Why dumb people should not vote - Washington votes no to GMO labeling

[poofyhairguy]

"Costs 10 cents less" "OMG MIGHT KILL YOU OR TURN YOU INTO A MUTANT FISH!!!!!"

You tell me what is more marketable.

"KILLER OF THE AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS!!!" "We are always rolling back prices"

I don't have to ask which one is more marketable, as Wal-Mart is the biggest company in America. The most sensational message doesn't always win out. The best crafted message does.

The people that want GMO stuck on everything clearly want you to believe that GMOs are bad despite all evidence contrary.

And the honest truth is even if they were labeled many people wouldn't care or ignore the label either way. Heck when I first heard of GMOs I though it sounded cool, some sort of "Superfood."

But if it is labeled at least the consumer has a choice to avoid it or not.

Except that preventing the adoption of GMO is bad for society which ultimately is bad for the consumer and government.

Tons of personal choices are bad for the society, consumer and government. Smoking, fatty foods, alcohol, motorcycles, etc. In America we just don't go for optimal because that is what our glorious leaders say we should do. This isn't China.

The American spirit is consumerism and enabling me to make my choices, even bad ones. I think a lot more than GMOs should be labeled personally to give the consumer as much information (to possibly ignore) as possible.

The whole purpose of the label is to imply that GMO foods are bad. Why should individual consumers be forced to figure out that it is complete subterfuge and there is no issue with them? Why should the government be complicit in this subterfuge.

Individual consumers will be forced to do nothing. The vast majority that only care about price will buy the GMO food and never notice the label, while those who are ALREADY OPINIONATED ABOUT IT might choose to avoid GMO food based on the label. Nothing wrong with empowering that choice.

When they forced nutritional information be put on foods it wasn't to "imply fatty foods are bad." It was to allow the consumer to be as informed as possible and to force the transparency required for efficient markets. Same thing here.

GMO is only a brand liability for as long as it is cheaper to pay some lobbyists to hide the brand rather than fix the brand. THAT is why I am sad this didn't go through, as forcing these companies to that tipping point is good for the American consumer. If GMOs are really a good thing time to repair that brand now, not tomorrow.

 

[BUnit1701]

Easy enough - assume it is all GMO unless you see the sticker that says non-GMO. Of course, pay twice the price for the same product.

Humans are living to be into their 80s routinely. Cavemen lived to be 25. GMO is saving millions from starving to death. Eat your food and shut the fuck up.

I love how people are on the anti-GMO bandwagon...but they will still eat all the chemicals and preservatives and hormones and other shit that is out there. But no, not GMO. Certainly not something that scientists have been doing for years and years and have down to a <gasp> SCIENCE!

LMAO but those preservatives and chemicals, those aren't science...

 

[Texashiker]

The whole purpose of the label is to imply that GMO foods are bad.

The label on a frozen pizza box implies it is bad?

The label on corn dogs implies they are bad?

Have you ever read the labels before you buy something? My wife and I do. We try not buy anything with hydrogenated oils and words we can not pronounce in it.

My wife has high blood pressure so we read the sodium content. I remember when companies fought against labeling sodium on their labels.

Somehow listing hydrogenated oils on butter implies it is bad?

It is not about good or bad, it is about giving the consumer a choice.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Is thread is not about pro-gmo or anti-gmo.

This is about the consumer having a choice.

There is no real difference in a shoe made in mexico and one made in china. So why should it matter?

As a consumer in a free market I have to right to say where my money goes. With no choice I have no say, and thus the free market is undermined.

Why do we put a higher standard on shoes than we do on food? Why do we get to pick what shoes we want to buy, but not our food?

You care to explain how you don't have a choice? You can go to the farmers market as you stated in an earlier post I quoted. Then you get non-GMO local food. Hence, choice of where your money goes in a free market.

 

[hal2kilo]

Somehow Jews manage to determine what foods are kosker without government mandated labels. And Muslims to determine which foods are halal without mandated labels. So why are anti-GMO nutters so stupid they can't do the same thing without Uncle Sam putting a big "here you go dumbass - no GMOs" sticker on everything in the supermarket?

Must be that the actual education in logical inquiry and scientific method those groups receive, as opposed to people like Texas Hiker.

