• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump floats rolling back food safety regulations

Harry Guerrilla said:
By modern standards, no.
As they were laid out in the book, no.
Click to expand...

By any standards?

BRIA 24 1 b Upton Sinclairs The Jungle: Muckraking the Meat-Packing Industry - Constitutional Rights Foundation

The White House was bombarded with mail, calling for reform of the meat-packing industry. After reading The Jungle, President Roosevelt invited Sinclair to the White House to discuss it. The president then appointed a special commission to investigate Chicago's slaughterhouses.

The special commission issued its report in May 1906. The report confirmed almost all the horrors that Sinclair had written about. One day, the commissioners witnessed a slaughtered hog that fell part way into a worker toilet. Workers took the carcass out without cleaning it and put it on a hook with the others on the assembly line.
Click to expand...
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
He wrote about bodies being dumped into vats.
Not true, among other things.

Hell his intent had nothing to do with food safety but with worker unionization.
The old "I aimed for their hearts and hit their stomachs."
Click to expand...

Regardless of his intent, Sinclair still did a public service.

Besides, would you eat pork that came from a carcass that was dunked into a workers toliet?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Regardless of his intent, Sinclair still did a public service.

Besides, would you eat pork that came from a carcass that was dunked into a workers toliet?
Click to expand...

Of course not, me back then, raised not to be as sensitive to these things.
Totally different story.

My grandfather slept in a room with pig carcasses hanging from the ceiling.
 
danarhea said:
Nope, I didn't say all, but unlike some, I do realize that some regulations are very necessary because some people and corporations are so greedy that they have no problem putting peoples' lives at risk in order to make a buck. Greed is not necessarily a bad thing, but it must be balanced by reason.
Click to expand...

You seem to be arguing with yourself at this point since Trump is not calling for the end of regulations.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Regardless of his intent, Sinclair still did a public service.

Besides, would you eat pork that came from a carcass that was dunked into a workers toliet?
Click to expand...

Have you actually read the book or are you just mouthing things you have heard others say?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Trump floats rolling back food safety regulations

Are you ****ing kidding me? This man and the vast majority of his policies are ****ing insane. He formulates policies like a pissed off immature teenager.
Click to expand...



Thank the Tea Party.

Rabid and blind anti-government sentiment has been brewing for some years on the right. It used to be more about having sensible efficient regulation; now it seems, for many, to be about simply not having government programs.

I won't be surprised if, in 10 years, someone proposes doing away with the FDA's ability to regulate drugs (while simultaneously being a gung-ho (illegal) Drug Warrior, no doubt).
 
danarhea said:
El wrongo, O salmonella breath!! :mrgreen:

Scroll down to the " FDA Food Police" section, which Trump had removed from his web site, after public outcry. The Hill, however, had already taken a screen shot of it, and you can see it at this link. The link to the document on the Trump web site now shows a blank page.
Click to expand...

I still don't see him calling for an end to regulations or an end to the FDA. All I see is panic on behalf of lefties who cant fathom the idea of ever having the state do less of anything.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Trump floats rolling back food safety regulations

Are you ****ing kidding me? This man and the vast majority of his policies are ****ing insane. He formulates policies like a pissed off immature teenager.
Click to expand...

That proposed policy has since been changed:

The fact sheet was later removed from the website and a new fact sheet detailing Trump's economic agenda did not include mention of the FDA.

The FDA recently completed an overhaul of the food safety system with seven rules to better protect consumers from food-borne illnesses. Manufacturers of both animal and human food are now required to implement preventive controls to minimize the risk of contaminating food when it’s manufactured, processed, packed or held by a facility.

Trump’s economic policy plan also calls for “an immediate halt to new federal regulations and a very thorough agency-level review of previous regulations to see which need to be scrapped.”

Agencies would be required to list all regulations and rank them in terms of their contribution to growth, health and safety. The ultimate goal, Trump said, would be to strengthen the rules that are useful and reduce the rules that harm the economy.
Click to expand...
 
danarhea said:
El wrongo, O salmonella breath!! :mrgreen:

Scroll down to the " FDA Food Police" section, which Trump had removed from his web site, after public outcry. The Hill, however, had already taken a screen shot of it, and you can see it at this link. The link to the document on the Trump web site now shows a blank page.
Click to expand...

