From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Fri Jul 05 2002 - 23:12:08 MDT
On Friday, July 5, 2002, at 11:02 pm, Technotranscendence wrote:
> On Friday, July 05, 2002 12:12 PM Harvey Newstrom
> mail@HarveyNewstrom.com wrote:
>> I don't see forcing corporations to tell the truth about their
> products
>> as being coercive. It seems that hiding the truth or misleading the
>> customer into making choices they don't want is the coercive action.
>
> Plus, why would you buy stuff from misleading people -- be they members
> of a corporation or your local mom and pop store? Don't you think on a
> truly free market, the problem would take care of itself?
Just like Enron. Why would people buy stock from a company that lies
about it books? Don't you think the problem would take care of itself?
No. Until someone steps in and forces them to reveal the truth, nobody
knows they are being misleading. Until the public claims match the
actual truth, with no withholding of information, consumers cannot make
proper decisions.
> Also, don't you already see the result of government labeling in drugs?
> It results in the FDA -- that defecation of a regulatory agency --
> literally having a deathgrip on what information can or cannot be passed
> along.
I don't see any problem with the FDA requiring that medicines be
accurately labeled as to contents. The problems in the FDA come from
restricting labels so information is withheld from the consumer. This
is what I am against and why I am calling for full disclosure. I don't
see how anybody can sell something without clearly and accurately
describing what they are selling.
> The current widespread ignorance is fed by government interventions run
> amok. Granted, not everyone was a scholar and a scientist before the
> Progressive Era, the New Deal, and the Great Society, but surely these
> ratcheted interventions have tended to increase shortsightedness and
> reward irresponsibility both through making long range planning less
> tenable (government decrees change at a bureacrats whim) as well as
> perpetuating the myth that political appointees and career politicians
> know best.
You are against food labeling because you equate it to government
control. I don't care whether government enforces it or not. I just
want my food to be accurately labeled. I want the stuff inside to match
the ingredients list outside.
> Finally, don't forget your labeling regime is going to be backed,
> manned, and enforced by the same people you believe are so stupid as to
> need to be led by the hand through life. What do you think the result
> will be? Or do you believe angels will land upon Earth and manage
> product labeling?
What are you talking about? Who do I believe are so stupid as to need
be lead by the hand in life? Labels are for the intelligent people who
want to make their own informed decisions. It is the anti-label
advocates who think people are too stupid to read a label and that
companies have to make decisions for them and hide all the complicated
stuff from John Q. Public.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:11 MST