Red Mosquito

tragabigzanda wrote:Tucker Carlson:

Fox News host Tucker Carlson said this week that young Americans are increasingly attracted to socialism because "our current system isn't working" for them when it comes to issues like college debt.

...

"We need to move the crushing financial burden of student debt off the shoulders of middle-class families and 22-year-olds and back onto the people who’ve gotten rich from it," Carlson and Patel conclude. "That’s an idea every sensible person can support. And there’s a political payoff for any politician wise enough to adopt it."

WTF? I bet he got tongue lashed for that.

wease wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:Tucker Carlson:

Fox News host Tucker Carlson said this week that young Americans are increasingly attracted to socialism because "our current system isn't working" for them when it comes to issues like college debt.

...

"We need to move the crushing financial burden of student debt off the shoulders of middle-class families and 22-year-olds and back onto the people who’ve gotten rich from it," Carlson and Patel conclude. "That’s an idea every sensible person can support. And there’s a political payoff for any politician wise enough to adopt it."

WTF? I bet he got tongue lashed for that.

Yea i feel like this is a prank thread. that came out of tucker carlsons mouth? amazing

Desperate times. The right is treading water because of Trump. He's right in that it's a good way to get a lot of votes. I know a lot of people with a lot of student debt that would switch sides in a heartbeat for four years if it meant getting rid of student loan debt

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

He has college age kids. Simple as that.

tragabigzanda wrote:

Of course, rather than legislating this, American beef companies could choose to add a MADE IN USA label, and if it is in fact it is healthier/safer and consumers have a preference for healthier/safer beef the label, or the absence of such a label, will influence their decisions in favor of American beef. No legislation required. Of course, if consumers don't care about health/safety (unlikely) or if the health/safety benefits of American beef are overstated, then American beef companies would probably want legislation to shield them from competition.

4/5 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

Of course, rather than legislating this, American beef companies could choose to add a MADE IN USA label, and if it is in fact it is healthier/safer and consumers have a preference for healthier/safer beef the label, or the absence of such a label, will influence their decisions in favor of American beef. No legislation required. Of course, if consumers don't care about health/safety (unlikely) or if the health/safety benefits of American beef are overstated, then American beef companies would probably want legislation to shield them from competition.

Sure, but then the "made in USA" label without gov't oversight could be potentially used as a "we processed the cow here so this thing you're holding in your hand was 'made' in the USA"

which would probably happen even with oversight, it all depends on what the person in charge wants to consider against the rules, after all.

tragabigzanda wrote:

4/5 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

Of course, rather than legislating this, American beef companies could choose to add a MADE IN USA label, and if it is in fact it is healthier/safer and consumers have a preference for healthier/safer beef the label, or the absence of such a label, will influence their decisions in favor of American beef. No legislation required. Of course, if consumers don't care about health/safety (unlikely) or if the health/safety benefits of American beef are overstated, then American beef companies would probably want legislation to shield them from competition.

My understanding is that such a label would have to be regulated by the USDA and/or FDA (more likely the former), and that a change in regulation would require legislation followed by open comment period. That’s just based on what I’ve seen before with similar issue, so I could be wrong here, but...

You may be right. I'm not sure. I'm just picturing something like on the wrapper for Purdue chicken, for example, an American flag or a "Made in USA" stamp.

I'm sure that they could advertise USA beef to convince people that it's safer/healthier. Kind of like those commercials where California dairy farmers try to convince that California cows are happier and that the milk/cheese from their happy cows is superior to that of non-Cali cows.

bune wrote:

4/5 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

Of course, rather than legislating this, American beef companies could choose to add a MADE IN USA label, and if it is in fact it is healthier/safer and consumers have a preference for healthier/safer beef the label, or the absence of such a label, will influence their decisions in favor of American beef. No legislation required. Of course, if consumers don't care about health/safety (unlikely) or if the health/safety benefits of American beef are overstated, then American beef companies would probably want legislation to shield them from competition.

Sure, but then the "made in USA" label without gov't oversight could be potentially used as a "we processed the cow here so this thing you're holding in your hand was 'made' in the USA"

which would probably happen even with oversight, it all depends on what the person in charge wants to consider against the rules, after all.

Could be. But in my scenario without regulation it would be in the interest of USA beef producers to find a way to differentiate themselves from non-USA beef producers. So they could do things like privately regulate a specific stamp among themselves, with a USA flag and a check mark or whatever. And that would be the stamp of approval that says "this is the superior/healthier/safer made-in-USA beef that you want to buy, not that other one." I'm betting that those firms would be much more motivated in trying to stop imitators from misleading the public than the overworked bureaucrats in D.C.

My main point is that if USA beef is in fact better/healthier then they (USA beef producers) should be very motivated to (1) make sure the public believes that their product is superior and (2) to make it as easy for the consumer to choose USA beef as much as possible. And if their claim is true the regulation would be redundant and unnecessary because people would naturally choose their product.

Inspector stamps are already a hot commodity (we had to lock ours up every time we left the office) so this would be another thing to lock up and/or potentially forge.

But it's a good idea, I don't want to just sit here and tell you why it won't/can't work, that sucks.

bune wrote:Inspector stamps are already a hot commodity (we had to lock ours up every time we left the office) so this would be another thing to lock up and/or potentially forge.

Interesting. What do you do, if you don't mind me asking?

Right now nothing near as interesting but I was a food inspector while in the Army. One of the things we did was check the cuts of beef and pork for the stamps that the factory inspectors used. We heard a lot of stories and had stamps of our own.

edit: sample image

bune wrote:Right now nothing near as interesting but I was a food inspector while in the Army. One of the things we did was check the cuts of beef and pork for the stamps that the factory inspectors used. We heard a lot of stories and had stamps of our own.

Oh wow, so yeah you know way more than I do about what I was saying.

I've edited this question a few times, but I think this one gets to it: after what you've seen do you still eat beef/pork?

I'll go one better: Do I eat anything at all knowing what I know. You kind of have to just not think about it. I mean, do you stop eating something because of the knowledge that 'X is an acceptable number of bug parts before it's flagged' means there there is a quantity of bug parts greater than 0 in your food?

But to answer your question: yeah but way less frequently than most. We don't have a lot of either and stick to chicken most of the time.

4/5 wrote:[My main point is that if USA beef is in fact better/healthier then they (USA beef producers) should be very motivated to (1) make sure the public believes that their product is superior and (2) to make it as easy for the consumer to choose USA beef as much as possible. And if their claim is true the regulation would be redundant and unnecessary because people would naturally choose their product.

Isn't most meat cut and packaged at store level?

truly it depends on what the contract says but yes, you're correct in that the store does most of the cutting: They get a giant cut that they then reduce to the individual pieces.

surfndestroy wrote:

4/5 wrote:[My main point is that if USA beef is in fact better/healthier then they (USA beef producers) should be very motivated to (1) make sure the public believes that their product is superior and (2) to make it as easy for the consumer to choose USA beef as much as possible. And if their claim is true the regulation would be redundant and unnecessary because people would naturally choose their product.

Isn't most meat cut and packaged at store level?

bune wrote:truly it depends on what the contract says but yes, you're correct in that the store does most of the cutting: They get a giant cut that they then reduce to the individual pieces.

Not all of them do. WalMart hasn't cut their own meat or ground their own burger for years*. Kroger has both. Fresh cut and prepackaged. As does Publix.


*Oddly, Sam's Club DOES cut their own meat.