Ths is a classic case of an "evolving posiion" due to public backlash. Trump is far from alone in that regard. Such prior issue/policy positions are often recorded and preserved. Did Trump change a firmly held "bedrock principle" or just drop a fleeting thought about what specific cuts in federal regulations he would prefer?

 
apdst said:
I think we can do away with the dog food department at the FDA. That sounds like a giant waste of money.
Click to expand...

Hell no! I own a dog and I would like to know I am not feeding him chopped up rabid rat meat. With tens of millions of dogs in this country, regulations for their food is also a public health concern for humans. It is this "Well that sounds like a waste of money, and I am too lazy to look into it, so let's cut it" mentality that is going to lead to some catastrophic consequences should Trump get elected.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
Hell no! I own a dog and I would like to know I am not feeding him chopped up rabid rat meat. With tens of millions of dogs in this country, regulations for their food is also a public health concern for humans. It is this "Well that sounds like a waste of money, and I am too lazy to look into it, so let's cut it" mentality that is going to lead to some catastrophic consequences should Trump get elected.
Click to expand...

Research the product your buying. It's not my responsibility to pay for dog food inspectors. It's a waste of my money.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Trump floats rolling back food safety regulations

Are you ****ing kidding me? This man and the vast majority of his policies are ****ing insane. He formulates policies like a pissed off immature teenager.
Click to expand...

Are you ****ing insane? Are no regulations in LibWorld worth doing away with? Wait, perhaps we should only be allowed to eat in government approved dining halls. Surely, the regulations that apply to restaurants should apply to homes, too.

Donald Trump would be a horrible president but mostly because he's a liberal Democrat. And, like a liberal Democrat, he'll say whatever he thinks will work and then do what he's been taught to do.
 
apdst said:
Research the product your buying. It's not my responsibility to pay for dog food inspectors. It's a waste of my money.
Click to expand...

If there are no regulations then there is nothing to research. They don't have to even be honest about what they put in it. And it is my money too. I am sure there are plenty of things tax dollars are being spent on that you support and and I don't.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
If there are no regulations then there is nothing to research. They don't have to even be honest about what they put in it. And it is my money too. I am sure there are plenty of things tax dollars are being spent on that you support and a I don't.
Click to expand...

But..but.. Hillary! Liberals!

(i just saved apdst the trouble of replying by typing it in for him)
 
Fletch said:
I still don't see him calling for an end to regulations or an end to the FDA. All I see is panic on behalf of lefties who cant fathom the idea of ever having the state do less of anything.
Click to expand...

It's partisan carp. If Obama wanted to do this, you'd be leading the screaming section.
 
rocket88 said:
It's partisan carp. If Obama wanted to do this, you'd be leading the screaming section.
Click to expand...

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Either you have never read a post of mine concerning regulation and state power, or you are so desperate to insult me that you don't care how foolish you look in the process.
 
Fletch said:
Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Either you have never read a post of mine concerning regulation and state power, or you are so desperate to insult me that you don't care how foolish you look in the process.
Click to expand...

I'm not wrong. You never miss a chance to scream about Obama.
 
CriticalThought said:
If there are no regulations then there is nothing to research. They don't have to even be honest about what they put in it. And it is my money too. I am sure there are plenty of things tax dollars are being spent on that you support and and I don't.
Click to expand...

I always find these posts interesting. You don't seem to get the underlining problem of your position and yet you go over it all the same. The fact that no one has any say in what they pay for is in fact a large part of the problem with the entire system. One way to deal with the issue is to in fact limit what the government spends on.
 
Henrin said:
I always find these posts interesting. You don't seem to get the underlining problem of your position and yet you go over it all the same. The fact that no one has any say in what they pay for is in fact a large part of the problem with the entire system. One way to deal with the issue is to in fact limit what the government spends on.
Click to expand...

Yes and we do that in part by voting for the person who advocates for the policies we support. Maybe you don't like safe pet foods because apparently the health of millions of animals is in no way connected to public human health, so you will vote for the guys who oppose pet food regulations and when Fidos everywhere pass on Ebola to their owners because some top brand dog food decided to pad the margin by including monkey brains or some stupid crap, then you can blame the government for not doing its job.
 
CriticalThought said:
If there are no regulations then there is nothing to research. They don't have to even be honest about what they put in it. And it is my money too. I am sure there are plenty of things tax dollars are being spent on that you support and and I don't.
Click to expand...

Fine, you pay for it.

How did dogs survive for the 10,000 odd years without the FDA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom