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

[Londo_Jowo]

Even if Washington voters decided to require GMO labeling the OP's home state doesn't require GMO labeling.

 

[nehalem256]

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"

Non-organic food does not require labeling as non-organic. People who want special organic produce instead buy special labelled "organic" produce.

Coincidentally "organic" food is also GMO-free. Seems like labeling is already taking place.

Why do you want special new labeling requirements for GMO food?

 

[brycejones]

Even if Washington voters decided to require GMO labeling the OP's home state doesn't require GMO labeling.

OP would have to move to eastern Washington. I'm pretty sure his head would explode in the western part of the state.

 

[Texashiker]

OP would have to move to eastern Washington. I'm pretty sure his head would explode in the western part of the state.

I have been to Liberty Lake a few times, it's a nice area. On one trip to Liberty Lake I hiked Liberty Lake park, its something like 7 miles to make the loop.

My mother-in-law lived there until she passed away, and my father-in-law still lives there.

Coeur d'alene looked like a nice area. My wife and I borrowed the car from her parents and drove over there for a few hours.

That Spokane River is just beautiful.

Picture from my trip,

 

[Zaap]

Instead of bitching about the voters why don't you complain about what apparently changed the dynamics of the race? Unlimited money spent by issue groups who most likely received most of their money from corporations with a stake in the outcome.

It would be interesting to see some of the advertising that was run.....

I understand your point (and agree with it somewhat) but doesn't there come a point where voters are responsible for what they vote for more than whoever dumps money into an ad campaign?

So let's say someone hires a slick ad agency and dump tons and tons of money into the campaign: "Toxic Shit is Good For You! Let's dump tons of it all over the streets!" And they get the Toxic Shit lobby going full swing, hiring celebrity spokesmen to pitch the wonders of toxic shit, ads saying "Vote YES on Shit!" running 24/7, far outspending the "What, are you fucking crazy? Vote NO on shit!" crowd...

...isn't it still on the voters to not be fucking stupid enough to collectively pull a lever voting for toxic shit strewn all over their streets? Regardless if they were bombarded with slick ads spewing the virtues of toxic-shit strewn streets 24/7 or not?

At what point is it up to people to stop being dumbasses swayed only by who gives them the most relentless song-and-dance ad campaign, and actually grow brainstems and vote for or against things based on their actual best interests?

 

[poofyhairguy]

I understand your point (and agree with it somewhat) but doesn't there come a point where voters are responsible for what they vote for more than whoever dumps money into an ad campaign?

So let's say someone hires a slick ad agency and dump tons and tons of money into the campaign: "Toxic Shit is Good For You! Let's dump tons of it all over the streets!" And they get the Toxic Shit lobby going full swing, hiring celebrity spokesmen to pitch the wonders of toxic shit, ads saying "Vote YES on Shit!" running 24/7, far outspending the "What, are you fucking crazy? Vote NO on shit!" crowd...

...isn't it still on the voters to not be fucking stupid enough to collectively pull a lever voting for toxic shit strewn all over their streets? Regardless if they were bombarded with slick ads spewing the virtues of toxic-shit strewn streets 24/7 or not?

At what point is it up to people to stop being dumbasses swayed only by who gives them the most relentless song-and-dance ad campaign, and actually grow brainstems and vote for or against things based on their actual best interests?

The Muslim Brotherhood agrees with and supports your statement. Oh, and so does every big business in America.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

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.

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.

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.

As I've said a few times (yet you seem to be ignoring because you either realize it's correct or are purposely trolling), buy from local farmers who choose "organic" (whatever the hell that means to the farmer) methods. Or go to the store and buy stuff with the labels that say "non-GMO" on them (I even did the googling of the labels for you). Get a fucking brain and quit bitching about something that a ruling that didn't go your way because you're not willing to put in any effort to find the fucking products you claim you want. I've provided solutions/answers for this made up problem you have conjured up, but you don't want to listen to them.

Here, I'll put it another way. If it's a massive company making the product, it doesn't have a "non-GMO" label on it, and you buy it at Wal-Mart... assume it has GMO in it. If it's a small company/local grower/producer, has a "non-GMO" label on it, and you buy it at health food type stores like Whole Foods... then it's a non-GMO and worthy of your money. There is the choice you claim you want so bad. It already exists.