Kosher symbols are on all kinds of products. Especially processed food. I guess you never noticed. Anti-semetics call it a secret tax.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

"KILLER OF THE AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS!!!" "We are always rolling back prices"

I don't have to ask which one is more marketable, as Wal-Mart is the biggest company in America. The most sensational message doesn't always win out. The best crafted message does.



And the honest truth is even if they were labeled many people wouldn't care or ignore the label either way. Heck when I first heard of GMOs I though it sounded cool, some sort of "Superfood."

But if it is labeled at least the consumer has a choice to avoid it or not.



Tons of personal choices are bad for the society, consumer and government. Smoking, fatty foods, alcohol, motorcycles, etc. In America we just don't go for optimal because that is what our glorious leaders say we should do. This isn't China.

The American spirit is consumerism and enabling me to make my choices, even bad ones. I think a lot more than GMOs should be labeled personally to give the consumer as much information (to possibly ignore) as possible.



Individual consumers will be forced to do nothing. The vast majority that only care about price will buy the GMO food and never notice the label, while those who are ALREADY OPINIONATED ABOUT IT might choose to avoid GMO food based on the label. Nothing wrong with empowering that choice.

When they forced nutritional information be put on foods it wasn't to "imply fatty foods are bad." It was to allow the consumer to be as informed as possible and to force the transparency required for efficient markets. Same thing here.

GMO is only a brand liability for as long as it is cheaper to pay some lobbyists to hide the brand rather than fix the brand. THAT is why I am sad this didn't go through, as forcing these companies to that tipping point is good for the American consumer. If GMOs are really a good thing time to repair that brand now, not tomorrow.

Looks like there are plenty of labels already out there that prominently display they are "non-GMO." So assume if it doesn't have that label then it's a GMO and don't buy it. Go find products that proudly display their belief in non-GMO farming practices. There are plenty out there, here are some labels you'll find for it:
https://www.google.com/search?q=non...3fsATe4YC4DQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1008&bih=601

 

[Texashiker]

You care to explain how you don't have a choice? You can go to the farmers market as you stated in an earlier post I quoted. Then you get non-GMO local food. Hence, choice of where your money goes in a free market.

Do you remember when food companies were fighting against salt and fat content being put on labels?

And now everyone thinks it is great.

 

[glenn1]

Have you ever read the labels before you buy something? My wife and I do. We try not buy anything with hydrogenated oils and words we can not pronounce in it.

Then welcome to the tiny minority who are obsessive about that kind of thing. The overwhelming vast majority of us don't worry about it as much because the risks of GMOs are effectively scientifically neglible and not worth any time spent thinking about it. Most everyone else is too busy trying to stop their toddler from shoving Cheerios up their nose to worry if that cheerio has "GMO corn" or hydrogenated oils.

And believe it or not, most everyone else doesn't see Monsanto engaged in a world ending conspiracy or that "Frankenfoods" are going to kill us all. Just because you're super paranoid about something doesn't mean the rest of us are "dumb voters" because we don't give in to completely redundant mandated stickers on everything to calm your terror.

 

[glenn1]

Kosher symbols are on all kinds of products. Especially processed food. I guess you never noticed. Anti-semetics call it a secret tax.

Wow, how could that be without any mandatory labelling like what the OP is talking about? Obviously it's impossible for kosher symbols to exist on food packaging without a government mandate. This is obviously a hoax from Monsanto and other evil food companies:

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Do you remember when food companies were fighting against salt and fat content being put on labels?

And now everyone thinks it is great.

GMO != nutritional content (which is what salt/fat content are). They are two different things.

Then welcome to the tiny minority who are obsessive about that kind of thing. The overwhelming vast majority of us don't worry about it as much because the risks of GMOs are effectively scientifically neglible and not worth any time spent thinking about it. Most everyone else is too busy trying to stop their toddler from shoving Cheerios up their nose to worry if that cheerio has "GMO corn" or hydrogenated oils.

And believe it or not, most everyone else doesn't see Monsanto engaged in a world ending conspiracy or that "Frankenfoods" are going to kill us all. Just because you're super paranoid about something doesn't mean the rest of us are "dumb voters" because we don't give in to completely redundant mandated stickers on everything to calm your terror.

