In the Heinz example, they started out by advertising the product as being pure while the others used rotten tomatoes, but people still continued buying rancid ketchup. Despite having all the information, market forces continued to favor the cheaper, tainted food. Using this historical evidence, my conclusion is that people can't make rational decisions even under the best circumstances.
As opposed to coming to the rational conclusion that buying the cheaper food was rational and it wasn't as bad as you think it was. Since people eat crap like lutefisk and balut, I don't think your conclusion is valid.
Also, you're conflating a gross product (bad ketchup) with food that's a health risk because of germs (tainted spinach). The ketchup was made deliberately that way to be cheaper and while it would have tasted different (that's what the vinegar is for) it wasn't a health risk. The spinach is not tainted deliberately and isn't sold cheaper because it's dangerous. You're using the response to the second as justification for a response to the first, and that's bad logic.
When you mitigate externality, you keep from incurring extra costs.
By increasing the cost, generally more than you would have otherwise, plus you've reduced freedom and given preference to one company over another which leads eventually to the corporatism we have now.
A final note is that I am aware and acknowledge the imperfections in our system. There is corruption, there are regulatory agencies that promote bad food, there are inefficiencies and many other problems.
All of which stem from what you're advocating.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 19/7/11 08:45 (UTC)As opposed to coming to the rational conclusion that buying the cheaper food was rational and it wasn't as bad as you think it was. Since people eat crap like lutefisk and balut, I don't think your conclusion is valid.
Also, you're conflating a gross product (bad ketchup) with food that's a health risk because of germs (tainted spinach). The ketchup was made deliberately that way to be cheaper and while it would have tasted different (that's what the vinegar is for) it wasn't a health risk. The spinach is not tainted deliberately and isn't sold cheaper because it's dangerous. You're using the response to the second as justification for a response to the first, and that's bad logic.
By increasing the cost, generally more than you would have otherwise, plus you've reduced freedom and given preference to one company over another which leads eventually to the corporatism we have now.
All of which stem from what you're advocating.