• Trump would roll back food safety regulations
    92 replies, posted
[IMG]http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_full/public/blogs/trumpmcdonalds.jpg?itok=pkfBmTO5[/IMG] [QUOTE]Donald Trump intends to roll back food safety regulations if he wins the White House in November. In a fact sheet Thursday, the campaign highlighted a number of "specific regulations to be eliminated" under the GOP nominee's economic plan, including what they called the "FDA Food Police." “The FDA Food Police, which dictate how the federal government expects farmers to produce fruits and vegetables and even dictates the nutritional content of dog food,” it read.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://thehill.com/regulation/healthcare/296152-trump-says-he-would-eliminate-food-safety-regulations"]Source[/URL] I guess mad cow disease in your big mac is an acquired taste.
jesus christ it's like every proposal he makes or everything he says gets more and more fucking insane this man must not win the presidential elections
Hey want an example of what happens when you have lax food safety regulations? China.
Jesus Christ he's now attacking the very institutions that set us apart from China. Gutter oil anyone? Fake eggs?
He's not serious, is he? This could literally led to people dying, and it's certainly going to make the obesity problem in America worse. Why does he want to reform seemingly everything? It seems that he wants complete control of every little political thing in the States.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51056144]Jesus Christ he's now attacking the very institutions that set us apart from China. Gutter oil anyone? Fake eggs?[/QUOTE] Someone could say they're small business owners or entrepeneurs and we need people like them who create opportunity instead of waiting for it.
[QUOTE=Dr.C;51056163]Someone could say they're small business owners or entrepeneurs and we need people like them who create opportunity instead of waiting for it.[/QUOTE] We also dont need an increase in disease, malnutrition, and death but wait it'll be great for the funeral parlors innit?
[QUOTE=Dr.C;51056163]Someone could say they're small business owners or entrepeneurs and we need people like them who create opportunity instead of waiting for it.[/QUOTE] It's exactly the reason I oppose Libertarianism. Because even though the Government can be a massive piece of shit, some things actually are put in place for our benefit.
[quote]“The rules govern the soil farmers use, farm and food production hygiene, food packaging, food temperatures and even what animals may roam which fields and when,” the statement continued. "It also greatly[B] increased[/B] inspections of food 'facilities,' and [B]levies[/B] new taxes to pay for this inspection overkill."[/quote] I'm really confused about the phrasing, is it talking about existing laws or proposed ones?
[QUOTE=catbarf;51056186]I'm really confused about the phrasing, is it talking about existing laws or proposed ones?[/QUOTE] He's talking about gutting the existing laws and introducing more taxes.
[quote]It was only when the whole ham was spoiled that it came into the department of Elzbieta. Cut up by the two-thousand-revolutions- a-minute flyers, and mixed with half a ton of other meat, no odor that ever was in a ham could make any difference. There was never the least attention paid to what was cut up for sausage; there would come all the way back from Europe old sausage that had been rejected, and that was moldy and white--it would be dosed with borax and glycerine, and dumped into the hoppers, and made over again for home consumption. There would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers had tramped and spit uncounted billions of consumption germs. There would be meat stored in great piles in rooms; and the water from leaky roofs would drip over it, and thousands of rats would race about on it. It was too dark in these storage places to see well, but a man could run his hand over these piles of meat and sweep off handfuls of the dried dung of rats. These rats were nuisances, and the packers would put poisoned bread out for them; they would die, and then rats, bread, and meat would go into the hoppers together.[/quote] Excerpt from the [url=http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/sinclair/ch14.html]true-story[/url] book that [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle]rallied[/url] the country behind creating the FDA, or more accurately phrased as "based on real events".
Raisin Bran, now with two scoops of rat poop! There's a reason regulations are in place. And claiming they take up a significant amount of money to abide by is 1. A lie, and 2. Useless anyway, because safety is more important than fucking profit
I hope Trump doesn't win. I like not having food poisoning.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51056158]He's not serious, is he? This could literally led to people dying, and it's certainly going to make the obesity problem in America worse. Why does he want to reform seemingly everything? It seems that he wants complete control of every little political thing in the States.[/QUOTE] He says lots of words to try to appeal to everyone. Don't worry, he will fix it trust him.
Trump's idea of making us more competitive with China is to turn the United States into China it seems. Increased government surveillance? Check. Less civil liberties? Check. Little industrial oversight? Check. Poor conditions and wages for workers? Check. Environmental clusterfuck? Check. Big ass wall? Check.
If he does win, some patriot will likely do what needs to be done. That, after all, is what the amendment is for. But I find the idea he might win highly unlikely. He'll lose by a landslide, just wait and see.