It's one thing to read labels for nutritional content. I look for foods that have the least amount of added shit in them as possible, but I don't care if it's GMO or not. Technically speaking, all food is GMO that humans have farmed.

 

[Texashiker]

Then welcome to the tiny minority who are obsessive about that kind of thing. The overwhelming vast majority of us don't worry about it as much because the risks of GMOs are effectively scientifically neglible and not worth any time spent thinking about it. Most everyone else is too busy trying to stop their toddler from shoving Cheerios up their nose to worry if that cheerio has "GMO corn" or hydrogenated oils.

My wife and I are past the toddle phases of our life.

What are you, in your 20s, maybe your 30s? Dont worry, you will reach a point in your life where you will read the labels.

My wife has an allergy to MSG. It is a slight allergy where she does not feel good after eating foods with MSG in it.

So lets see, we look for hydrogenated oils, sodium content, MSG and words that are like a mile long.

Its all part of being an informed consumer in a free market.

 

[Paul98]

If you think anti-gmo is a selling point those who are selling the product could just label their products.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

My wife and I are past the toddle phases of our life.

What are you, in your 20s, maybe your 30s? Dont worry, you will reach a point in your life where you will read the labels.

My wife has an allergy to MSG. It is a slight allergy where she does not feel good after eating foods with MSG in it.

So lets see, we look for hydrogenated oils, sodium content, MSG and words that are like a mile long.

Its all part of being an informed consumer in a free market.

Ok, be informed. Buy products with labels that say "non-gmo"

If you think anti-gmo is a selling point those who are selling the product could just label their products.

They do (see below). But apparently people like TexasHiker don't know/care that this is already done and want to force companies to say they are GMO instead of letting the free market companies decide if they want to use GMO products or not. And if they don't then label it that way and cater to the market that is against GMO's.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Looks like there are plenty of labels already out there that prominently display they are "non-GMO." So assume if it doesn't have that label then it's a GMO and don't buy it.

Yes that is a solution. If GMOs are really bad things that is the best solution, as in the long-term that would create market pressure to force them out of the market or at least a segment of the market (like organic branding has done).

But if GMOs are not bad like EVERYONE in this thread who is against labeling has said, and they are a net benefit to society, then the best solution is fixing the brand so that 100 years from now we still aren't fighting the same battle about GMO food. If they aren't bad then transparency should be a good thing, like a murder suspect that is innocent and gets his day in court.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. People see these companies push hard to prevent this labeling and wonder why. I might think it is because they are being irresponsible with the GMO brand, but to someone else that is proof GMOs are bad. Which then feeds the negative connotation even more.

It is either a problem or its not. The labeling of it doesn't matter either way. The labeling just enables choice.

 

[Paul98]

GMO could obviously make things better or worse for you. Just being GMO has nothing to do with if it's better or worse.

 

[Texashiker]

If they aren't bad then transparency should be a good thing, like a murder suspect that is innocent and gets his day in court.

Transparency is the best option. But for some reason companies fight labeling.

If we wanted to look at this in a historical aspect, just about all companies have fought labeling.

I remember when companies fought tooth and name to stop fat and sodium from being listed.

In the movie Tucker, about the Tucker cars. Car manufactures laughed at having seat belts and power brakes in cars.

Big business has a long history of resisting change. This gmo labeling is no different.

 

[glenn1]

My wife and I are past the toddle phases of our life.

What are you, in your 20s, maybe your 30s? Dont worry, you will reach a point in your life where you will read the labels.

My wife has an allergy to MSG. It is a slight allergy where she does not feel good after eating foods with MSG in it.

So lets see, we look for hydrogenated oils, sodium content, MSG and words that are like a mile long.

Its all part of being an informed consumer in a free market.

I'm in my mid 40s and do have a toddler at home, as if that matters. And again, your food preferences aren't really my concern. Using laws to mandate non-scientifically relevant characteristics of food be put on labels is stupid and about as anti-science and anti-health as you can get. You might as well require astrology warning labels to be put on food.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Transparency is the best option. But for some reason companies fight labeling.

If we wanted to look at this in a historical aspect, just about all companies have fought labeling.

I remember when companies fought tooth and name to stop fat and sodium from being listed.

In the movie Tucker, about the Tucker cars. Car manufactures laughed at having seat belts and power brakes in cars.

