estimates.

    the only objective costing is related to taxpayers ... there is a study that the No campaign funded that said food costs would skyrocket for consumers ... but it's assumptions were all pretty bad ... such as every producer will then source organics instead of putting it on gmo on their labels ...
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    polaris_x wrote:
    IS there a good source for how much $ this labeling is expected to cost? Not that everything should come down to money, just interested. I used my google machine but so far none of the articles I've read actually list the estimates.

    the only objective costing is related to taxpayers ... there is a study that the No campaign funded that said food costs would skyrocket for consumers ... but it's assumptions were all pretty bad ... such as every producer will then source organics instead of putting it on gmo on their labels ...


    The only source I found said about $400 per year for consumers. I'll see if I can find the source again.

    No to Prop 37 funded a study that said $400 per year rise in costs:

    http://www.noprop37.com/facts/food-costs/

    Yes to Prop 37 funded their own study that said a one time increase of $1.27 for CA households.

    http://www.carighttoknow.org/facts

    Pretty huge discrepancy between the two estimates! As with everything, I am sure it is somewhere in the middle but how close to which end is anybody's guess.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    riotgrl wrote:
    The only source I found said about $400 per year for consumers. I'll see if I can find the source again.

    that's the No funded analysis by Northbridge that I mentioned ... the assumptions on that analysis are absurd ...
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    The only source I found said about $400 per year for consumers. I'll see if I can find the source again.

    that's the No funded analysis by Northbridge that I mentioned ... the assumptions on that analysis are absurd ...

    That analysis assumes that people will stop buying GMO foods which I doubt would actually happen for most people as evidenced by some of the comments made on this board. Seems like a scare tactic to me
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    riotgrl wrote:
    That analysis assumes that people will stop buying GMO foods which I doubt would actually happen for most people as evidenced by some of the comments made on this board. Seems like a scare tactic to me

    yeah and that producers would switch to organics instead of putting gmo on the label ... ridiculous ...
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    DS1119 wrote:

    And you truly believe the local farmer has the money to adhere to these standards? This law gets passed say goodbye to farmer's markets.
    That is an interesting point to consider.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    That analysis assumes that people will stop buying GMO foods which I doubt would actually happen for most people as evidenced by some of the comments made on this board. Seems like a scare tactic to me

    yeah and that producers would switch to organics instead of putting gmo on the label ... ridiculous ...

    that'l never happen, soon the GMO's will found to be "healthy" for us and backed by doctors all over the world
    and the GMO labeling will be no big deal...not to mention cheaper than growing organics.

    Godfather.
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    Godfather. wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    That analysis assumes that people will stop buying GMO foods which I doubt would actually happen for most people as evidenced by some of the comments made on this board. Seems like a scare tactic to me

    yeah and that producers would switch to organics instead of putting gmo on the label ... ridiculous ...

    that'l never happen, soon the GMO's will found to be "healthy" for us and backed by doctors all over the world
    and the GMO labeling will be no big deal...not to mention cheaper than growing organics.

    Godfather.

    GMOs are already cheaper than organics. However, we are already starting to see studies that begin to dismantle the notion that our standard American diet are wrong, wrong, wrong. Personally, I do not believe that GMO's will ever be proven to be healthy. As I stated before, a company that poisoned my dad, my brother and myself because of the use of Agent Orange during Vietnam cannot produce "healthy" food IMO.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • EnkiduEnkidu So Cal Posts: 2,996
    I haven't read the whole thread but hey - it's simple. I want to know what's in my food. For example, I never wanted my children to have milk with hormones or other weird crap in it. So I get to look at a label and decide. I'd like that option for everything I eat.

    I'll vote for Prop 37 and I know it's not perfect, but I don't think it will pass because of Monsanto, Dupont, Pepsico, Dow, Bayer, Kraft, Coca-Cola, etc. and all the money they spent in advertising against it. I think Monsanto is one of the creepiest companies that exist.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,749
    they talked about this on the 3rd party debate last night. Both candidates supported this. Even Gary Johnson.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    MayDay10 wrote:
    they talked about this on the 3rd party debate last night. Both candidates supported this. Even Gary Johnson.

    exactly ... should be a no brainer ... but once again - the public will let corporations tell them what to think and they will win again ... because people will believe their lies ...
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    polaris_x wrote:
    MayDay10 wrote:
    they talked about this on the 3rd party debate last night. Both candidates supported this. Even Gary Johnson.

    exactly ... should be a no brainer ... but once again - the public will let corporations tell them what to think and they will win again ... because people will believe their lies ...

    It's easier to believe the lies and have cheap, convenient food than to have to change the entire way you view and purchase food.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    remember how safe the ground zero site was on 9/12/01? remember Giuliani Partners and EPA head Whitman saying that the site was safe?

    http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/09/10 ... s-cancers/
  • riotgrl wrote:
    It's easier to believe the lies and have cheap, convenient food than to have to change the entire way you view and purchase food.

    I keep telling my wife we need to get rid of all the prepackaged bullshit we buy for the kids. fuck the microwave. stop reheating shit in there. do it on the stove. yeah, it takes a bit longer, but the stove doesn't alter the molecular structure of our food!

    it's so gross all the shit we put into our bodies.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    riotgrl wrote:
    It's easier to believe the lies and have cheap, convenient food than to have to change the entire way you view and purchase food.

    I keep telling my wife we need to get rid of all the prepackaged bullshit we buy for the kids. fuck the microwave. stop reheating shit in there. do it on the stove. yeah, it takes a bit longer, but the stove doesn't alter the molecular structure of our food!

    it's so gross all the shit we put into our bodies.


    It was really hard for my family but we did it. I do spend more time cooking but my husband and i have both lost weight without trying and feel so much better!
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,408
    riotgrl wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    It's easier to believe the lies and have cheap, convenient food than to have to change the entire way you view and purchase food.

    I keep telling my wife we need to get rid of all the prepackaged bullshit we buy for the kids. fuck the microwave. stop reheating shit in there. do it on the stove. yeah, it takes a bit longer, but the stove doesn't alter the molecular structure of our food!

    it's so gross all the shit we put into our bodies.


    It was really hard for my family but we did it. I do spend more time cooking but my husband and i have both lost weight without trying and feel so much better!

    I stopped cooking in a microwave as well. The only thing I use it for is occasionally heating a rice bag to sooth sore muscles once I've iced a few times.
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    Corporations win!

    Hey, I can't let you hippies feel too good about today ... ;)

    :twisted:
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,408
    Jason P wrote:
    Corporations win!

    Hey, I can't let you hippies feel too good about today ... ;)

    :twisted:
    Oh Yeah? Eat granola, buddy. :lol:
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Jason P wrote:
    Corporations win!

    Hey, I can't let you hippies feel too good about today ... ;)

    :twisted:

    th?id=H.4936971176970030&pid=15.1
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    :D
  • riotgrlriotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    In the spirit of moving forward and reuniting our divided country, I present you with a video poking fun at myself and my fellow hippies :D

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmwSdIc_Btw&feature=fvwrel
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
Sign In or Register to comment.