Subject:
|
Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Jun 2001 15:38:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
265 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher Tracey writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> As an aside, if we as consumers wanted to have full disclosure on the
> ingredients of a product and/or the source of those ingredients, should
> the food producers provide it?
I subscribe to Consumer Reports and I read it (ahem) religiously. More
information is good. I tend to favor buying products that have more
information on them. I think food labels ought to be accurate and complete.
Any producer that puts a misleading or untrue statement on a product ought
to be taken to court for fraud and possibly negligence.
That said, I would not require labels as a matter of law. So "should" they
provide it? Yes. And I shop on that basis. "Must" they (be required by law
to) provide it? No. (1)
1 - let me soften that a bit. I am not convinced that there is a clear and
present danger from not labeling to the extent that there needs to be a law
requiring it. If someone can convince me that labeling HAS to be there or
else massive ill effects will follow that can't be ameliorated by the
prospect of charging the producers with murder, negligence, breach of
contract, etc... then maybe.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
| (...) no definately not monolithic... we come in all shapes and sizes... :) (...) As an aside, if we as consumers wanted to have full disclosure on the ingredients of a product and/or the source of those ingredients, should the food producers (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
