Vote Yes on 37 - Unregistered
Original post made by Ngo Loon on Oct 30, 2012
on Oct 31, 2012 at 7:32 pm
I restricted it to keep the conversation civil. All opinions welcome when they are respectfully presented. Otherwise-they are free to you this topic to anonymously rant and rave.
on Nov 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm
This is a simple labeling bill. It will not increase the cost of your food. Dow chemical and Monsanto chemical is spearheading the no on 37 and are the ones spreading the lies ...Why?..because they are the ones that make these gmo seeds. I personally want to know what I eat, and I read the nutrition labels. and I will be voting yes on prop 37
on Nov 1, 2012 at 7:19 pm
The problem I see with this initiative is the cottage industry of lawsuits this will create. You do not have to show any intent in order for a lawyer to sue you and it will cost the vendors money, most likely by an out of court settlement. I have seen this for the disabilities act. Just about every winery in California was sued by an ex-convict who studied law while he was in jail. This guy was not trying to get things fixed. He saw a very lucrative money making opportunity as even if there was no infraction, the cost of hiring lawyers to defend yourself was higher than the out of court settlement so the best business decision was to pay the extortion. This law could make sense if it allowed regulation by the government instead of the trial lawyers seeing this as a revenue generator. There are so many grains today that have been modified to help them grow in the challenging weather conditions, which makes it harder for the vendor of the end-product to manage all of this. Much of the world is thankful we have these genetically-modified techniques as it allows many countries that could not keep crops alive to now be able to do so, and feed their people.