Monday, June 23, 2008

corporatocracy =2, american people =0

WASHINGTON: The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease.

The Agriculture Department tests fewer than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. A beef producer in the western state of Kansas, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, wants to test all of its cows.

Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone should test its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive tests on their larger herds as well. . . .

A federal judge ruled in March that such tests must be allowed. . . . The Agriculture Department said Tuesday it would appeal, effectively delaying the testing until the court challenge has played out.

From Bad American's Let em eat mad cow and The International Herald Tribune.

And a little background: The infectious agent responsible for bovine spongiform encephalopathy has a loooooong incubation period and is not killed by cooking. Testing 1%. Denying companies that want to do better (wait, what happened to the free market?) . . . Burger anyone?

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, you do realize that requiring testing of every cow would make the price of beef even higher, right? A small price to pay for guaranteed safety, maybe, unless you're a struggling beef farmer or a struggling family trying to put meat on the table.

As for testing every cow- a company can do that on their own. There's no law against testing all of your cos. There's just no law requiring it. So here's a free market solution: only buy beef from companies that do test all of their cows.

June 23, 2008 12:39 PM  
Blogger BigAssBelle said...

oh anonymous, read the fucking thing.

this is the government intervening to STOP a small company from certifying its beef as 100% tested just because the large beef companies don't want to have to compete.

there's the "free market" you so love in action.

June 23, 2008 12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, I understood that. I didn't express myself well, I think, so let me try again:

This is not an example of free markets. In a free market, the government would stay the fuck out of it and allow any company to test whatever number of cows they wanted, and then allow them to advertise that. So, the point is that it's not the free market that is failing here, it is the LACK OF FREE MARKETS that is failing because the government can't mind their own fucking business.

June 23, 2008 1:34 PM  
Blogger BigAssBelle said...

hahahahahah!!!! oh, wiping tears . . . just go away, foolish creature. not welcome here. goodbye.

June 23, 2008 2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Huh? Now I'm really confused. We actually agree on this: the larger meat companies and Dept of Agriculture are wrong, and the government should not be able to forbid full testing by companies that want to do so. But that means you actually want a free market since that would mean (At least by the definition I've always learned) that the government would allow what you (we) want: for Creekstone to be able to test whatever cows it wants. Am I misunderstanding you? I thought you wanted that?

June 23, 2008 2:27 PM  
Blogger BigAssBelle said...

big companies run boo hoo hoo-ing to the government to intervene on their behalf.

free market? not so much.

the small processor, who wants to gain a competitive edge by doing something the others aren't doing, is barred from that because the big nanny boys don't want them to.

this is typical corporate bullshit. cry free market, free market, while whining and crying about unfair competition.

your arguments are kneejerk right wing crap, anonymous. you don't even know what you're talking about.

June 23, 2008 2:50 PM  
Blogger Doralong said...

No pun intended- but that's truly barking mad..

June 23, 2008 4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, let me try one more time:

Lynette, I AGREE with you. 100%. Absolutely. Completely.

The free market is NOT being used here (and anyone who claims it is is wrong). The problem is that the free market is NOT being used. If it were, the small company would be able to do exactly what they want to do (and should be able to do) and the larger company wouldn't be able to whine to the government about it.

So, by your words, you actually support the free market in this instance, and you are correct. Unfortunately, the free markte is not being allowed to work here. If it were, we'd all be able to choose if we wanted to buy meat from companies that tested 100% of their cows, or 1%. Since the free market is not being used, it means we have only 1 choice. And that is not right.

June 23, 2008 6:29 PM  
Anonymous TedBear said...

Did the USA already get repossessed by the Chinese government? Food testing? We don't need no stinking food testing. We are acting more and more like we have a Benevolent Chairman Mao. Oh, wait, we do, Bushwad.

BAB- are you going to Pride NYC?

June 24, 2008 11:36 PM  
Blogger Dusty said...

Belle, mad cow is 100% sure to kill humans that contract it. So it's not 'can kill' its 'will kill' humans.

Its a slow agonizing death. One I wouldn't wish on my worse enemy..unless of course his name is Bush or Cheney.

June 26, 2008 4:56 PM  
Blogger Doralong said...

Dusty- dang! That's a thought, huh??

June 26, 2008 4:58 PM  
Blogger Dusty said...

Sure is Doralong, might not be a popular thought..but its my thought on this issue.

Belle, I posted this on Sirens m'dear. I hadn't heard about it until I stopped by here today.

June 26, 2008 5:07 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home