 

[poofyhairguy]

As I've said a few times (yet you seem to be ignoring because you either realize it's correct or are purposely trolling), buy from local farmers who choose "organic" (whatever the hell that means to the farmer) methods. Or go to the store and buy stuff with the labels that say "non-GMO" on them (I even did the googling of the labels for you). Get a fucking brain and quit bitching about something that a ruling that didn't go your way because you're not willing to put in any effort to find the fucking products you claim you want. I've provided solutions/answers for this made up problem you have conjured up, but you don't want to listen to them.

Here, I'll put it another way. If it's a massive company making the product, it doesn't have a "non-GMO" label on it, and you buy it at Wal-Mart... assume it has GMO in it. If it's a small company/local grower/producer, has a "non-GMO" label on it, and you buy it at health food type stores like Whole Foods... then it's a non-GMO and worthy of your money. There is the choice you claim you want so bad. It already exists.

This is what we actually do at a personal level. Grow our own food, or farmers market, or from store I trust.

It sucks when we travel and we are somewhere that doesn't have a Whole Foods. But that is life sometimes.

 

[Texashiker]

As I've said a few times (yet you seem to be ignoring because you either realize it's correct or are purposely trolling), buy from local farmers who choose "organic" (whatever the hell that means to the farmer) methods. Or go to the store and buy stuff with the labels that say "non-GMO" on them (I even did the googling of the labels for you).

In other words, in your opinion, food should be held to a different standard than everything else on the free market?

I can be a conscientious objector to everything I buy, just not GMO foods?

 

[CountZero]

Currently ingredients are listed on all foods. No mention of where they come from. Why? Because it doesn't change anything. There is nothing significant about where those ingredients come from with respect to the nutritional value or health concerns for that food.

FYI:
Country of origin labeling requirements do exist. They've been around for seafood for quiet a while now (at least when I worked at a grocery store back in 2005/2006) and my understanding was they were expanding to cover other products (maybe just meat but I don't recall).

 

[actuarial]

In other words, in your opinion, food should be held to a different standard than everything else on the free market?

I can be a conscientious objector to everything I buy, just not GMO foods?

In other words, in your opinion, the name of all farmers should be put on every product, since I was once spit on by a man named David and I should be allowed to avoid Davidi corn.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

In other words, in your opinion, food should be held to a different standard than everything else on the free market?

I can be a conscientious objector to everything I buy, just not GMO foods?

Well, in some ways yes. Food is not the same as a shoe. Or a car. Food is required to live, others are commodities. So they aren't the same. Now, I get what you're trying to get at and things aren't as different as you claim. You want things to be labeled GMO. Then why isn't there a requirement for conflict free diamonds? I should be able to choose how my money is spent in a free market after all. Right? So how about we slap a label on all diamonds requiring their sourcing to be known instead of the optional labeling that is currently done. Or what about clothing? I want to know if my clothes were made using sweat shops. So lets label those too. Or what about requiring labeling cosmetics for their use of animal testing? Why don't we require a label on all chicken that shows the environment they live in? Or cows/pigs?

Why don't you rally behind labeling any of those things? Why is it *only* GMO's that you seem to want to know the sourcing of? Who cares that diamonds can help mass murderers, genocides, slavery, child labor, and numerous other horrible things we do to fellow humans. Who cares that people working in sweat shops have a low standard of living and work in horrible conditions. Who cares that cosmetics are tested on living creatures that are more or less tortured.

You seem to think you don't have a choice. You do. Nobody is forcing you to buy GMO foods. You have options. Grow your own food. Buy locally sourced food that is grown using organic methods. Buy food labeled non-GMO. I don't see how you don't have a choice like you claim. You are choosing to ignore the choices you have and stomp your feet crying about this false "non-choice" you're presented with. Open your eyes and look at the choices you have.

You've lost this debate on this forum. And for the near future in the US as well. You can either look for alternatives (which I've presented a few of), you can be unproductive and complain about it yet not do anything to change it, or you can actually try to push for reforms that you like by voting for people who support your beliefs and talking to your representatives. You could also start/join a group who is pushing for GMO foods to be labelled. But the scientific facts remain. GMO's are not a problem as far as science today knows. Could there be an issue in the future? Yes. But can you predict the future? It helps with many of the issues we face today from a nutrition standpoint and from feeding the world population.

