I lived so close and never even heard of these guys

http://www.polyfacefarms.com/default.aspx

My favorite



Oh well, may be time to get a home school visit to the farm.

Good example of the marketplace responding to signals. Lots of demand being generated for organic foods is creating innovation. How long before the government comes in and finds some way to screw this up?

(04-06-2010 05:48 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Good example of the marketplace responding to signals. Lots of demand being generated for organic foods is creating innovation. How long before the government comes in and finds some way to screw this up?

Exactly. Read the description of the book that's above; the Gov't has been trying to shut them down from the beginning.

Why are gov't forces against them? I don't get it, I thought the dems were the green party. Is it co2?

(04-06-2010 09:25 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Why are gov't forces against them? I don't get it, I thought the dems were the green party. Is it co2?

I don't think it's partisan. I think it's the bureaucrats at the USDA, and state level. Perhaps FDA and EPA as well. Their fiefdoms are threatened by new ideas (even if they are really just old ideas). To quote Coyote Blog,

"Government bureaucracies do not exercise power by allowing activities to occur – they only have power, and thus have reason to justify their continued funding and jobs, when they say no. Every incentive that they have is to say no. When a government agency allows progress to proceed smoothly, it is doing so because some person or small group is fighting against the very nature of the organization. "

(04-06-2010 09:35 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 09:25 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Why are gov't forces against them? I don't get it, I thought the dems were the green party. Is it co2?

I don't think it's partisan. I think it's the bureaucrats at the USDA, and state level. Perhaps FDA and EPA as well. Their fiefdoms are threatened by new ideas (even if they are really just old ideas). To quote Coyote Blog,

"Government bureaucracies do not exercise power by allowing activities to occur – they only have power, and thus have reason to justify their continued funding and jobs, when they say no. Every incentive that they have is to say no. When a government agency allows progress to proceed smoothly, it is doing so because some person or small group is fighting against the very nature of the organization. "

I just don't get it, these are the most down to earth people I've ever seen, and they are making a market and profit without gov't assistance. What could they possibly be doing illegal?

(04-06-2010 09:44 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  I just don't get it, these are the most down to earth people I've ever seen, and they are making a market and profit without gov't assistance. What could they possibly be doing illegal?

I just "discoverd" them. I haven't been there, nor have I read any of their books, so I don't know.

But, this is how they describe themselves

"Christian-conservative-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic” so you could see how I became interested.

Anyway, I read that quote here:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/02/co...ant-resist

Which is yet another column that should get Fo worked up

I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Aiiiiiiieeeeee head assplodes.

(04-06-2010 09:55 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 09:44 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  I just don't get it, these are the most down to earth people I've ever seen, and they are making a market and profit without gov't assistance. What could they possibly be doing illegal?

I just "discoverd" them. I haven't been there, nor have I read any of their books, so I don't know.

But, this is how they describe themselves

"Christian-conservative-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic” so you could see how I became interested.

Anyway, I read that quote here:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/02/co...ant-resist

Which is yet another column that should get Fo worked up

I love the quote from the bartender..."You mean people can make their own decisions as adults?" How dare him state the obvious!!!....Oh...Of course it is not obvious to the bureaucrats.

(04-06-2010 09:55 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 09:44 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  I just don't get it, these are the most down to earth people I've ever seen, and they are making a market and profit without gov't assistance. What could they possibly be doing illegal?

I just "discoverd" them. I haven't been there, nor have I read any of their books, so I don't know.

But, this is how they describe themselves

"Christian-conservative-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic” so you could see how I became interested.

Anyway, I read that quote here:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/02/co...ant-resist

Which is yet another column that should get Fo worked up

I love the quote from the bartender..."You mean people can make their own decisions as adults?" How dare him state the obvious!!!....Oh...Of course it is not obvious to the bureaucrats.

Quote:Respecting and honoring the pigness of the pig is a foundation for societal health.

I wish them well, but this quote just makes me laugh.

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

(04-07-2010 08:17 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

Of course..and it has less to do with government regulation and more to do with simply "not wanting to make customers sick". Health standards are fine..but...the government is the wrong one to set them. Its should be done by independent rating services competing in the marketplace...not bureaucrats that have NO stake in the businesses.

(04-07-2010 09:29 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 08:17 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

Of course..and it has less to do with government regulation and more to do with simply "not wanting to make customers sick". Health standards are fine..but...the government is the wrong one to set them. Its should be done by independent rating services competing in the marketplace...not bureaucrats that have NO stake in the businesses.

