GMO labeling on the Ballot in Oregon

[PRB]

Then they shouldn't sell food! Get it?!

you don't believe in the freedom to sell food without labeling? you want Amish to label their raw milk too? WTF!

 

[PRB]

If you don't care whether the food you buy is accurately labeled or not, would you like to buy some "fudge" from me? I'd be glad to give you a really great price!

you have to eat it first, then I'll think about it.

 

[invisible]

For example, if you're the only person in the world who thinks a GMO tomato isn't a tomato, there's been no fraud - because the producer is advertizing to the general population, not just you. If, on the other hand, everybody in the world but the producer considers a GMO tomato to not be a real tomato, then it would be fraud.

Exactly! And 90+ percentage of the population agrees that a tomato with frog genes in it is not a tomato! Would you like to buy some "fudge"?

 

[Natural Citizen]

I disagree with you about the definition of a tomato. To me a tomato food item with a certain appearance, flavor, texture, etc - whatever its genetics.

Consequently, a GMO tomato is a tomato, and calling it such is not fraudulent advertizing.

But, as you can see, this is highly subjective. It depends on how different people understand different words. Generally speaking, the law considers the "normal" definition to be the decisive one. For example, if you're the only person in the world who thinks a GMO tomato isn't a tomato, there's been no fraud - because the producer is advertizing to the general population, not just you. If, on the other hand, everybody in the world but the producer considers a GMO tomato to not be a real tomato, then it would be fraud.

In any case, whether there is fraud or not, the proper way of curbing it is to file a lawsuit - not to impose new business regulations.

Substantial equivalence has long since flown right out of the window when it came to protecting licensing and usage fees for these products under patent law. Of course, this is something that we've discussed in great depth elsewhere and so really has no function with regard to this citizens initiative. Perhaps we can bump that discussion. I'll look it up later. In fact, I had flirted with doing that anyhow in light of Monsanto's recent mercantilist response to the gmo ban that passed elsewhere in the nation yesterday. Seems like they're having a tantrum because it just happened to be the place they were using as their home turf for genetic experimentation since the weather was always good there. Which, btw, could be said to be comparable to the logistics of the TPP except at the domestic level.

I fully expect these companies to attempt to sue away the sovereignty of these American people there in Maui if they feel like their laws will disrupt future profits for said companies. Again, conforming to the international legal model that some of our representatives want to speed through in the form of the TPP. Interesting times, for sure.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Exactly! And 90+ percentage of the population agrees that a tomato with frog genes in it is not a tomato!

Evidence?

But, as I already said, even supposing that's the case, that does not justify mandatory labeling.

It justifies lawsuits.

 

[invisible]

Evidence?

But, as I already said, even supposing that's the case, that does not justify mandatory labeling.

It justifies lawsuits.

Evidence is polls cited in post #79. What do you think a successful lawsuit would result in? Mandatory labeling! What would the difference be if it came about through a gov't ballot initiative, or a gov't court?
Would you like to buy some "fudge"? I'd be glad to give you a really good price!

 

[Natural Citizen]

Evidence?

But, as I already said, even supposing that's the case, that does not justify mandatory labeling.

It justifies lawsuits.

Well. As I said, I'll bump existing discussion on that. To start a debate here on it, I think, is counterintuitive. You could probably do a forum search for "Substantial equivalence" in the meantime. At the moment I'm kind of watching other things and really just swapping windows once in a while to the forum here. But, as I said, I will bump discussion on that just because I'm going to contribute more to it anyhow. There really is a wealth of information and discussion here at RPF and my advice to any new member would be for them to spend time researching the key words that interest them. Although the stuff that gets added to the front "Top News" page doesn't ever seem to be returned in search results. Which I find to be scwewy but it is what it is. You'd think that wouldn't be the case since those things are usually reflective of the more critical updates to the most current events with regard to the issues that they involve.

