|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 24 2018 05:39 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 01:25 Plansix wrote:Missouri May Be First State To Get Serious About The Definition Of Meat
Missouri is at the vanguard of defining what meat is, thanks to legislation awaiting the governor's signature.
It's an essential, perhaps even existential, question sparked by the growth of plant-based proteins, meat substitutes and lab-grown products. And it's a topic that, while first passed at the state level on May 17, is also being considered at the federal level.
Under the bill, which had overwhelming bipartisan support, only products that come from once-living, breathing animals can be marketed as meat. Specifically, meat would be defined as something "derived from harvested production livestock or poultry."
Spokesman Mike Deering of the Missouri Cattlemen's Association said it's key to protecting livestock producers' livelihood and investments.
"There's a lot of unknowns about these products and safety protocols and nutrition and all of that ... we're not stifling technology, but [we want to] make sure that we market with integrity and we're honest with consumers," he said.
In a year when the USDA expects Americans to eat record amounts of meat, livestock associations aren't necessarily targeting veggie burgers. They're more focused on plant-based meat products (also known as "clean meat") that have been gaining steam in the last year or so — companies like Beyond Meat and Hungry Planet in Missouri, as well as Impossible Burger and Memphis Meats.
Deering referenced a "knowledge gap" between producers and consumers.
"Why try to mimic the traditional meat industry?" he said of alternative meat company packaging that he claims misleads consumers. "Why put pictures of cattle and pictures of chickens on their product?"
But that's an argument that opponents of the bill, including the Good Food Institute, believe is a nonstarter. They say consumers are smart enough to know what they're looking for at the grocery store.
"All of these products that are currently on the market use descriptors that say what the source of the ingredients are ... you're going to find something that says soy-based vegan beef crumbles," GFI's director of policy Jessica Almy said, adding, "These compound names, like plant-based chicken, both communicate to consumers what the source of the food is."
She also said that federal law already keeps companies from misleading consumers about what the product is, and pointed out another possible issue: "a patchwork" of state labeling laws.
"It's going to create a situation where products that go to Missouri have to be labeled differently" than in the other 49 states, and it'll "pose significant and unnecessary hurdles for producers selling new products," Almy said.
Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens has until July 15 to sign the bill into law. SourceIn other new, a much needed state law is being pushed through in Missouri. The requirements on the US food industry have been notoriously lax and the FDA is pretty toothless when it comes to “innovations” in the mass market food industry. It is good a state is starting the push to force labeling that reflects were the hell the food started. Because the lack of labeling is only making people suspicious. So if you hunt some deer or elk that is not allowed to be called meat since it is not "derived from harvested production livestock or poultry"? Or does production livestock include wild animals?
You wouldn’t be allowed to sell it anyways, which is what this is about. It is about labeling in stores.
|
The big question, and one the actual bill doesn't seem to really answer, is what it means to be "marketed as meat." Is calling something "X burger" marketing it as meat? Is including a cow on the package when it's designed to taste like cow marketing it as meat? Is calling something beefless ground beef marketing it as meat? Seems like a great provision for weaponizing against out of state products to me...
|
I'd bet it gets struck down in federal court if it passes.
|
On May 24 2018 05:56 TheTenthDoc wrote:
The big question, and one the actual bill doesn't seem to really answer, is what it means to be "marketed as meat." Is calling something "X burger" marketing it as meat? Is including a cow on the package when it's designed to taste like cow marketing it as meat? Is calling something beefless ground beef marketing it as meat? Seems like a great provision for weaponizing against out of state products to me...
See "Cheez Whiz" and "Pringles Potato Snack".
|
I am sure we will settle on “meat product” for the fake veggie meat.
|
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product.
|
As someone who ate a lot of faux meat (and real meat) these last few months, I have to say the idea that they're marketed as real meat in any way is pretty laughable (with possibly the exception of the beast burger and even that says "100% PLANT PROTEIN in giant letters). The mere fact they're called "the impossible" or "beyond X" and generally say in all their marketing "tastes even better than meat" should tip off anyone with a modicum of sense.
(as a total side note beefless ground beef is infinitely better than real ground beef, it tastes way better)
|
On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 03:04 On_Slaught wrote:
Also, yet another example of shady money behind the Trump sphere of influence.