Sorry Fo, I disagree on this one. Seems perfectly reasonable for me for the gov't to be the "independent rating service."

The problem here is simple: the government is too busy telling people how to do their jobs, instead of setting the metrics and letting companies get there however they choose.

All gov't should do is define what "safe food" is, and describe exactly how that will be measured. And it should keep them plenty occupied making sure they can defend their definitions and methods. But, they're too busy sticking their noses in to operations and rejecting things simply because they don't understand them.

(04-07-2010 09:29 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 08:17 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

Of course..and it has less to do with government regulation and more to do with simply "not wanting to make customers sick". Health standards are fine..but...the government is the wrong one to set them. Its should be done by independent rating services competing in the marketplace...not bureaucrats that have NO stake in the businesses.

c'mon fo do you really want the food supply unregulated. Left to their own devices, the market would sink into disarray. Do you remember Odwalla?

(04-07-2010 09:29 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 08:17 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

Of course..and it has less to do with government regulation and more to do with simply "not wanting to make customers sick". Health standards are fine..but...the government is the wrong one to set them. Its should be done by independent rating services competing in the marketplace...not bureaucrats that have NO stake in the businesses.

If your private approach works, why isn't food safer in countries without vast food safety regulation? Why does cholera break out in Africa, shouldn't people be driven by the market to the safe wells? Why does food poisoning happen so much in China? Shouldn't the market only support those vendors with sanitary conditions?

You know the answer to the above. Markets supports whatever cut-rate price is offered, which often means cutting corners on the easy stuff like sanitation, proper prep, research on preservatives etc.

The problem inherent in your univeral private approach is that people die from poor food safety. Ofter after only one meal. This isn't a dishwasher that you can return to the Depot and write a bad review on Yelp, this may be tainted meat that kills you after one hamburger.

The government the ability to enforce regulations that impact food companies health and safery programs. Consumer Reports doesn't.

While many on this board sympathize with your leanings, your pure market conditions are nigh impossible to ever be realized.

(04-08-2010 08:34 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 09:29 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 08:17 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(04-07-2010 07:52 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-06-2010 11:10 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am conflicted.

I hate hippies. But I like farmers! I don't like government intrusion. But I like my food to safe and secure!

Your food is "safe and secure"? Really?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208306/ns/...york_times

http://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/majorp...efault.htm

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/foodb...070000.htm

Yes, the vast majority of foods consumed by Americans is safe and secure. You know this.

Of course..and it has less to do with government regulation and more to do with simply "not wanting to make customers sick". Health standards are fine..but...the government is the wrong one to set them. Its should be done by independent rating services competing in the marketplace...not bureaucrats that have NO stake in the businesses.

If your private approach works, why isn't food safer in countries without vast food safety regulation? Why does cholera break out in Africa, shouldn't people be driven by the market to the safe wells? Why does food poisoning happen so much in China? Shouldn't the market only support those vendors with sanitary conditions?

You know the answer to the above. Markets supports whatever cut-rate price is offered, which often means cutting corners on the easy stuff like sanitation, proper prep, research on preservatives etc.

The problem inherent in your univeral private approach is that people die from poor food safety. Ofter after only one meal. This isn't a dishwasher that you can return to the Depot and write a bad review on Yelp, this may be tainted meat that kills you after one hamburger.

The government the ability to enforce regulations that impact food companies health and safery programs. Consumer Reports doesn't.

While many on this board sympathize with your leanings, your pure market conditions are nigh impossible to ever be realized.

There is no reason why the government inspection paradigm could not be handled by private organizations. We already see many food chains that have their own inspections and standards that are higher than the government. Ask a McDonalds owner about their standards.

Independent organization WOULD have the same power because the CONSUMER would STOP doing business with those that got poor ratings. Consumers support those with quality products...always have..always will.

You are correct that this is not likely to occur. The reason is that Americans LOVE to be controlled. They ***** and moan about the government, but are scared to let it go. The illusion of safety has been driven into our gullible heads by bureaucrats. No government inspection or standard make anyone safe. It is the individual businessman that insures your safety. He is NOT looking to poison you. Do people get sick from bad food?....of course...and they do it under the government paradigm. Why can't I bring a suit against the government if I get sick from contaminated food? Oh..I forgot. The government is not liable for your safety even though it claims to be keeping you safe.

I am not scared to let the chains of government control slip off of me. I know the marketplace is capable of providing for my needs.