Stewart Parnell - just get those peanuts packaged!!!!!!!!!!!

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Considering it was a State of Georgia Dept of Agriculture doing the testing, it'd be more likely that Commissioner Tommy Irvin had his palm greased, and made sure the tester "misplaced" the bad results. That guy is as corrupt as it comes.

You're ignoring some of the basic facts of the case.

The problems with the Georgia plant WERE reported by inspectors on numerous occasions in the case of the Georgia Department of Agriculture, but this issue is they didn't have the information about positive salmonella tests for the peanut butter to go along with this. They probably should have been stronger on enforcement in the first place, but a key problem was lacking a substancial part of the information which was the testing conducted by the private company.

You appear to be confused on this point, but IT WAS NOT THE STATE OF GEORGIA BUT DEFINITELY A PRIVATE COMPANY which tested the actual peanut butter for the salmonella contamination.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Aegeon

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Considering it was a State of Georgia Dept of Agriculture doing the testing, it'd be more likely that Commissioner Tommy Irvin had his palm greased, and made sure the tester "misplaced" the bad results. That guy is as corrupt as it comes.

You're ignoring some of the basic facts of the case.

The problems with the Georgia plant WERE reported by inspectors on numerous occasions in the case of the Georgia Department of Agriculture, but this issue is they didn't have the information about positive salmonella tests for the peanut butter to go along with this. They probably should have been stronger on enforcement in the first place, but a key problem was lacking a substancial part of the information which was the testing conducted by the private company.

You appear to be confused on this point, but IT WAS NOT THE STATE OF GEORGIA BUT DEFINITELY A PRIVATE COMPANY which tested the actual peanut butter for the salmonella contamination.

However, THE STATE OF GEORGIA DIDN'T EVEN ASK IF THERE were tests taken.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
See my post above. Is the outside testing service above profit motive? They have margins too.

In case you don't get this, right now there are bascially no legal consequences whatsoever for the testing company to report the results to the company and leave things at just that. (The only exception might be if the testing company definitely knows no product has been recalled, but this is fairly unlikely to happen since the producer company is likely to keep this information to itself.) You can change the law so that if its clear the results of positive tests are deliberately not reported to the FDA as well by the testing company, that those involved with failing to do so can be looking at serious jail time even if no-one is known to have gotten sick or killed as a result. There are plenty of unethical people out there who will comply with the law because they don't want to being stuck in prison.

Right now the threat of puntative measures to a great degree doesn't even exist. I noted we can't 100% guarantee no chance of contamination happening, but we can greatly reduce the odds by cracking down on the sort of practices which occured in this case.

 

[dahunan]

Better whistleblower protection is what is needed...

Not like this guy ran a slave farm... Any employee who knew about this when it happened is also liable.

If I knew about it I would have called authorites immediately

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
However, THE STATE OF GEORGIA DIDN'T EVEN ASK IF THERE were tests taken.

That actually appears to be clear evidence of insufficent regulations and testing procedures rather than anything like low level corruption if correct.

It does bring up whether the FDA should be running these things, or at least if data should be better distributed in the first place. The FDA should at a minimum be collecting this information and then making sure the state agencies are aware of the testing results so they can consider that information when conducting their inspections or deciding whether to do so at that time.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Considering the state already hadn't shut them down for numerous repeated violations, why should they stop now?

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Considering the state already hadn't shut them down for numerous repeated violations, why should they stop now?

Uh, in this case the FDA has shut them down basically, and key executives are realitically going to jail and its not productive to make things worse by trying anything else.

In general, the State of Georgia probably should have had tougher enforcement in the first place, but they lacked the key internal testing data as I noted previously, which certainly could have made a difference.

This may mean the FDA needs to the much of the testing and enforcement rather than relying upon state agencies.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

I wanted to jump through my TV and beat the fucker senseless when he was sitting there pleading the 5th.

 

[BansheeX]

I equally find that the most difficult thing for people to understand is that cheaper cars are not always better for the system as a whole. Sure more people can afford it. But an unsafe car carries hidden costs in the form of accident clean ups, indirect productivity losses (when hundreds of motorists are stuck on the road), health care costs, and welfare costs (if the victim is paralyzed and the state or his family has to care for him). These costs are not being passed to the company that made the car, they are being passed to the taxpayer, the society as a whole. This guarantees that if a company can get away with doing something that potentially harms the society, but brings them profit, they will do it. Make the profit and pass the costs to the public. That is what happened with Pacific Gas and Electric Company, that is what happened with Ford Pinto, and that is exactly what happened in this case too.