In fact, I'm going to try to finagle a couple of different threads just because of what we are seeing with regard to these chemical companies beginning to sue each other. That's a relevant phenomenon but more in line with the geo-political aspect of it. Getting into foreign policy here and a so called "agricultural standard" so to speak. You could probably reasearch that too. Just key in "agricultural standard" and "international finance clearing" into the search bar here at the forum. Also "BRICS".

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Evidence is polls cited in post #79. What do you think a successful lawsuit would result in? Mandatory labeling!

No, it would result in damages paid to he defrauded plaintiff.

That's the difference between the two methods.

In the one case, the producer is only punished when he is proven to have actually defrauded someone.

In the other case, the producer is punished because someone predicts that he might defraud someone.

By way of analogy, what is the proper way to deal with industrial pollution? Regulations designed to prevent pollution, enforced by federal regulators who visit and inspect the facilities? Or lawsuits against those corporations which actually pollute?

 

[donnay]

you don't believe in the freedom to sell food without labeling? you want Amish to label their raw milk too? WTF!

The Amish do label their stuff they sell. As a matter of fact I deal with a few Amish and Mennonite retailers.

 

[PRB]

Exactly! And 90+ percentage of the population agrees that a tomato with frog genes in it is not a tomato! Would you like to buy some "fudge"?

yeah, let's ask the masses what a tomato is.

 

[PRB]

The Amish do label their stuff they sell. As a matter of fact I deal with a few Amish and Mennonite retailers.

are they forced to? do you want them to be forced to?

 

[donnay]

are they forced to? do you want them to be forced to?

If they want to sell it to the public they label it. We are all forced to comply to government regulations--except biotech companies. If you want to sell anything to the public you have to get the permits to do so and follow their regulations or you can be fined and imprisoned--except biotech companies.

There are diabetics out there. There are children who are allergic to peanuts. There are people who are lactose intolerant. How will they know, if the things they choose to eat are not labeled how will they know it will not trigger a very bad reaction and/or possible cause death?


Here is the Monsanto-Federal revolving door-- take a look at the names and tell me there is no conflicts of interests:

 

[Peace Piper]

Costs of labeling, I thought your whole point was that we need to hurt the Monsantos to get even with them, did I misunderstand you?

Seems the cost argument is absurd when looking around the rest of the world

The 64 Countries that Require GMO Labeling

Australia
Austria
Belarus
Belgium
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
Bulgaria
Cameroon
China
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Ecuador
El Salvador
Estonia
Ethiopia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malaysia
Mali
Malta
Mauritius
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Peru
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
South Korea
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Tunisia
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Vietnam

The GE Food labeling Law map shows the laws in more than sixty countries
regarding genetically engineered food labeling.

Hard to believe that the people in Tunisia, for example, are more educated about their food than in the US. A disgrace actually. A total disgrace.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/reports/1413/genetically-engineered-food-labeling-laws-map#

http://naturalsociety.com/64-countries-require-gmo-labeling-not-united-states/


Related: China pulls plug on genetically modified rice and corn

China’s Ministry of Agriculture has decided not to renew biosafety certificates that allowed research groups to grow genetically modified (GM) rice and corn. The permits, to grow two varieties of GM rice and one transgenic corn strain, expired on 17 August. The reasoning behind the move is not clear, and it has raised questions about the future of related research in China...

...China has nearly reached self-sufficiency in producing rice using conventional varieties, so the ministry has decided there is no need to commercialize Bt rice in the near future, says Huang Jikun, director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy. He says that with commercialization off the table, there was no point in renewing the certifications. Huang says "rising public concerns safety of GM rice" likely also played a role...

http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2014/08/china-pulls-plug-genetically-modified-rice-and-corn

 

[parocks]

I did the same math, and scrolled down and saw someone did a better job of it.

