First the Supreme Court grants immunity to medical device makers and now the USDA is considering the option of holding back the names of retailers in future meat recalls.
(CLICK HERE FOR A MORE RECENT UPDATE ON THIS ISSUE)
Had this rule been in place last month, consumers would not have been made aware of which supermarkets were selling meat from the largest beef recall in US history. Furthermore, because beef is often repackaged at the grocery store without a brand label, there is often no way to identify whether that meat is part of the recall or not.
Question: Why is the US Government less interested in our safety than they are in looking out for the interests of the businesses they are supposed to be protecting us from? Whatever happened to legislation designed to promote public safety and consumer confidence.
Is it any wonder that our economy is struggling when there are more laws protecting the credit card companies than the people on which they prey; when the mortgage industry can use shady tactics to trap home-owners into high-interest loans, while those very same people are unable to file bankruptcy on the life-sentence we call credit-card debt? How does the US government expect us to go out and spend money to “boost” the economy when half the crap we are expected to buy is contaminated with things that can kill us? And God forbid we have to go to the hospital after we eat tainted food or use dangerous products because our health insurance company – if we are lucky enough to even have one – will find a way to deny the claim.
Those who are proponents of a free marketplace and less government regulation may have a point when it comes to government overspending and attempted control over our morality. But what do they have to say about less regulation to protect the consumer and MORE regulation to protect big business? How can you justify ending up with the same amount of regulation, but with less accountability, less information for the public and less safety for your children?
Leave a Reply