The Pinto case is similar to this case. Ford tried to gauge whether it would cost more to fix the design flaw or pay off lawsuits resulting from it. Their cost-benefit analysis incorrectly came out in favor of paying lawsuits. It ended up being far more costly, not just from the lawsuits, but from lost sales due to negative publicity surrounding them. It was a poor capitalist decision, but socialists always cite it as an example of what a capitalist is incentivized to do. But it's not, because a capitalist is never purposely trying to lose money. That doesn't mean they always make the right decision, there's nothing to government can do to change the fact that humans make mistakes.

What really burns socialists is that there are actually times where quality of life to many can be preferable to saving the lives of a few. Capitalism in general finds that balance best. Consumers want to decide if a risk is worth taking for themselves, and we should allow that. If a company conceals those risks from the consumer, we should make sure they can hurt that company to dissuade it.

Now, if there was a perfect system where wrongdoers would always get caught nothing of this would have happened and we could have a system that would regulate itself with minimal government oversight. There is no such system, however, and in cases like this it just might be better to have an ounce of prevention in order to mitigate much worse problems later on.

I support a limited FDA, unlike a lot of libertarians. I think food and medicine is so complex that there needs to be some kind of specific governance. When I read about farmers grinding up sick animals and feeding them to herbivorous cows causing mutated prions to develop in their spinal tissue, consumers eating it and having no symptoms for 20 years, yes I think there needs to some laws about how producers are producing and labelling their products. Allergy information is vital to a lot of people, we should mandate ingredients labels for their sake. We should define what "natural" and "organic" is. However, I also know the FDA begets collusive activity. They get bribed to look the other way on growth hormones when other countries ban them, they allow nitrates in meat, they allow water fluoridation, they ban things like Stevia to protect artificial sweetener interests. Ultimately, it's consumers educating themselves and making a market of their knowledge that gets us better products.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Sadly, China has seen exactly the same thing, over overt cheating being done at the plant manger level. But the Chinese government does not take the problem lightly, when they find a Stewart Parnell type, they simply kill the miscreant dead, dead, dead.

I certainly hope that our Steward Parnell does serve a long jail sentence, as for Peanut Corp of America, I suspect they will go into bankruptcy very soon.

I was reading about the tainted milk thing, i think they sentenced the CEO to death but i read it usually ends up being a lighter sentence (life in prison)

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Proof unbound capitalism doesn't work. Personal gain trumps concern for other people.

:roll:

This is a criminal act, and has no bearing on any system of economics.

Or are you going to claim capitalism causes rape too?

um, what? Do you think he shipped it for the lulz? Nope this is a pretty clear case of the profit motive at work.

Are government agents immune to profit motive? What's to stop this guy from bribing the government tester to mark everything as clean?

Haven't you heard? The FDA is incorruptible.

I'm so shocked that a government agency became corrupted under bush, tell us more!

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Seems to me the key word is "unbound" -- it's unbound capitalism that is the problem. The people who constantly whine about government regulations holding them back ignore the fact that it is usually abuses like this that triggered the regulations in the first place. Capitalism is a great system, but the human greed that drives it is also its Achilles heel. Checks and balances, including government regulation, are essential to keeping a capitalistic system healthy and successful over the long term. This story is an example of the inevitable result of lax checks and balances.

So what kind of regulations or monitoring would you suggest that would prevent this from happening again?

I don't know enough about this industry and the controls already in place to offer a well-informed answer. Based on what we've heard (and as others have pointed out), it appears in this case that there was inadequate follow through on the testing. For example, perhaps it should be mandatory that adverse test results be reported to the FDA, triggering an immediate investigation before the manufacturer is allowed to ship any product. This requires the FDA (or whoever would do the investigation) have adequate resources to respond promptly, and that there be checks and balances within the both the testing organization and the investigating agency to avoid corruption.

It also sounds like the plant wasn't following safe handling and processing practices. I understand the State of Georgia found problems repeatedly. Why did it stop there? If PCA was breaking existing laws/regulations, why wasn't this corrected? Was it a lack of enforcement power, lack of response by those with enforcement power, or something else? If they were in legal compliance, it sounds like better regulation is needed. It may also simply be an example of lax enforcement, a rather common criticism of the Bush administration.

 

[ModerateRepZero]

to me it's yet another example of how much freedom and how little control the FDA has over companies. the FDA can issue a warning but CANNOT issue a recall? :boggle;

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Is anyone even remotely distrubed as I am?
-snip-

Yeah, I am.

Peanut butter is for kids, making this behavior particulary outragious.

Fern

 

[BansheeX]

Company bankrupt, announced today. What an imbecile, probably going to jail as well.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: BansheeX
Company bankrupt, announced today. What an imbecile, probably going to jail as well.

