Trump is in

I'll all about forcing transparency both on companies and the government. I don't want to implicitly trust a company to inform me out of it's own goodwill as there are plenty of companies that won't. For better or worse, few companies will incur financial costs upon themselves out of goodwill that would cut into profit margins. I recognize not every company will cut corners to turn the largest profit.

If a product was made because American jobs were cut and it was manufactured overseas in a sweatshop by an 8 year old, people should know. Let the consumer decide if they're okay cutting American jobs for outsourced labor. If a product was made by genetically engineering a strain of corn, companies should be required to label that appropriately. Maybe someone doesn't want GMO because they believe Monsato is strong arming people that don't pay them fees for GMO products out. Maybe they feel uncomfortable consuming GMO products due to wanting to be sure it's safe. Doesn't matter, people should be able to decide what to do based on their political, religious, ethnic, etc beliefs and it shouldn't be up to the company to decide for them.

I have exactly the same feeling towards the government as well. I don't implictly trust the government to look out for my rights as a citizen and believe transparency gives power to the citizens to allow them to see what the government is doing.

While there may have been a political angle behind the GMO labeling measure, in the end, it merely forced the labeling of GMO products. So, while I actually consume GMO products and I see it as a positive use of science... I also recognize that people should be able to choose for themselves.

 

it's not just forcing the labeling. plenty of groups want to ban GMO's completely. There is a lot of misinformation out there and labeling it as something it isn't.

 

If a company makes a product from genetically engineered food, it should be labeled. That is an entirely separate issue from a government or another corporate body seeking to ban GMOs. If you use them, label them. What you said was valid, there is a lot of misinformation, but that is up for the consumer to suss out and decide for themselves. If they want to buy into misinformation then it's still their choice. I believe in individual accountability.

I have exactly the same feeling when a government says "yeah, we'll pass this bill and not tell you what is in it... because it's better for you (and us) if you don't know and decide for yourself". I don't think either stance is illogical.

I'm simply for transparency and allowing the people as a whole the right to choose for themselves instead of the patronizing "we know what is best for you" angle.

 

label away as far as i'm concerned, but the vilification of Monsanto is just ridiculous. i'm not convinced the motive behind this is transparency.

 

Basically if you're eating a grain and it isn't labeled non-GMO you're eating them.

I find it funny with all the vegetable seeds that are listed GMO free. I believe potatos is the only GMO vegetable. Hell some people think hybridization is genetically modifying food.

 

I'd agree with that. Motive aside, the measure provided transparency and consumer freedom of choice.

Again, I use GMO products and I feel they're just hastening evolution of the genetic structure of critical plants.

However, I do know GMO has been vilified by Monsanto's business practices which I'm not a fan of but, hey, they did the research and they assumed the liability.

If GMO was separate from Monsanto I think most of the negativity would go away.

 

"The vilification of Monsanto is ridiculous." Monsanto is unquestionably evil.

Edit: I kind of hijacked the point because I meant they were generally evil, and you were referring solely to the GMO thing.

 

I don't agee with a lot of their business practices, but their work also keeps millions from starving.

I have no issue with factory farms and large corporate farms. My issue is that the government favors them through regulations and laws which makes it hard for small family farms.

 

yeah saving the world from starvation is really evil.

 

I'm no fan of how they interact with domestic farmers but, to me, most of the fight back is against one singular company having that much control over global agriculture.

 

they've certainly done some anti competitive things, but most of the domination is due to having a better product.

 

There's plenty of competition especially if you include non-GMO seeds, but inside their field they're the leaders in innovative.

 

I agree. As I've said, I buy their products knowingly... but I still agree with a person's right to choose, as a consumer, what they endorse by spending their money.

I support the right for someone to come to a different conclusion that I did and spend their money how they want... so long as they make an attempt to educate themselves.

I.E. if someone says "I don't like the way Monsanto has destroyed Argentinian agriculture and I won't buy their products" I would respect that. I wouldn't agree with it, but it's their right to choose.

Most people I know that don't consume GMO are from that viewpoint.

 

most people I know who don't consume GMOs are doing so because they've been brainwashed they are bad for you. they don't know that everything they eat has been modified already.

 

One reason I love Europeans is because they're all about not eating GMOs in between each pack of cigarettes smoked

 

Again, it's still their choice.

Make the nutritional content known and if they still choose to eat a triple-stack McHeartattack every day it's their choice.

Personal responsibility and accountability. I thought those were the pinnacles of most Conservatives?

 

"The US has a hegemony and spends more money than anyone on it's military. They're still occupying Germany!"

"Germany is geographically central to NATO and the US is thousands of miles awa-"

"We need USAF planes to get to Mali."

"Jesus Christ France, get your shit together."

 

I've already said I have no problems with labeling as long as it's not misleading. for instance in California they want to put on the label that it could be potentially bad for your health. well shit anything could potentially be bad. i'm simply suggesting the ground roots opposition is one of ignorance and the people funding the opposition have motives other than the ones they state.

 

I have a similar issue with "gluten free" which started as a legit label for people with Crohn's Disease but somehow ended up potentially giving people autism. Somehow. But I don't think "gluten-free" itself is misleading... I just think that people are naturally easy to rile up.



That just about sums up the gluten craze for people that don't even have digestive issues with gluten.

 

I love the gluten-free obsessed hipsters who buy craft beers that are full of it.