canndo
Well-Known Member
Nothing about the 57 permits though.
Government Regulation
- Thread starter NLXSK1
- Start date
I am all for food safety, regulations don't necessarily make food safe. Why not have a private company that awards a "Clean and Safe" award to certain vendors, he gets paid by charging a inspection fee. Burger stands with the award would get extra business. It not unlike taking a test for MCSE or Microsoft specialist, you pay to be tested, if you pass you get to brag about it and maybe even further your career.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
No, the city requires impact studies. Their friends are the ones getting paid to do the studies.
That's exactly why it's impossible to generalize on the situation. MOST bad regulations designed to impede business are at the local and state level. MOST regulations that are designed to protect us are at the federal level. However when we demand more regulations we usually end up getting junk regulations that benefit no one and only impede commerce and when we demand deregulation we end up getting getting rid of the important regulations that protect the people. It's a lose-lose game. The system is rigged. That's why we need to oppose/support specific regulations rather than generalize.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Ok. But it does lend credibility to what he's saying. It specifically says two years, just like he claimed. Makes his story believable enough as far as I'm concerned.
You don't need a permit to be a doctor, you may need a professional LICENSE.
BTW there are indeed people who are not doctors who have been practicing as such, some did it for years, some ever performed many surgeries and had no one die. I doubt many people are pretending to be policemen, besides you need neither a permit nor a license to be a police officer, you need a couple months training and the willingness to follow orders.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Well then lets get rid of the regulations that don't keep food safe, keep the regulations that do make it safe, and then fix the ones that are designed to keep us safe but don't work. Reasonable enough?
Because that's likely going to be a pay to play game where the private company supports politicians in order to extort money from businesses.
There are no regulations that can promise food safety, unless we just have one food manufacturer and it only makes oatmeal. mmmmmmmmm Oatmeal for every meal forever....plus vitamins, but only FDA approved vitamins (None).
Private company will pay politicians to make regulations protecting it's own interests? Well of course, but the same thing happens with or without the regulation. All politicians are regulated in how and what they can be given, but they sure find a way to get around all that don't they, immunity from inside trading etc.
You always have to pay to play in one way or another, but the money is best spent by private entities instead of government.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Sure, but there are regulations that make it statistically more likely for food to be safe. I'm not buying the idea that we should all together ignore food safety just because it doesn't come with a 100% reliability rate.
Great, and we have 40% of the nation overweight. Being overweight is the number three predictor of future health issues. Smoking is number one. We regulate smoking, but it still kills more people than all the illegal drugs, car crashes, overweight, bad food, accidental slips and falls COMBINED!!! Regulated.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I am against alot of government regulation. I am more along the lines of supporting information.
You can tell me that cigarettes give me cancer but dont try to tax me into compliance. You can set the standards for education but dont create a monstrosity that provides miserable education to kids and has no opt out clause.
We need some regulation but it has gotten far past stupid.
You can tell me that cigarettes give me cancer but dont try to tax me into compliance. You can set the standards for education but dont create a monstrosity that provides miserable education to kids and has no opt out clause.
We need some regulation but it has gotten far past stupid.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Yet you want to abandon government regulation because it doesn't work and leave business, the business that has done much to cause the obesity epidemic and the buisness that spread cigarettes and ensured that they were not only deadly but addictive, to its own devices.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Yes, because I dont want my government to force me into a work camp if I get pudgy.
canndo
Well-Known Member
You aren't getting the point - it isn't and shouldn't be you that is regulated but the company that pays billions in order to addict children to fat and sugar and salt. We see by this very example what corporations are capable and willing to do for a profit that you seem incapable of acknowleging.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
The same government that subsidizes sugar cane should punish the companies for using cheap sugar?
I am getting the point I am simply completely disagreeing with it.
If I want to eat a burger that is 3000 calories I should be able to do it. If the government wants to tell me that it will make me fat, fine. Now I understand that I will get fat. They have no business trying to prevent me from eating it by raising the taxes or banning the materials used to make it.
Okay, what about this. A few pointed out, or maybe it was just one person, nonetheless they pointed out that a certificate/permit (whatever you call it) doesn't promise that the food you get is going to be safe considering how many times fast food and other food distributors have made people sick/killed them with their practices.
So, what if in the grand scheme of things, this certificate that is optional that I spoke of earlier, that only announces to the world that you have a food handlers license and have some training, what if we attached the need of INSURANCE to cover the people they make sick before this non-required certificate can be issued. That still allows the dude who just wants to make his secret family reciepe out of a burrito cart without any regulation, the right to be on the street competing for business without government getting in his way. At that point it's only customers, or lack of, that would hurt his business.
By telling Jose he can't have a burrito cart because they don't think his food is clean enough takes my right away of making the decision of whether or not I want to buy Jose's unregulated burritos. If an adult makes a stupid decision to eat food that they know nothing about, well then the concequences to some degree are all their own to bare. If Jose is making people sick, Jose will answer for that, but until he does, fucking sell those dirty burritos to anyone you want Jose, live the dream, just don't fuck up and make anyone sick because people who infect others with whatever lose their right to sell burritos, but until you fuck up it's game on baby.
Dangerous Freedom is the only real freedom. Pull up your skirt and live.
So, what if in the grand scheme of things, this certificate that is optional that I spoke of earlier, that only announces to the world that you have a food handlers license and have some training, what if we attached the need of INSURANCE to cover the people they make sick before this non-required certificate can be issued. That still allows the dude who just wants to make his secret family reciepe out of a burrito cart without any regulation, the right to be on the street competing for business without government getting in his way. At that point it's only customers, or lack of, that would hurt his business.
By telling Jose he can't have a burrito cart because they don't think his food is clean enough takes my right away of making the decision of whether or not I want to buy Jose's unregulated burritos. If an adult makes a stupid decision to eat food that they know nothing about, well then the concequences to some degree are all their own to bare. If Jose is making people sick, Jose will answer for that, but until he does, fucking sell those dirty burritos to anyone you want Jose, live the dream, just don't fuck up and make anyone sick because people who infect others with whatever lose their right to sell burritos, but until you fuck up it's game on baby.
Dangerous Freedom is the only real freedom. Pull up your skirt and live.
canndo
Well-Known Member
You make a typical presumption N, and that is that you actually have true volition. Fast food companies do not spend billions on advertising and marketing because those things don't work, they spend the money because they know they can bend folk's wills. The government DOES tell people in this country that fast food will make them fat and what is happening? they are getting fatter, do you think they WANT to get fatter? Do you think that this generation is somehow less capable than the last and that one less capable than their last of reasonable choice?
Now how do you suppose such blatant actions against our society should be met?
Yeah, cuz McDonalds makes people eat their hamburgers.
Dude, just don't. The combination of people eating unhealthy food and too much of it and a lack of excercise made them fat. Stop trying to give obesity a scape goat when the problem is the fatty who won't put the burger down.
Nope, the reason people get overweight isn't because private businesses exist, its because they consume too many calories. There is NO WAY McDonalds can be held responsible for you being fat, you got fat by choice because the government regulates everything and lulls you into a false sense of security by saying that all the food McDonalds serve must be good for you because it passes all the stringent rules designed to make sure all our food is "safe" to eat.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Mcdonalds DOES "make" people eat their hamburgers. You can be self righteous about how people "should" skip that bag of fries and get out and walk but explain to me why they spend billions to influence people to eat what they have DESIGNED to addict you to. Now look at children who are prone to be influenced by these campaigns., each generation is a bit fatter - why do you think that is when in our history before fast food it was not, or not nearly at the same rate.