Why is this guy not yet charged with a crime?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Seems to me the key word is "unbound" -- it's unbound capitalism that is the problem. The people who constantly whine about government regulations holding them back ignore the fact that it is usually abuses like this that triggered the regulations in the first place. Capitalism is a great system, but the human greed that drives it is also its Achilles heel. Checks and balances, including government regulation, are essential to keeping a capitalistic system healthy and successful over the long term. This story is an example of the inevitable result of lax checks and balances.

So what kind of regulations or monitoring would you suggest that would prevent this from happening again?

I don't know enough about this industry and the controls already in place to offer a well-informed answer. Based on what we've heard (and as others have pointed out), it appears in this case that there was inadequate follow through on the testing. For example, perhaps it should be mandatory that adverse test results be reported to the FDA, triggering an immediate investigation before the manufacturer is allowed to ship any product. This requires the FDA (or whoever would do the investigation) have adequate resources to respond promptly, and that there be checks and balances within the both the testing organization and the investigating agency to avoid corruption.

It also sounds like the plant wasn't following safe handling and processing practices. I understand the State of Georgia found problems repeatedly. Why did it stop there? If PCA was breaking existing laws/regulations, why wasn't this corrected? Was it a lack of enforcement power, lack of response by those with enforcement power, or something else? If they were in legal compliance, it sounds like better regulation is needed. It may also simply be an example of lax enforcement, a rather common criticism of the Bush administration.

lol it was only a matter of time someone blamed this on Bush.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Seems to me the key word is "unbound" -- it's unbound capitalism that is the problem. The people who constantly whine about government regulations holding them back ignore the fact that it is usually abuses like this that triggered the regulations in the first place. Capitalism is a great system, but the human greed that drives it is also its Achilles heel. Checks and balances, including government regulation, are essential to keeping a capitalistic system healthy and successful over the long term. This story is an example of the inevitable result of lax checks and balances.

So what kind of regulations or monitoring would you suggest that would prevent this from happening again?

I don't know enough about this industry and the controls already in place to offer a well-informed answer. Based on what we've heard (and as others have pointed out), it appears in this case that there was inadequate follow through on the testing. For example, perhaps it should be mandatory that adverse test results be reported to the FDA, triggering an immediate investigation before the manufacturer is allowed to ship any product. This requires the FDA (or whoever would do the investigation) have adequate resources to respond promptly, and that there be checks and balances within the both the testing organization and the investigating agency to avoid corruption.

It also sounds like the plant wasn't following safe handling and processing practices. I understand the State of Georgia found problems repeatedly. Why did it stop there? If PCA was breaking existing laws/regulations, why wasn't this corrected? Was it a lack of enforcement power, lack of response by those with enforcement power, or something else? If they were in legal compliance, it sounds like better regulation is needed. It may also simply be an example of lax enforcement, a rather common criticism of the Bush administration.

lol it was only a matter of time someone blamed this on Bush.

Why not blame it on Carter? Jimmy was the peanut man. :roll:

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Proof unbound capitalism doesn't work. Personal gain trumps concern for other people.

:roll:

This is a criminal act, and has no bearing on any system of economics.

Or are you going to claim capitalism causes rape too?

You don't think that culture influences rape statistics?

"Directly causes X" is different than "creates an environment where X can flourish". But both are related to X, wouldn't you say?

Unbound anything is bad news. All "pure" ideologies are fundamentally broken and unsustainable.

Originally posted by: dbk
At one point, Parnell said his workers "desperately at least need to turn the raw peanuts on our floor into money." In another exchange, he told his plant manager to "turn them loose" after products once deemed contaminated were cleared in a second test.

Parnell?s response to a final lab test showing salmonella was about how much it would cost, and the impact lab testing was having on moving his products.

Yeah, he's callous, and more concerned with the bottom line than the potential risk. But the products that he ordered shipped DID pass a test. Frankly, I bet that pretty much any other CEO would have made the same call if they didn't think that it would cost them more in lawsuits than they would lose in recalls.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: BansheeX
Company bankrupt, announced today. What an imbecile, probably going to jail as well.

Why is this guy not yet charged with a crime?

Oh he will be.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: BansheeX
However, I also know the FDA begets collusive activity. They get bribed to look the other way on growth hormones when other countries ban them, they allow nitrates in meat, they allow water fluoridation, they ban things like Stevia to protect artificial sweetener interests. Ultimately, it's consumers educating themselves and making a market of their knowledge that gets us better products.

SRSLY?

You think that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous commie plot we have ever had to face?

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: BansheeX
However, I also know the FDA begets collusive activity. They get bribed to look the other way on growth hormones when other countries ban them, they allow nitrates in meat, they allow water fluoridation, they ban things like Stevia to protect artificial sweetener interests. Ultimately, it's consumers educating themselves and making a market of their knowledge that gets us better products.

SRSLY?

You think that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous commie plot we have ever had to face?

It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.