Live data from Hacker News

Big Food vs. the People

lighthousereports.com

21–30 of 196 posts

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#21
post #10

The measures related to lawsuits are misleading and terrible, because of the way class-action lawsuits have incentivized lawyers to pursue dubious cases against large companies.

I'm not in love with the system, but it does seem like a last resort for imposing discipline on corporations. The dilemma is whether the tort system is preferable to an approach involving more regulation and enforcement.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#23

I'm about as hippie with my food as you can get, but this "article" is badly written propaganda that conceals more than it reveals. Half way down the article you learn that ~80% (193 out of 239) of the lawsuits are in Mexico and > many of them were against the country’s labelling regulation. Quinto Elemento Lab reveals the companies’ arguments: that the laws were a violation of their constitutional rights But the art…

People have to learn to recognize the patterns.

In this case, lighthouse reports is an international NGO which receives on the order of ~1MM in income per year (an extremely common pattern for these NGOs), which was directly given to them by (unspecified) government grants and (unnamed) private donors (can see all this in their openly published annual reports). In exchange for the funding (80.38% of which they paid out to themselves as wages/compensation), they put together and release "reports", "studies", etc., that push the messaging the NGO was created to push.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#24
post #10

The measures related to lawsuits are misleading and terrible, because of the way class-action lawsuits have incentivized lawyers to pursue dubious cases against large companies.

Don't they still need to win to get paid?

No. The case can be settled out of court. This doesn't necessarily mean lawsuits are misleading or terrible as measures.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#25
post #10

The measures related to lawsuits are misleading and terrible, because of the way class-action lawsuits have incentivized lawyers to pursue dubious cases against large companies.

I'm not in love with the system, but it does seem like a last resort for imposing discipline on corporations. The dilemma is whether the tort system is preferable to an approach involving more regulation and enforcement.

I’m not saying that the lawsuits are necessarily wrong or bad (though there do seem to be many of dubious merit), just that they don’t accurately reflect the mix of safety and other problems between large and small producers.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't they still need to win to get paid?

They're purchasing lottery tickets that are mostly paid for by tax payers who fund the court systems.

- “Purchasing”: The attorneys that are taking these cases for $0 in the hopes that they’ll get n% of $SETTLEMENT

- “paid for by tax payers who fund the court systems”. The alternative would mean taking away the right of private citizens to sue.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#27

I'm about as hippie with my food as you can get, but this "article" is badly written propaganda that conceals more than it reveals. Half way down the article you learn that ~80% (193 out of 239) of the lawsuits are in Mexico and > many of them were against the country’s labelling regulation. Quinto Elemento Lab reveals the companies’ arguments: that the laws were a violation of their constitutional rights But the art…

People have to learn to recognize the patterns. In this case, lighthouse reports is an international NGO which receives on the order of ~1MM in income per year (an extremely common pattern for these NGOs), which was directly given to them by (unspecified) government grants and (unnamed) private donors (can see all this in their openly published annual reports). In exchange for the funding (80.38% of which they paid o…

1MM in any currency doesn't sound like a lot, especially relative to who they're up against...

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#29
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're purchasing lottery tickets that are mostly paid for by tax payers who fund the court systems.

- “Purchasing”: The attorneys that are taking these cases for $0 in the hopes that they’ll get n% of $SETTLEMENT - “paid for by tax payers who fund the court systems”. The alternative would mean taking away the right of private citizens to sue.

I mean, I think you understand what I'm saying. They're externalizing the costs and internalizing the benefits. The same thing we complain about with numerous other industries.

The alternative would not be to take away the right of private citizens to sue. There is, surprisingly enough, quite a chasm between identifying that some parties are taking advantage of a system and completely shutting that system down.

Re: Big Food vs. the People

#30

america has a monopoly problem

Indeed if we could solve one thing with our gov't, I'd want it to be antitrust enforcement. For an ostensibly free market society we seem awfully willing to accept it being anything but.

I'd like corporations (bodies) to be prosecuted like human bodies, where bad behavior was noted, you got a record, and punishment increased through fines, restrictions all the way to forms of incarceration, and even the death penalty.
Post reply on HN