131–140 of 146 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not very many. Consumers mostly go to the store and grab whatever. Very few even read the label.
*Citation needed for every sentence in this post.
I sympathize with US ranchers, but I agree with the courts that "Product of the USA" okay... M-COOL (Meat Country of Origin Label) is the right solution... and let me give an example why: If I buy a new, real wood, kitchen table, that was imported as a sapling, planted in the USA for 20 years, then milled in the USA, then worked into a table by USA craftsmen -- would that be a product of the USA? I'd say so, and I th…
That seems like a reasonable ruling. For any product, if there is a substantive processing step done (other than basic packaging), I would consider the label to be accurate. Additionally, mandatory COOL seems like a self-serving overreach by the cattle industry. By all means, include optional labeling specifying the country of origin, following whatever (non-fraudulent) criteria you want, and that label can be protec…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> imported as a sapling, planted in the USA for 20 years, then milled in the USA, then worked into a table by USA craftsmen But that's not a good analogy to what is being complained of in this case. What is being complained of in this case would be more analogous to a tree that was raised from sapling on in a foreign country, cut down, milled, and worked into pieces of a table in that foreign country, then a US compa…
Sounds like “assembled in… from foreign components” or in this case “butchered in… from foreign cattle”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
*Citation needed for every sentence in this post.
Ranchers I know who have the most to gain form correct labels lobbied to get rid of it, the WTO didn't like it and they didn't see any gain. This was back when Obama was president though so maybe things have changed?
There's no law requiring the "made in USA" label on goods made in the USA. US ranchers who don't want to use the label don't have to.
The WTO doesn't like trade barriers, especially US trade barriers, and a strict "made in the US" label is a barrier, so their opposition is a given. If such labels had no effect, WTO might argue against them on principle, but if they did, that would be a reason for WTO to argue against them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure? As far as I remember Prosciutto di Parma has a proper disciplinary, the pigs must be bred in Italy, and not even all of it.
Prosciutto di Parma is very specific and not parmaham, which is a generic designation applied to all sorts of crappy ham and meant to trick those that don't know better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That there isn't an obvious place to draw the line does not in any way justify drawing the line at a patently absurd position like this court has done. Courts constantly make rulings on issues where the boundaries are somewhat blurry. For just one example, take the infamous line about pornography: "I know it when I see it." They have well-established techniques for reasoning about such cases. It's not perfect, but it…
The easy solution is to allow for something like "Prepared in the USA", and only allowing "Product of the USA" if the animal was slaughtered in the US.
Clear labelling about where they were grown, and where the butchering was done will go a long way towards helping people make informed decisions.
I sympathize with US ranchers, but I agree with the courts that "Product of the USA" okay... M-COOL (Meat Country of Origin Label) is the right solution... and let me give an example why: If I buy a new, real wood, kitchen table, that was imported as a sapling, planted in the USA for 20 years, then milled in the USA, then worked into a table by USA craftsmen -- would that be a product of the USA? I'd say so, and I th…
This is paired with a set of rules which apply to each category which undo typical efforts made to make a product appear more local.
In the case of a livestock/grown product that is partially raised overseas, that instead lands on a scale.
I sympathize with US ranchers, but I agree with the courts that "Product of the USA" okay... M-COOL (Meat Country of Origin Label) is the right solution... and let me give an example why: If I buy a new, real wood, kitchen table, that was imported as a sapling, planted in the USA for 20 years, then milled in the USA, then worked into a table by USA craftsmen -- would that be a product of the USA? I'd say so, and I th…
Here in Europe, you're told everything, not just where it was finally processed/packaged. Produce is labelled not just down to a country level, but to individual farms, and often you'll see meat for sale in shops include not just the code for the farm, but the full name too. If I were to show you the jar of (blended) honey I have in my cupboard, it lists every country it came from. I haven't looked at any soup I have…
Is this true across all of Europe? If not, what country are you in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ranchers I know who have the most to gain form correct labels lobbied to get rid of it, the WTO didn't like it and they didn't see any gain. This was back when Obama was president though so maybe things have changed?
Huh? There's no law requiring the "made in USA" label on goods made in the USA. US ranchers who don't want to use the label don't have to. The WTO doesn't like trade barriers, especially US trade barriers, and a strict "made in the US" label is a barrier, so their opposition is a given. If such labels had no effect, WTO might argue against them on principle, but if they did, that would be a reason for WTO to argue ag…