I guess my idea just makes too much sense... The fee will cover the cost and be paid for by the ones that want the info, NOT by the folks who don't want it...

 

I like it.

No, it's the difference between people who believe the government is there to help the people, and the those who think we should just pay our taxes and not get anything out of it. If the government isn't going to serve the people, it has no reason to exist.

 

What this is, is a classic case of commen sense legislation which will help countless people across the nation. It's giving people access to critical information that was NOT accessible in a real time situation. To suggest people should have to access websites when these impromptu situations arise, or should carry around pamphlets is just silly.

 

The service that government is to provide is listed in the Constitution and it does not say anything about protecting us from what we eat. This is a small, but classic example of an overreaching, bloated government that is involving itself in our lives where it has no business. It is too bad that even if most have read the Constitution, they either do not understand it or worse choose to ignore its true intent.

The service that government is to provide is listed in the Constitution and it does not say anything about protecting us from what we eat. This is a small, but classic example of an overreaching, bloated government that is involving itself in our lives where it has no business. It is too bad that even if most have read the Constitution, they either do not understand it or worse choose to ignore its true intent.

It has zero to do with "protecting" or telling people what to eat. It's just simply providing useful information to the citizens. It's not the government telling us to do anything at all. It provides the information as a public service--which is its roll and responsibility--and allows the individual to freely use that information (or not) as they choose.

They should probably take down road signs. I mean, I can Google directions and use a map to get where I'm going. Think of the money that would be passed down to the taxpayer with no more signs being made. I mean, we don't need the government telling us where to go right? If you aren't smart enough to know where you are going in the first place, maybe you shouldnt just travel.

They should probably take down road signs. I mean, I can Google directions and use a map to get where I'm going. Think of the money that would be passed down to the taxpayer with no more signs being made. I mean, we don't need the government telling us where to go right? If you aren't smart enough to know where you are going in the first place, maybe you shouldnt just travel.

 

See post #156. :thumb:

Again...how much do you think it will end up costing? Let's see a cost breakdown and figure out just how much that this is going to raise the price of a Big Mac.

You still don't get... It will not raise the price of a Big Mac.. It will only cost the people who WANT the info... Not the company or the tax payer... The money you drop into the machine will cover ALL the cost...:thumb:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i

You still don't get... It will not raise the price of a Big Mac.. It will only cost the people who WANT the info... Not the company or the tax payer... The money you drop into the machine will cover ALL the cost...:thumb:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i

 

Tell me would you like to do away with the FDA? Have you ever noticed all of the nutrition information on food labels? Would you like to just do away with those labels and guess at the nutritional content? Or spend all of your days and nights in a chem lab figuring out exactly what's in your food?

Because you know that I don't over-react to something so benign. :sssh:

 

I'm also recommending that we get rid of all road signs. They're too expensive to maintain and replace. We can all just use our GPS, just like we can use our internet before going to the restaurant to determine what is best for us to eat.

Not even close to where I was going...

Again...how much do you think it will end up costing? Let's see a cost breakdown and figure out just how much that this is going to raise the price of a Big Mac.

Does it matter? He has a good idea, why should I pay more so you can get info I'm not interested in for me? I know a Big Mac isn't good for me, I don't need the government to tell me that.

Tell me would you like to do away with the FDA? Have you ever noticed all of the nutrition information on food labels? Would you like to just do away with those labels and guess at the nutritional content? Or spend all of your days and nights in a chem lab figuring out exactly what's in your food?

What's wrong with just putting the info on their website? You can print out info and keep it in your car. What's wrong with his idea? You can get the info you want by paying for it yourself. Or is it that you want everyone else to pay for it?

They should probably take down road signs. I mean, I can Google directions and use a map to get where I'm going. Think of the money that would be passed down to the taxpayer with no more signs being made. I mean, we don't need the government telling us where to go right? If you aren't smart enough to know where you are going in the first place, maybe you shouldnt just travel.

I'm so glad none of you like to compare apples to oranges... :lol:

It has zero to do with "protecting" or telling people what to eat. It's just simply providing useful information to the citizens. It's not the government telling us to do anything at all. It provides the information as a public service--which is its roll and responsibility--and allows the individual to freely use that information (or not) as they choose.

 

What you are failing to see, this is not a function of government. They may be providing a servive, but it is not what the government was set-up to do. If you want such info availible organize a non-profit group and collect some donations to fund the gathering of information that you want. Let government do what it was created for and let individual citizens step forward to provide a public service, as they see fit.

We should not depend on government for such matters. The government should be protecting us from foriegn and domestic enemies, protecting the value of our money, providing an atmosphere to operate a business, these are the services they are to provide according to the Constitution.

Because you know that I don't over-react to something so benign. :sssh:

 

I'm also recommending that we get rid of all road signs. They're too expensive to maintain and replace. We can all just use our GPS, just like we can use our internet before going to the restaurant to determine what is best for us to eat.

 

The Constitution of the United States provides for the building of post roads to carry the mail, to regulate and provide an atmosphere to ecncourage business. The Constitution also calls for a military to protect our nation. With these constitutional mandates a well developed system of transportation would be within the bounds of our federal government.

What you are failing to see, this is not a function of government. They may be providing a servive, but it is not what the government was set-up to do. If you want such info availible organize a non-profit group and collect some donations to fund the gathering of information that you want. Let government do what it was created for and let individual citizens step forward to provide a public service, as they see fit.

We should not depend on government for such matters. The government should be protecting us from foriegn and domestic enemies, protecting the value of our money, providing an atmosphere to operate a business, these are the services they are to provide according to the Constitution.

 

I think it is absolutely the function of government - so there. The government is set up to "promote the general welfare".

 

For what its worth, there is NOTHING in the constitution that says the government should 'provide an atmosphere to operate a business' or 'protect the value of our money.'

 

There is nothing about capitalism or the free market in our constitution. Governments are actually set up to stem the tide of social/economic darwinism. Governments are set up to regulate people/businesses so that they don't infringe on my pursuit of my general welfare.

 

Therefore it can regulate things that harm us, or at the very least provide us enough information so that we can regulate ourselves and not be harmed by businesses.

 

I am still amazed that the government actually allows the sale/production of cigarettes.

What you are failing to see, this is not a function of government. They may be providing a servive, but it is not what the government was set-up to do. If you want such info availible organize a non-profit group and collect some donations to fund the gathering of information that you want. Let government do what it was created for and let individual citizens step forward to provide a public service, as they see fit.

We should not depend on government for such matters. The government should be protecting us from foriegn and domestic enemies, protecting the value of our money, providing an atmosphere to operate a business, these are the services they are to provide according to the Constitution.

 

Again, how is this different than the nutritional values that by law are required to be on "food" products purchased at a supermarket?