GMOs Scary or not?

Aaron_K123

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

Regarding #1----voter turnout is bad ( and I live in Italy where it is the same) because both sides turn off alot of voters. One can only choose between bad or worse. Politicians get so wrapped up in winning at all cost, that they lose contact with real voters. People don't believe pie in the sky anymore. If you can't choose, you stay home.

I definitely get the both sides are awful thing and it stinks to have to choose between bad and worse. The problem with not showing up at all, though, is that you can't change the game from not playing. The other problem that comes in is that, for at least midterm elections in the US, one party shows up in much greater numbers than the other party, which tends to get people elected who are going to broaden the divide. (Sorry for the off topic-ness... :drinker:)

It also doesn't help that we have one party in the US right now that has decided to almost exclusively cater to the anti-science brigade to win elections. I personally don't think that most of the politicians, on either side, actually believe some if not most of the things that they're saying, but the fact that they are saying it is pretty damaging.

Seriously. If it wasn't for the anti-science and the social conservatism (moral majority blah blah) stuff I might consider myself republican on the basis of things like fiscal conservancy and personal responsibility. As it stands though I can't, current Republican party still talks a big game with regards to fiscal conservancy and personal responsibility but their actions don't speak to that at all. Seems to me these days they are more about getting in everyone's business socially. I guess I view myself as somewhat libertarian with the democrat party being the current lesser of two evils.

I hear you about not being particularly enthused by either party these days though.

snowflake954

^^^^^^^^^^I guess what I'm saying here is that both sides are only bent on destroying the other, no matter what the cost. This hurts all of us. I have seen it in Italy first, and was appalled when I happened to be on a visit home at election time. What does this have to do with the GMO scare? We depend on our lawmakers to legislate correctly and fairly--hah. There is little trust around. I just read that the Euopean Union will let each country decide if it wants to let OGM in their territory. Spain and France are listed as already using it. Italy is very much against. That's why I thank you all for the information--especially Aaron, who sees the positives and expresses them admirably.

isamann

Funny thing is most people don't even know they're consuming gmos a lot of the time so i'm thinking not

fatcity66

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

If they are lying through their teeth, as most sociopathic, deceitful people do, how do I know who to vote for? Especially if they don't have much of a transparent history in politics, or are fairly new to the scene.

fatcity66

WARNING: THIS FOOD HAS BEEN IRRADIATED


would that scare the **** outta you? I wouldn't bat an eye and would eat it.

I would swear I used to see 'irradiated' on some food packages years ago. And I ate it. Not the packaging, the food. If that is still on any labels of foods I've eaten recently, I stopped noticing it long ago.

And unless something goes terribly wrong with GMO foods, I suspect most Americans will also eventually cease noticing or caring about a label proclaiming something to be GMO, too. In fact, it's widely known that a lot of corn products and soy products are GMO, and if people were that arsed about it, the entire American snack food industry would be in the red right now.

And if something does go terribly wrong, not labeling won't save the technology. It might even make the backlash worse. Especially if an offending company is immune from liability in our courts.

I'm betting Cheetos are made from GMO corn. I really think if Cheetos were labeled as GMO, people would still eat them, because they taste good, and are addictive.

4homer

bump

Meerataila

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

If they are lying through their teeth, as most sociopathic, deceitful people do, how do I know who to vote for? Especially if they don't have much of a transparent history in politics, or are fairly new to the scene.

I suppose if people really want to keep representatives instead of just going the direct route, we could make them contractually obligated to do everything in their power to fulfill their campaign promises on a specific timetable. Failure to do so could automatically result in either automatic impeachment, a nationwide vote to decide whether to impeach or not, and/or jury selection of random citizens to determine whether or not the failure to fulfill a promise on schedule was justified and if not whether to simply remove the culprit from office, or fine the culprit, or jail the culprit, or all of the above.

fatcity66

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

If they are lying through their teeth, as most sociopathic, deceitful people do, how do I know who to vote for? Especially if they don't have much of a transparent history in politics, or are fairly new to the scene.

I suppose if people really want to keep representatives instead of just going the direct route, we could make them contractually obligated to do everything in their power to fulfill their campaign promises on a specific timetable. Failure to do so could automatically result in either automatic impeachment, a nationwide vote to decide whether to impeach or not, and/or jury selection of random citizens to determine whether or not the failure to fulfill a promise on schedule was justified and if not whether to simply remove the culprit from office, or fine the culprit, or jail the culprit, or all of the above.

I could get behind that.

SunofaBeach14

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

If they are lying through their teeth, as most sociopathic, deceitful people do, how do I know who to vote for? Especially if they don't have much of a transparent history in politics, or are fairly new to the scene.

I suppose if people really want to keep representatives instead of just going the direct route, we could make them contractually obligated to do everything in their power to fulfill their campaign promises on a specific timetable. Failure to do so could automatically result in either automatic impeachment, a nationwide vote to decide whether to impeach or not, and/or jury selection of random citizens to determine whether or not the failure to fulfill a promise on schedule was justified and if not whether to simply remove the culprit from office, or fine the culprit, or jail the culprit, or all of the above.

Jailing representatives for failure to get other representatives to vote for their platform? Seems like a great way to attract good people. Maybe if we paid them less too. If you really care then get involved, otherwise you're just part of the problem.

QueenBishOTUniverse

I'm sorry, I had to, it doesn't take a lab to make some crazy crazy plant crosses. Grafting as a technique has been around for quite a while:



http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/single-tree-grows-40-kinds-fruit

Meerataila

The people who are 'informed' are generally at least as crazy and dumb as the craziest, dumbest regular old citizen you can find, and on top of that in order to reach their position of power these people are often far more ruthless, nasty, deceitful, and in general sociopathic.

^^THIS

Two things:

1) Stop voting for them. Voter turnout, in the US, is dismal at best during the midterms and not much better during presidential election years, so exercise your right to vote; it'll make more of a difference during midterms, where only 1 out of 3 Americans typically even bother to show up.

2) Even if pure democracy was a good idea, which it isn't, the cost of that would be extremely prohibitive. We can't get the US government to spend money on things that people actually need; there's not a chance that the people or the states would go for this on that reason alone and that's what you would need for it to be a thing - a new Constitutional amendment.

If they are lying through their teeth, as most sociopathic, deceitful people do, how do I know who to vote for? Especially if they don't have much of a transparent history in politics, or are fairly new to the scene.

I suppose if people really want to keep representatives instead of just going the direct route, we could make them contractually obligated to do everything in their power to fulfill their campaign promises on a specific timetable. Failure to do so could automatically result in either automatic impeachment, a nationwide vote to decide whether to impeach or not, and/or jury selection of random citizens to determine whether or not the failure to fulfill a promise on schedule was justified and if not whether to simply remove the culprit from office, or fine the culprit, or jail the culprit, or all of the above.

Jailing representatives for failure to get other representatives to vote for their platform? Seems like a great way to attract good people. Maybe if we paid them less too. If you really care then get involved, otherwise you're just part of the problem.

Have you seen our politicians? I'd take a random criminal out of super max over most of the politicians we've had. Better yet, trade them one for one. Politician goes to super max, prisoner goes to Congress and the White House. Unlike the politician, there is at least a chance the prisoner was innocent.