I can't see how this could be a good thing for the general population. This is supposed to go hand-in-hand with more disclosure which looks alright in paper but I have serious doubts that people will make informed choices about what they are buying even if the companies are forced to disclose their safety procedures.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056323]If he does win, some patriot will likely do what needs to be done. That, after all, is what the amendment is for. But I find the idea he might win highly unlikely. He'll lose by a landslide, just wait and see.[/QUOTE] That is what I hope too, but every day I look at the news and see Trump catching up to Clinton I worry a little. Hopefully the debates will stop that from happening.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056323]If he does win, some patriot will likely do what needs to be done. That, after all, is what the amendment is for. But I find the idea he might win highly unlikely. He'll lose by a landslide, just wait and see.[/QUOTE] Kindly don't try to encourage political assassination.
I am thankful that, at least for a footnote in our history, we were communist, so we dragged ourselves out of this same disease riddled hellscape that this champagne-drinking corporate overlord fuckface proposes and finally landed real food on our plate for the first time in a millenia. To hear that losing what little regulation the Americans have over their food is a probability makes me furious. At least the Haitians know they're eating dirt. You could feed him his father's corpse and his senile fucking brain wouldn't notice it.
[QUOTE=Thlis;51056351]Kindly don't try to encourage political assassination.[/QUOTE] Kindly don't try to accuse me of doing something I haven't. I'm merely repeating what I've heard people say. It would be very unfortunate if it came to that. He's really unlikely to win, though, so it's fine.
[QUOTE=Thlis;51056351]Kindly don't try to encourage political assassination.[/QUOTE] I think it was a parody of what Trump says?
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056380]Kindly don't try to accuse me of doing something I haven't. I'm merely repeating what I've heard people say. It would be very unfortunate if it came to that. He's really unlikely to win, though, so it's fine.[/QUOTE] I don't see a quotation around [QUOTE=archangel125;51056323]If he does win, some patriot will likely[B] do what needs to be done[/B]. That, after all, is what the amendment is for.[/QUOTE] What exactly is the difference between what you said and Trumps "By the way, and if she gets the pick—if she gets the pick of her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I dunno."?
[QUOTE=Thlis;51056395]I don't see a quotation around What exactly is the difference between what you said and Trumps (paraphrasing) "2nd amendment people might be able to stop Hillary from appointing judges"?[/QUOTE] And why are you making such a big deal about this?
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056380]Kindly don't try to accuse me of doing something I haven't. I'm merely repeating what I've heard people say. It would be very unfortunate if it came to that. He's really unlikely to win, though, so it's fine.[/QUOTE] Your use of "what needs to be done." implies that you support that type of action. It's idiotic to think that killing the president would be good for the country under these circumstances, despite your political inclinations. If anything, it would only stir up more tensions and instability. (Not to mention all the ethical implications of that action)
[QUOTE=bunguer;51056409]Your use of "what needs to be done." implies that you support that type of action. It's idiotic to think that killing the president would be good for the country under these circumstances, despite your political inclinations. If anything, it would only stir up more tensions and instability.[/QUOTE] It really depends on how much a hypothetical POTUS Trump would try to throw his weight around. I promise you that if he cracks down on dissenting opinions, limits the freedom of press or freedom of expression at all, someone's going to do it, whether we think that would be best for the country or not. It'd probably be bad, really, that'd put his running mate in charge.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056407]And why are you making such a big deal about this?[/QUOTE] 1) I personally have a strong distaste for political violence, especially mob violence/"Justice" 2) It's pretty much the exact same thing that people have been lambasting Trump for.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51056407]And why are you making such a big deal about this?[/QUOTE] It was a dumb post man for both parts. Trump has about a 40% chance of winning on fivethirtyeight and is steadily climbing. Clinton is losing ground pretty much everywhere despite having this in the bag. Killing Trump would just make him a martyr and fuck up everything.
[QUOTE=Thlis;51056419]1) I personally have a strong distaste for political violence, especially mob violence/"Justice" 2) It's pretty much the exact same thing that people have been lambasting Trump for.[/QUOTE] I very much dislike violence, too. But I have more of a revolutionary mentality than you do, in the sense that I believe that when things have gotten very bad within a country, when a government is too corrupt and too authoritarian to sway by legal means, when said government is seriously damaging the future of said country against the will of the people, then the time for peaceful complacency is over. That time hasn't come yet for the US, but it won't be far away with Trump in charge.
[QUOTE=Last or First;51056243]Raisin Bran, now with two scoops of rat poop! There's a reason regulations are in place. And claiming they take up a significant amount of money to abide by is 1. A lie, and 2. Useless anyway, because safety is more important than fucking profit[/QUOTE] Not in the united states. Look at our health care system
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.