SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After becoming somewhat used to food scares from China, now we have sleazy operators in Europe too.
From the ABC News article:
Authorities have arrested at least 66 people in a European food scam which sold horse meat unfit for human consumption.
European Union police coordinating organization Europol announced Sunday that eight nations cooperated in the operation. In Spain, 65 people face a series of charges relating to public health, money laundering and animal abuse.
The operation took several months and the chief suspect, a Dutch businessman, was arrested in Belgium in April.
Spain's Civil Guard said that the criminal ring acquired horses in Spain and Portugal that were "in poor shape, old, or had been designated 'not apt for consumption.'" After falsifying paperwork and substituting microchips used to identify the horses, the animals were slaughtered and the meat shipped to Belgium.
The Civil Guard said that the profits from the illegal meat could reach 20 million euros ($23 million) a year.
The case was linked to a 2013 scandal when Irish authorities detected beef burgers containing horse meat.
Is it still safe to consume Soylent?
Additional details at CNN.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @05:18PM (15 children)
It's a much better idea to let consumers be responsible for what they choose to put in their own bodies.
The key is to help consumers make informed decisions—that's why there is a regulatory agency; to provide consumers with certain guarantees.
The problem, as always, is that this regulatory agency has been set up as a monopoly, and we all know that a monopoly is going to produce low-quality results (especially when that monopoly was founded at the point of a gun, rather than by providing a service for which customers paid voluntarily).
Let there be competing regulatory agencies, just like there are competing "kosher" certification agencies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @06:18PM (11 children)
Let us have a system of voluntarily agreed contracts with worker-owned coops! Let the market decide whether food should be halal! Let us eschew violently imposed monopoly!
🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐔🐓
🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚🥚
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @06:32PM (10 children)
There may well be "worker-owned coops" under such voluntarily contracts, but there may also not be.
Anyway, continue on with your trolling of libertarians.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @09:09PM (1 child)
Actually there are quite a few grocery stores that went the employee owned / coop route, and they are quite successful. Keep on ignoring reality and making your own assumptions out of thin air. Gotta love those people who sound so CONFIDENT, they MUST know something, why else would they be so CONFIDENT and SELF ASSURED? Oh right, they're idiots who just want to be "right".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @09:20PM
Your reply indicates that you have misunderstood what you read.
(Score: 2) by KGIII on Monday July 17 2017, @10:00PM (7 children)
What, if you don't mind my asking, do you think a libertarian is?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 17 2017, @11:24PM (6 children)
... someone who believes that interaction should, as much as possible, occur in accordance with rules to which the interacting parties agreed in advance of interaction (this is an iterative process that becomes ever more voluntary through repeated negotiations, dispute resolutions, and enforcements, as per the agreements); a capitalist is someone who rejects coercion—a capitalist is someone who is wary of interaction that occurs outside of a contract.
(Note that such rules may well provide for some kind of violent action as a valid, agreed response to some condition).
Socialism can be built atop capitalism, but capitalism cannot be built atop socialism.
(Score: 2) by KGIII on Monday July 17 2017, @11:36PM (5 children)
I would suggest the Wikipedia article. It's not too bad. Libertarian is the opposing side of Authoritarian and takes many, many forms. It's also scaled, so that extremes don't actually have to be assumed.
If you're curious, I fall in the lower-left quadrant on the political compass. I'm very much a Libertarian. However, my party seems to have gone off the deep end and, largely, become batshit crazy. Rand was an idiot, for example.
Seriously, give the Wikipedia article a skim. It's not too bad.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @01:38AM (4 children)
I basically gave a much more concrete description of what you said:
(Score: 2) by KGIII on Tuesday July 18 2017, @02:57AM (3 children)
Because your definition is both incomplete and misleading. Just the first half dozen paragraphs will help. It's not very difficult.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @03:15AM (2 children)
My definition is neither incomplete nor misleading; indeed, it is both complete and forthright.
(Score: 2) by KGIII on Tuesday July 18 2017, @04:07AM (1 child)
You would save bandwidth if you just read the article, but it's all good. You do you, I suppose.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @06:36AM
My definition is already both complete and clear.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday July 17 2017, @07:51PM (2 children)
> Let there be competing regulatory agencies, just like there are competing "kosher" certification agencies.
Sooo ... How do you suppose they're going to keep costs down, so they can undercut the competition and grow?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @11:05AM (1 child)
It's be just like bond ratings agencies. Triple AAA+ would buy again.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday July 18 2017, @03:39PM
If someone had publicly made the parallel between bundling mortgage securities and a steaming pile of rotting horse meat being called "premium", maybe some buyers might have kept their savings.