Or is this one of those "personal responsibility" issues where the smart consumer relies on their own bacterial cultures before eating instead of that nanny-state USDA?
""2005 "Risk based Inspections": ""Far from a minor adjustment intended to maximize food safety, this plan is really being used as a way to reduce the USDA’s budget. The changes in the way inspectors are assigned to meat and poultry plants would make current inspector shortages permanent, effectively shrinking the size of the agency’s frontline inspection workforce.""
2007-10-05 12:28:30 · 4 answers · asked by oohhbother 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes and Yes...
2007-10-05 12:31:59 · answer #1 · answered by HowFuzzyWuzee 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Please post your source. It looks like a commentary.
ADDED: Okay, no source? Flying blind here... Have you ever considered that every time the government steps up its help, a corresponding increase in governmental control also occurs? From an economic standpoint, this is rarely advantageous to the consumer. So we pay the higher taxes for the increased government over-sight (which may or may not result in anything but a larger bureaucracy) and we pay the higher prices on the goods.
2007-10-05 19:36:11 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yep... that's the answer to *ALL* questions..... Raise Taxes.. Let me guess.... You're a Democrat.... Right?.... Kool... I'm a psychic.
2007-10-05 19:42:43 · answer #3 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We already have the safest food supply in the world. I'll keep my money.
2007-10-05 19:33:47 · answer #4 · answered by midnitrondavu 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