Big business has a long history of resisting change. This gmo labeling is no different.

From a purely logistical standpoint, every time you introduce a new labeling designation, you introduce an additional layer of bureaucracy. Choice is all well and good, but how much is it actually worth to you? Because you don't just get to say, "slap a label on it," rub your hands and be done with it. Now you have to finance the bureaucracy that's going to be in charge of designing the labels, determining which items require labels, rolling out the labels and policing the labels to make sure companies are in compliance. And companies will have to start sourcing their ingredients, since plenty of them will come from out of state where labeling isn't required, never mind that most products sold in supermarkets aren't produced locally to begin with. That's additional cost as well, and that's all going to be shuffled along to consumers.

So, how much is it worth to you to know your food is GMO? You've already said several times in this thread that you don't actually care, you just want the consumers to have a choice. How much is that choice worth to you personally? It wasn't worth it to the citizens of Washington. But that's because they're dumb, right?

 

[poofyhairguy]

Transparency is the best option.

Always is with food.

Honestly a much bigger food issue for me is what companies can sneak in under the guise of "natural ingredients." The FDA should not be allowed to give companies that loophole. So I am for a lot of labeling reform.

I think if you have packaging, you have a responsibility to label exactly what you are selling. That is one of the few things the government should do in a free market environment is force transparency and enable consumer choice. Even if most consumers ignore the information, it needs to be there. If it adds a layer of bureaucracy that is the cost of doing business.

 

[Texashiker]

I'm in my mid 40s and do have a toddler at home, as if that matters. And again, your food preferences aren't really my concern. Using laws to mandate non-scientifically relevant characteristics of food be put on labels is stupid and about as anti-science and anti-health as you can get. You might as well require astrology warning labels to be put on food.

If you do not care where your food comes from fine.

But do not deny me the right to know where mine comes from.

So, how much is it worth to you to know your food is GMO?

How much is it worth to know your eggs came from cage free chickens?

To you it may not matter. But to some people it does.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

How much is it worth to know your eggs came from cage free chickens?

To you it may not matter. But to some people it does.

A few weeks ago, I literally would not have paid a penny more to know that information. Since then, I've started getting cage-free eggs through a work connection, and my wife insists that they are better and we're not to get anything else ever again. But that's more about the quality of the product. If I found out that these cage free eggs were coming from genetically modified chickens, does that some how invalidate their value as eggs?

And, as you said, it might not matter to me. It might matter to some. But there are already products that self-label for those who care to look for them. Requiring it for all products for a process that is not shown to be harmful in any way... I don't want to pay more to implement that. I don't need to; if I want non-GMO stuff, I can find it now without driving up the cost of everything else.

 

[glenn1]

If you do not care where your food comes from fine.

But do not deny me the right to know where mine comes from.




How much is it worth to know your eggs came from cage free chickens?

To you it may not matter. But to some people it does.

Then pay the extra money to a company who labels them that way voluntarily. Asking for GMO labelling is looking for a shortcut so you don't have to know where your food comes from. If the placebo effect of a sticker on a box is enough for you rather than your own due diligence to determine the source of foods, then you're not an educated consumer by definition in any event.

 

[Zargon]

If you do not care where your food comes from fine.

But do not deny me the right to know where mine comes from.




How much is it worth to know your eggs came from cage free chickens?

To you it may not matter. But to some people it does.

no one is denying your right to know, you are asking to not have to do any research to know for sure

 

[Texashiker]

no one is denying your right to know

The people of washington are proof that democracy is nothing more than mob rules.

Democracy, a form of government where the many take away the rights of the few.

A few weeks ago, I literally would not have paid a penny more to know that information. Since then, I've started getting cage-free eggs through a work connection, and my wife insists that they are better and we're not to get anything else ever again.

There is the taste, but to me it is also a moral issue.

As a consumer, we have a basic right to know where our food came from.

 

[hal2kilo]

Except now the food you were eating has this big fear-mongering label on it...

I mean that is the whole point right? To scare people into complaining about GMO foods so they are none away with.

The only way people won't be scared is if they investigate the science themselves and realize it is nothing more than fear-mongering.

Labeling food sucks. That's why all of the non-organic produce sits and rots on the shelf.

People make there own informed choices and the produce markets haven't collapsed.

"You can't handle the truth"