 

[1prophet]

Why does President Obama keep Appointing Monsanto Shills to Key Gov. Positions?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022592785#post1

"You're not going to want to hear it, but tough shit. It needs to be said and you need to be educated and stop acting like teabilly fuckheads (some of you) We are the ones with logic, so lets start acting like it. We are fucking up as a country and I am about to tell you why. I'm going to put the smack down of ALL smack downs on this pathetic and quite frankkly silly "outrage" about Obama signing this stupid little six month extension on an already existing law. All the liberal pages are running to his defense. "It was snuck in!" "He had no choice!" Give me a fucking break. Oh if only I had seen all of your outrage when......

the president filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA...

At the USDA, as the director of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto Danforth Center.

As deputy commissioner of the FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the infamous Michael Taylor, former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone. (are you awake yet?)

As commissioner of the USDA, Iowa governor, Tom Vilsack. Vilsack had set up a national group, the Governors' Biotechnology Partnership, and had been given a Governor of the Year Award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include Monsanto.

As the new Agriculture Trade Representative, who would push GMOs for export, Islam Siddiqui, a former Monsanto lobbyist.

As the new counsel for the USDA, Ramona Romero, who had been corporate counsel for another biotech giant, DuPont.

As the new head of the USAID, Rajiv Shah, who had preciously worked in key positions for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a major funder of GMO agriculture research.

Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. Kagan, as federal solicitor general, had previously argued for Monsanto in the Monsanto v. Geertson seed case before the Supreme Court.

In the real activist world, they see Obama as a lobbyist for Monsanto already. So don't pretend to care NOW all of a sudden. He signed this six month extension of a already existing law that quite frankly nothing could have been done about it anyway, that part is true. But don't sit there and actually defend him like he's so god damn helpless, because you weren't saying a fucking thing when he gave his buddies at Monsanto key appointments as listed above. No one put a gun to his head any of those times and they didn't "sneak in" to their jobs! Stop being hypocrites, (some of you) pages and fans, the stupid is starting to really stink. The quicker you admit we have a huge problem, the quicker we can solve it. But don't defend what is wrong. Wrong is wrong. Deal with it"


DISCLAIMER: I did not write this, However, I do find it bothersome that we voted for change, and yet President Obama Keeps hiring the same lackeys any other candidate would have.

This is my biggest problem with Our President. He is really into GMO farming as if it will save the world. Meanwhile our First Lady is an Organic Farmer.

I know some of you will get mad at me for posting this. But I am not the one choosing these people to high level positions of Authority within the Government.

ANOTHER ADDITION:
Apparently the Original Source of this information comes from a Right-Wing Nut Job my apologies. I am not a wing nut in disguise. Infact I am a black female part of the 99% I don't believe the Republican party wants my support.

That being said, I still have a few questions of concern:
Why does Monsanto need so much protection from us consumers?

What are they doing the food, that makes them afraid of being sued?

Can we get a Surgeon General warning on all Monsanto products?

 

[yllus]

I agree with this decision - it was a good thing. The worries about GMO are rooted in an anti-science mindset. Decades of fearmongering later, we've seen zero ill effects.

 

[feralkid]

I agree with this decision - it was a good thing. The worries about GMO are rooted in an anti-science mindset. Decades of fearmongering later, we've seen zero ill effects.

Agreed 100%
Well, except for the bees and other pollinators.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Well, in some ways yes. Food is not the same as a shoe. Or a car. Food is required to live, others are commodities. So they aren't the same. Now, I get what you're trying to get at and things aren't as different as you claim. You want things to be labeled GMO. Then why isn't there a requirement for conflict free diamonds? I should be able to choose how my money is spent in a free market after all. Right? So how about we slap a label on all diamonds requiring their sourcing to be known instead of the optional labeling that is currently done. Or what about clothing? I want to know if my clothes were made using sweat shops. So lets label those too. Or what about requiring labeling cosmetics for their use of animal testing? Why don't we require a label on all chicken that shows the environment they live in? Or cows/pigs?

Why don't you rally behind labeling any of those things?