There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. Show nested quote +One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face".
So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians?
Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine...
|
On May 24 2018 06:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product.
Even when it comes to non-vegetarian meat products, labelling and marketing is terribly misleading. Especially when it comes to fillers, additives, and even just the animal the meat is coming from.
On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine...
You're stretching the Ukrainian situation quite far here. They have four separate open investigations on Manafort, they were reaching out to Mueller to cooperate and share information, and nothing has been dismissed.
It's entirely political bargaining that the investigations are currently frozen, not denial of any wrongdoing.
|
On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine... Or you can look a line of text further and see that he will probably do anything to get access to more weapons to actually hold of the "totally not supported by Russia" rebels.
Also an offer to conveniently not find more evidence in exchange for X tends to mean that there is actual evidence to find. It most certainly does not imply that there existed no evidence in the first place.
|
On May 24 2018 07:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine... Or you can look a line of text further and see that he will probably do anything to get access to more weapons to actually hold of the "totally not supported by Russia" rebels. Also an offer to conveniently not find more evidence in exchange for X tends to mean that there is actual evidence to find. It most certainly does not imply that there existed no evidence in the first place.
Evidence on Manafort, sure. But Ukraine wouldn't negotiate with a Russian stooge president like this, is the point. The fact that the Ukrainians are willing to do this seems to me like they think he will remain in office because the "Russian investigation" will turn out blank on incriminating Trump with regards to collusion.
|
The investigation isn’t about him being a Russian stooge. Never has been.
|
On May 24 2018 07:39 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 07:30 Gorsameth wrote:On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine... Or you can look a line of text further and see that he will probably do anything to get access to more weapons to actually hold of the "totally not supported by Russia" rebels. Also an offer to conveniently not find more evidence in exchange for X tends to mean that there is actual evidence to find. It most certainly does not imply that there existed no evidence in the first place. Evidence on Manafort, sure. But Ukraine wouldn't negotiate with a Russian stooge president like this, is the point. The fact that the Ukrainians are willing to do this seems to me like they think he will remain in office because the "Russian investigation" will turn out blank on incriminating Trump with regards to collusion.
This really isn't a point at all. Foreign policy is shaped on what the rest of the world currently looks like, not what you want it to look like. And Trump is the sitting President of the United States.
|
On May 24 2018 07:39 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 07:30 Gorsameth wrote:On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine... Or you can look a line of text further and see that he will probably do anything to get access to more weapons to actually hold of the "totally not supported by Russia" rebels. Also an offer to conveniently not find more evidence in exchange for X tends to mean that there is actual evidence to find. It most certainly does not imply that there existed no evidence in the first place. Evidence on Manafort, sure. But Ukraine wouldn't negotiate with a Russian stooge president like this, is the point. The fact that the Ukrainians are willing to do this seems to me like they think he will remain in office because the "Russian investigation" will turn out blank on incriminating Trump with regards to collusion.
or they think he'll remain in office no matter what the outcome of the investigation, because they're from a part of the world that's very corrupt, and is used to corrupt people staying in office. and at any rate they don't want to take the risk.
you're simply reaching too hard to get to a conclusion you want, rather than because it's actually supported by the evidence.
also, even if they could provide evidence that would implicate trump, that'd still annoy a lot of republicans, moreso than it would please democrats, and possibly cost them support in the long run anyways.
|
On May 24 2018 07:39 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 07:30 Gorsameth wrote:On May 24 2018 07:18 a_flayer wrote:On May 24 2018 05:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:There is a lot of depth to this article, a very interesting read. Besides Cohen selling access to president for 400k and barely delivering on it, it also implies that Ukraine decided to no longer provide evidence on Manafort/Russia, to please Trump eventually leading to them currently getting sold Javelin anti-tank missiles. One source in Kiev said Mr Poroshenko had given Trump "a gift" - making sure that Ukraine would find no more evidence to give the US inquiry into whether the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia.
