Sue Kedgley's vituperative response to the government NOT forcing food producers to including country of origin labelling shows the Green Party's belief in using state violence against producers. This is my example number 1 of the Green Party belief in state violence.As Scott points out, if consumers want labelling that gives them some particular information -- that is, if there is consumer demand for such a thing -- then you would naturally expect suppliers to fulfil that demand; those suppliers that do so would then find their market-share increasing, something suppliers like very much. That this isn't happening, and instead that Sue has to ask for the government to get the gun out in order to make it happen suggests that there is no demandfor such a thing -- or at least none worth a damn.
She is full of angry nonsense in saying that by not forcing such labelling on food, the government is denying information for consumers. The opposite of compulsion isn't a ban Sue, even though those are the only two policies you ever seem to call for!
Get a life, Sue, and let people make their own choices. And put the gun away.
2 comments:
Definition of Dictatorship:
'A govt under which everything that is not prohibited is compulsory'. (Adapted from Sergei Arutunoff).
Yep. Sue and her green comrades would have made beaut Soviets.
and now because the producers also don't want mandatory labelling she is foaming at the mouth even more. Is there anything she wants that isn't to be compulsory or banned?
Post a Comment