All of that sounds good to me. I would go off in a conflict diamond labeling thread. At least these GMO companies aren't evil. The world's biggest diamond cartel is. I would love labeling forced on them. Heck I would love to force jail on them.

 

[Moonbeam]

http://www.momsrising.org/blog/alice-waters-discusses-food-community-and-gmos/

Some people are spiritually alive and some are not. This lady is alive and deeply knowledgeable about the meaning of food. I wish you could all eat at her restaurant. But then, it's in Berkeley, you see. Food is never as good if you've wet your pants. California, as usual, is at the forefront of everything. The work of Alice Waters if felt world wide. Most of us, unfortunately, live in a very dark part of the Galaxy. May a light shine on you. May you share a tasty non GMO meal with friends. May you have an experience of the sacred.

 

[feralkid]

dp (sorry)

 

[DucatiMonster696]

The whole anti-GMO movement is literally a running "Dihydrogen monoxide" comedy skit gone horribly wrong and out of control. You can make a case against the business practices of companies like Monsanto but in the end that has nothing to do with the actual science behind GMO crops. Science which has yet to be refuted in any strong and substantial manner. In the end the fact that so many still believe in the anti-GMO hype is pretty said IMHO.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Agreed 100%
Well, except for the bees and other pollinators.

There is zero evidence which states that GMO crops are causing CCD (colony collapse disorder).

 

[nightspydk]

That is the wrong way about it. Instead enlighten people, they got just as much right to vote as you do. You being smarter don't make you right nor better. That's elite way of thinking.

 

[ThinClient]

Non-organic food does not require labeling as non-organic. People who want special organic produce instead buy special labelled "organic" produce.

Coincidentally "organic" food is also GMO-free. Seems like labeling is already taking place.

Why do you want special new labeling requirements for GMO food?

The requirements to be able to call your food "organic" are a joke. Every food is organic. We're not eating rocks, so literally EVERYTHING you buy to eat is organic and can be labeled organic without fear or reprisal, whether or not pesticides and stuff are used on the product.

Organic labeling is a vapid effort just like this stupid GMO label would be.

Marking the package is just a quick, short step toward further fear-mongering about GMO products. The only people who want GMO labels are the morons who think that there's something wrong with GMO even though there is not a shred of evidence to support the claim.

I fully understand the problems with Monsanto and their business practices, but putting all the attention on OMG GMOS ARE EVIL takes away from the real issues with their company. It's essentially just a petty dig at Monsanto; it has nothing do with helping anyone or keeping people healthy.

 

[nightspydk]

But it is not like we need areas to grow crop, nor is it that we do not have the capacity to grow what we need. As the matter of fact we have all but sufficient to sustain the world popuation, but we rather keep stocks in pile or destroy to not ruin the market price.

What a great world.

 

[ThinClient]

But it is not like we need areas to grow crop, nor is it that we do not have the capacity to grow what we need. As the matter of fact we have all but sufficient to sustain the world popuation, but we rather keep stocks in pile or destroy to not ruin the market price.

What a great world.

Completely irrelevant when the matter at hand is whether or not the market will be hurt by people who are fucking stupid, thinking that they should avoid GMO foods. That's really what it boils down to. The GMO sticker effort is nothing more than a fear-mongering effort and that's why I don't support it.

 

[shira]

For all those opposed to requiring GMO-related information on food labels:

Are you opposed to ALLOWING a food label to truthfully proclaim something like, "Contains only non-GMO ingredients." Or "Chicken raised entirely on non-GMO feed?"

Surely, a company should be allowed to place truthful information on a product label if the company believes that information will enhance the marketability of its product.

And if such "non-GMO" information is allowed, then we'll end up with a de facto GMO labeling law. Because all food free of GMO ingredients (or raised only with non-GMO feed) will be boldly labeled as such. And any product without such information on its label will be assumed to contain GMO ingredients. The only government involvement in this will be to enforce laws that make sure that companies don't falsely claim non-GMO status for a product.

By the way, this is very similar to the situation with "organic" foods. There's actually very little evidence that consuming organic foods is any healthier than consuming non-organic. Yet we have laws in place to prevent false "organic" claims. Because people have a right to make their own decisions (unless their decisions are harmful to the broader society), even if the basis of their decisions is not anything that's actually relevant.