Republicans Represent the People

[Ubermensch]

Health inspection isn't a pass/fail kind of deal. It's actually a grading system, so it actually incentivises businesses. An establisment with an A+++ health rating is going to be more appealing to consumers than one with a D-, you dig? And yes, we should be checking these organisations regularly, they handle and prepare people's fucking FOOD. All the time! Strangers! I'd want to know that they are being held to AT LEAST minimum standards of quality and cleanliness! So that I can eat there with some degree of confidence that I am not going to get some sort of parasite that will eat my stomach lining! Prevention is better than cure and if that means we have to hold all food establishments to certain standards of safe practise then so fucking be it! I'm willing to pay a little bit extra in taxes in order to make sure I'm not going to be firing out both ends after I go to a restaurant, or even a fast food joint.

1) How many times (be honest now) do you check a restaurant's health inspection results before eating there?

2) Even a restaurant achieving the maximum score on a health inspection does not mean it is safe to eat there. It means that at one point in time (i.e. the inspection), it was preparing foods according to a certain standard of care and cleanliness. It doesn't mean they are still doing it.

I check every restaurant on my first time there and from every year onwards. I'm a pedant like that. And yeah I get that a health inspection grade isn't an absolute guaruntee that it's going to be safe, nothing is. But it's a pretty fucking good indicator you dig?

[reverendjeremiah]

I wonder how many pencil shavings you would be eating per day if Voids system was in control of the government. You would have to deal with monopolies that would find ways to cut costs and raise prices every day.. even if it means sneaking in another table spoon of ground pigs hair into the mix to make up the difference.

[Tiberius]

I wonder how many pencil shavings you would be eating per day if Voids system was in control of the government. You would have to deal with monopolies that would find ways to cut costs and raise prices every day.. even if it means sneaking in another table spoon of ground pigs hair into the mix to make up the difference.

1) Not every single piece of food is tested by the government before we eat it. You could be eating pencil shavings now and you wouldn't know it unless you did your own tests.

2) Just because the government wouldn't be testing food doesn't mean that other private institutions wouldn't either. In the Computer industry, there are many private regulatory bodies that build up a presence and charge for people to get certified with them. For instance, in computer security, CAP, SSCP and CISSP are all certificates issued by a private authority: (ISC)2.

There is no reason why this wouldn't also be true for the food industry if the government stepped back from regulating and spent more time policing. It's the rule of the market; if there is a demand for something, it'll appear pretty quickly.

[Ubermensch]

It's the rule of the market; if there is a demand for something, it'll appear pretty quickly.

Aaaaaand then it can get bought out or out-competed by a monopolistic corporation that doesn't like its profit margins being threatened.

[reverendjeremiah]

1) Not every single piece of food is tested by the government before we eat it. You could be eating pencil shavings now and you wouldn't know it unless you did your own tests.

True, but in a libertarian model the government will do nothing to remedy the situation. Apparently the "free market" is supposed to use their buying power to punish this offence, but a Libertarian model allows monopolies, which means it is a win win situation for the perps, because the libertarian govt would protect their intellectual property and not allow others to offer a better quality item. In other words, the libertarian govt will protect the corporations contracts as opposed to the health of the masses.

2) Just because the government wouldn't be testing food doesn't mean that other private institutions wouldn't either. In the Computer industry, there are many private regulatory bodies that build up a presence and charge for people to get certified with them. For instance, in computer security, CAP, SSCP and CISSP are all certificates issued by a private authority: (ISC)2.

Of course the occasional private citizen will find the funds to test the products of others, and some will create companies. But who regulates them? Not the government. They can lie all they want. The libertarian government will stand behind contracts first, evidence second. If someone has the money then it doesnt matter what these "watchdogs" say, as they will not be able to shut down the harmful corporation and such a monopolised corporation can spend mass amounts of money to drown out the truth. I also thought that a private authority is a fallacy, making arguments from authority. Wouldnt it be more logical to have a social regulatory where people of opposing view points can both be in power to keep each other in check? Conflict may not be the most efficient approach, but it is a good approach to checks and balances.

There is no reason why this wouldn't also be true for the food industry if the government stepped back from regulating and spent more time policing. It's the rule of the market; if there is a demand for something, it'll appear pretty quickly.

Wait..I thought regulating and policing were the same thing? What good is regulating without policing, and vice versa. That makes no sense to me. If you know your history, then tell me what happened in the deregulated market of post American civil war southern states? Look up "carpet bagger".