"Yes I get it, it's hard to determine why people do stupid things. I made my guesses, you can make yours."
That is not even close to what I said.
What I actually said is just because you believe something to be stupid does not make it so. Even if it can be shown to be stupid in the general case there can be cases where it is the perfectly reasonable and logical thing to do.
"Alright, you just don't believe regulations actually do what they set out to do."
Again, not even close to what I said. I was making a statement on the possibility of ever achieving perfection. No system of regulation could EVER prevent all instances of tainted food reaching market. The best argument you can put forth in favor of regulation is that it does the best job of any other possible system, but in several discussions on this topic you have never even attempted to make that argument.
"Been inside a meat factory that was safety tested? You think it didn't need to be before that? I don't know, I don't really see how you can support your claims here."
I don't need to because I never made the claim that things have not improved since 1900, I made the argument that the regulation does no and cannot prevent all instances of tainted food. Would you like for me to post the long litany of food recalls that have happened in just the last 5 years alone? Clearly the regulations do not prevent tainted food from reaching the market because it happens all the time. Ergo at best the regulatory system is a marginal improvement over other systems of food safety.
"So, you would be opposed to the government requiring testing of food products period?"
I'm a rational anarchist, you can have whatever laws you think are necessary, however I think such a law is stupid and will do more to line the pockets of big business than do anything to improve food quality.
"You think it should be every man for himself?"
Nope, never said that, in fact as I have mentioned several times I believe agencies like Consumers Union can do a far better job than government regulation.
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 20:05 (UTC)That is not even close to what I said.
What I actually said is just because you believe something to be stupid does not make it so. Even if it can be shown to be stupid in the general case there can be cases where it is the perfectly reasonable and logical thing to do.
"Alright, you just don't believe regulations actually do what they set out to do."
Again, not even close to what I said. I was making a statement on the possibility of ever achieving perfection. No system of regulation could EVER prevent all instances of tainted food reaching market. The best argument you can put forth in favor of regulation is that it does the best job of any other possible system, but in several discussions on this topic you have never even attempted to make that argument.
"Been inside a meat factory that was safety tested? You think it didn't need to be before that? I don't know, I don't really see how you can support your claims here."
I don't need to because I never made the claim that things have not improved since 1900, I made the argument that the regulation does no and cannot prevent all instances of tainted food. Would you like for me to post the long litany of food recalls that have happened in just the last 5 years alone? Clearly the regulations do not prevent tainted food from reaching the market because it happens all the time. Ergo at best the regulatory system is a marginal improvement over other systems of food safety.
"So, you would be opposed to the government requiring testing of food products period?"
I'm a rational anarchist, you can have whatever laws you think are necessary, however I think such a law is stupid and will do more to line the pockets of big business than do anything to improve food quality.
"You think it should be every man for himself?"
Nope, never said that, in fact as I have mentioned several times I believe agencies like Consumers Union can do a far better job than government regulation.