Comment: I vote no. As an individual

(See in situ)

I vote no. As an individual

I vote no. As an individual in the marketplace ... you don't HAVE a right to know anything ... you may have a desire to know something ... but you certainly don't have a right to knowledge.

If a business wants to sell you something, be it food or anything else, you don't have a right to know how they prepared it or what went into it, etc. Again, you have a desire to know. And the business is not obligated to tell you anything.

If you make a demand and the business does not deliver, the deal should not go through. Like Ron Paul says ... if the marketplace is demanding that more companies disclose the processes that food goes through before it reaches your mouth, then they will do so. Apparently, it is not a big issue, and it is not in high demand at this point in time.

If you feel that you aren't getting enough information on a product, then you are the final arbiter on whether you purchase it or not. So there is nothing wrong going on here. You are offered something and you are declining it due to lack of information.

Giving the government more power to regulate and dictate terms in the marketplace solves nothing. It's sort of like the law mandating fast food restaurants to post nutritional information on their menus. Are less people eating fast food? Hardly.

The FDA on a federal level already regulates everything. If something is FDA approved, does that mean it is safe and healthy? Hardly. That is wishful thinking. So if this kind of thing does not work on the Federal Level, what makes you think it's going to work at the state level?

Someone please tell me where this "right to know" comes from ... in relation to doing business in the marketplace. I would love to hear an explanation without pompous arrogance and the emotional appeal fallacy.

All paper money eventually returns to its real intrinsic value, zero. - Voltaire