Updated: 8:01 am, Nov 6

95% of est. votes counted

[TD="class: candname"]Yes
[/TD]
[TD="class: candbar"][/TD]
[TD="class: candvote"]712,508
[/TD]
[TD="class: candpct"]49.7%
[/TD]

[TD="class: candname win"]No
[/TD]
[TD="class: candbar"][/TD]
[TD="class: candvote"]722,278
[/TD]
[TD="class: candpct"]50.3%
[/TD]

Remaining counties left to be tallied at the moment...

Multnomah County
88.4% Reporting
Yes - 62.2% 169,665
No - 37.8% 103,277

Lane County
92.6% Reporting
Yes = 57.3% 78,073
No - 42.7% 58,146

Benton County
91.7% Reporting
Yes - 52.1% 19,431
No - 47.9% 17,862

Clackamas County
79.8% Reporting
No - 53.5% 69,717
Yes - 46.5% 60,525

A math problem. Let's assume that each of the precincts are the same in each of the counties. Not true, but let's go with it.

Yes needs 10K votes.

What is likely to happen in those counties?

Well, Multnomah County - yes by 66K. More than 10 percent left. So, let's say 7K extra yes margin out of Multnomah.

Lane looks like 1.5K yes.

Benton is about 100 yes.

Clackmas is about 2K no.

So, if everything is the same, no by about 3K. But everything isn't the same. Not all precincts are the same size and not all precincts in a county vote the same.

It most likely will get closer.

 

[parocks]

You know, I'm just really glad to see that these out of state companies are beginning to realize that throwing $25 million into a campaign against a citizen initiative isn't always going to work.

Where's that $25 Million going? TV stations? TV stations should work to get anti-GMO measures on the ballot, because they know that the GMOers will give them a lot of money to defeat it.

 

[green73]

Do you understand the concept of a citizens ballot initiative? The people's right to work toward building their own government at the state level? This is much like we see see with marijuana reform. I assure you that I'll waste very little time or energy with misinformation. Do you want to have this debate here? We already have a wealth of debate on it elsewhere around the board. Perhaps best to just bump and continue those. Watcha wanna do? Here or there? I have some time to kill this morning. Well...for a little while anyway.

The only libertarian thing you GMO people should be fighting for is allowing non-GMO producers to be able to label their food as such, something currently illegal. Why is that not the focus of your fight? I'll tell you why...infiltration.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I did the same math, and scrolled down and saw someone did a better job of it.




A math problem. Let's assume that each of the precincts are the same in each of the counties. Not true, but let's go with it.

Yes needs 10K votes.

What is likely to happen in those counties?

Well, Multnomah County - yes by 66K. More than 10 percent left. So, let's say 7K extra yes margin out of Multnomah.

Lane looks like 1.5K yes.

Benton is about 100 yes.

Clackmas is about 2K no.

So, if everything is the same, no by about 3K. But everything isn't the same. Not all precincts are the same size and not all precincts in a county vote the same.

It most likely will get closer.

Yeah, it's a hoot. Heh. We'll know tomorrow around 5pm though, for sure. It's guess work at the moment.

 

[Natural Citizen]

The only libertarian thing you GMO people should be fighting for is allowing non-GMO producers to be able to label their food as such, something currently illegal. Why is that not the focus of your fight? I'll tell you why...infiltration.

Infiltration of what, green73?

That's an interesting and rather broad subject, "infiltration", and could certainly be discussed in context of the movement in large. I'd certainly be interested in your thoughts on that while we're waiting for those results since you brought it up. Probably not going to have anything to add to this thread until those results come out tomorrow evening anyhow.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

...what if I was to sell you a turd, nicely wrapped up and packaged and marked as "fudge"? ... I'd be more than glad to sell you some "fudge".

Does it come with "lemonade?"

 

[Anti Federalist]

I do go grocery shopping, but I am not forced to.

You seem to assume I care whether it's GMO.

So much for buyer beware or personal responsibility.

How can you beware or be resposible, if you have no idea what you are buying?