Mr Poroshenko knew that to do otherwise, another source said, "would be like spitting in Trump's face". So. How do we feel about the Russia investigation now? When Ukraine is unwilling to buy into an anti-Russia conspiracy, you know you're in some really new territory. I mean, they'd go along with it even at their own cost, if they thought it could make Russia look bad. Wouldn't Ukraine want this Russian stooge removed from the oval office if they thought he was compromised and then reap the benefits for their assistance later? Does anyone still think its likely that Trump is in bed with the Russians? Honestly, I don't know why is it still called the "Russian investigation" at this point. We've been in Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine... Or you can look a line of text further and see that he will probably do anything to get access to more weapons to actually hold of the "totally not supported by Russia" rebels. Also an offer to conveniently not find more evidence in exchange for X tends to mean that there is actual evidence to find. It most certainly does not imply that there existed no evidence in the first place. Evidence on Manafort, sure. But Ukraine wouldn't negotiate with a Russian stooge president like this, is the point. The fact that the Ukrainians are willing to do this seems to me like they think he will remain in office because the "Russian investigation" will turn out blank on incriminating Trump with regards to collusion. When a (near) super power is organizing an armed insurrection in your country and has already successfully occupied and annexed a province you negotiate with whoever the hell is willing to give you help.
But sure, lets wait for Trump to be gone in 2 more years instead. You can afford to lose another province in the meantime right?
|
On May 24 2018 07:18 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 06:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product. Even when it comes to non-vegetarian meat products, labelling and marketing is terribly misleading. Especially when it comes to fillers, additives, and even just the animal the meat is coming from.
The whole thing stinks to hell of the livestock lobby seeing that somebody else could someday soon make a replacement for their product that is cheaper.
|
On May 24 2018 08:40 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 07:18 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 24 2018 06:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product. Even when it comes to non-vegetarian meat products, labelling and marketing is terribly misleading. Especially when it comes to fillers, additives, and even just the animal the meat is coming from. The whole thing stinks to hell of the livestock lobby seeing that somebody else could someday soon make a replacement for their product that is cheaper.
There's an issue with consumers being ridiculously prudish about what they're willing to eat, but aside from that I see no issue requiring clear labelling on products.
|
On May 24 2018 09:22 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 08:40 Gahlo wrote:On May 24 2018 07:18 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 24 2018 06:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product. Even when it comes to non-vegetarian meat products, labelling and marketing is terribly misleading. Especially when it comes to fillers, additives, and even just the animal the meat is coming from. The whole thing stinks to hell of the livestock lobby seeing that somebody else could someday soon make a replacement for their product that is cheaper. There's an issue with consumers being ridiculously prudish about what they're willing to eat, but aside from that I see no issue requiring clear labelling on products.
I would assert that food industry and its resistance to labeling and transparency has only made the problem worse.
|
On May 24 2018 09:22 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2018 08:40 Gahlo wrote:On May 24 2018 07:18 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 24 2018 06:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
"Production livestock" gives it away that the policymaker is the farming lobby. The idea that consumers are ebing mislead that the vegetarian meat alternative product or protien made from microorganisms is pig, cattle, or chicken flesh is laughable, especially when the market for such is that it isn't animal product. Even when it comes to non-vegetarian meat products, labelling and marketing is terribly misleading. Especially when it comes to fillers, additives, and even just the animal the meat is coming from. The whole thing stinks to hell of the livestock lobby seeing that somebody else could someday soon make a replacement for their product that is cheaper. There's an issue with consumers being ridiculously prudish about what they're willing to eat, but aside from that I see no issue requiring clear labelling on products.
That's not what they want, though. They want a philosophically arguable labeling of products, which is beneficial to them, and has nothing to do with nutrition. One that is based on a debate that has not been settled and that intellectually they would probably lose. They want this because labels have a powerful ability to shape image. They know exactly what they are doing, and it has no basis in ethics. I have no problem with making information available and accurate. I have serious issues with tricks that convince the less aware masses into thinking a certain way.
|
When we talk about this labeling, we do need to remember we are talking about corporations driven by profit. Corporations that will lie or omit information to the public to sell their products. This isn’t about science or creating a more efficient way of feeding people. This is about marketing products. And forcing companies to be upfront about the food and what is it made out of it good people buying that food. Veggie burgers should not be called “wonder burger” with the word “beef” in bold on the front label and then only saying they are a “vegetable product” on the back. That is no fun for anyone. That shit just sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
