Political Ocean's 11

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

So you're going to personally go down and inform them of what a dietitian does and how to recognize snake oil or have the big gubbermint do it with warning labels and disclaimers, or by empoering do you mean defending the right of snake oil salesmen to inflict harm to make a quick buck? Because as can be evidenced itt, various people already didn't know what a dietitian was and I doubt they would somehow acquire the knowledge to make an informed decision between medicine and snakeoil when under stress of sickness. We already do this for medicine, require food saftey, and have various other certfications and standards when health could be put in danger. Why shouldn't we apply the same to diet, where bad advice can also result in some signifigant damage?

[Hurlshort]

It sounds like this woman had a few options for sharing her bad advice, but it was the 1 on 1 stuff that got her in trouble?

[Guard Dog]

It sounds like this woman had a few options for sharing her bad advice, but it was the 1 on 1 stuff that got her in trouble?

Exactly/ It makes no sense.

[Guard Dog]

So you're going to personally go down and inform them of what a dietitian does and how to recognize snake oil or have the big gubbermint do it with warning labels and disclaimers, or by empoering do you mean defending the right of snake oil salesmen to inflict harm to make a quick buck? Because as can be evidenced itt, various people already didn't know what a dietitian was and I doubt they would somehow acquire the knowledge to make an informed decision between medicine and snakeoil when under stress of sickness. We already do this for medicine, require food saftey, and have various other certfications and standards when health could be put in danger. Why shouldn't we apply the same to diet, where bad advice can also result in some signifigant damage?

Warning labels are fine. disclaimers are fine. Hell even a license that says "This person knows what they are doing" is fine. Criminal charges because she didn't have that? Not fine. Caveat emptor. Don't tell consumers what they can and can't buy, or who from.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Guard Dog

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

So you're going to personally go down and inform them of what a dietitian does and how to recognize snake oil or have the big gubbermint do it with warning labels and disclaimers, or by empoering do you mean defending the right of snake oil salesmen to inflict harm to make a quick buck? Because as can be evidenced itt, various people already didn't know what a dietitian was and I doubt they would somehow acquire the knowledge to make an informed decision between medicine and snakeoil when under stress of sickness. We already do this for medicine, require food saftey, and have various other certfications and standards when health could be put in danger. Why shouldn't we apply the same to diet, where bad advice can also result in some signifigant damage?

 

Warning labels are fine. disclaimers are fine. Hell even a license that says "This person knows what they are doing" is fine. Criminal charges because she didn't have that? Not fine. Caveat emptor. Don't tell consumers what they can and can't buy, or who from.

So regulation is fine but enforcement of regulation isn't?

[Guard Dog]

 

 

So you're going to personally go down and inform them of what a dietitian does and how to recognize snake oil or have the big gubbermint do it with warning labels and disclaimers, or by empoering do you mean defending the right of snake oil salesmen to inflict harm to make a quick buck? Because as can be evidenced itt, various people already didn't know what a dietitian was and I doubt they would somehow acquire the knowledge to make an informed decision between medicine and snakeoil when under stress of sickness. We already do this for medicine, require food saftey, and have various other certfications and standards when health could be put in danger. Why shouldn't we apply the same to diet, where bad advice can also result in some signifigant damage?

Warning labels are fine. disclaimers are fine. Hell even a license that says "This person knows what they are doing" is fine. Criminal charges because she didn't have that? Not fine. Caveat emptor. Don't tell consumers what they can and can't buy, or who from.

So regulation is fine but enforcement of regulation isn't?

 

Let's say certification is fine, regulation (with some exceptions) isn't.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Why? As mentioned previously we have such regulation when it comes to otber medical professionals and food, so why does diet get a pass?

[Ben No.3]

„I don't believe we are letting the wolves devour the sheep. I believe in empowering the sheep to take care of themselves.“

 

This belongs in the Fun Thread.

 

This would have been a metaphor I would use to point out how dangerous the market and libertarianism is. It baffles me that a libertarian, a supposed advocate of capitalism, would use it. But I guess I should be thankful you did, GD.

 

You can’t empower sheep to fight a wolf. That can’t and won’t ever happen. The only thing that could take care of them would be a third party that is capable of things like building a fence. Refusing to build that fence is not empowering the sheep; it is sentencing them to death.

 

Quite similarly, getting rid of a strong state is not empowering anyone but the wolves (of Wall Street?). An employee can’t protect himself adequately against his employer through any mean but a string state apparatus. And don’t act like the company cares about him.

 

You like to quote, GD. I have a quote for you. Mind you; I am the translator, so sorry for any inaccuracies.

 

“Question: What is the difference between a worker and a slave?

 

Answer: The slave is sold once and for all; the worker has to sell himself hourly and daily. The individual slave, [being the] property of his owner, has, already because of the interests of said owner, an guaranteed existence, however miserable it might be; the individual worker, property of the entire bourgeois class so to speak, who’s work is only bought when needed, does not have a guaranteed existence. Only the existence of the entire working class is guaranteed.”

 

-F. Engels

 

MEW 4

 

 

 

So the wolves need sheep as a whole; but they don’t give two ****s about the individual sheep. Even more, it lies in their interest that the sheep will be eaten; by them. The only thing protecting the individual sheep from being eaten is the fence.

Now what was that about sheep-empowerment?

[HoonDing]

Lock her up!

 

Shoot her!

[injurai]

You folks are missing the forest for the trees here. Don't get bogged down in the minutia of dieticians vs non-dieticians. The point was a heavy handed government agency putting one businesswoman out of business at the behest of others.  Surely that does not sit well with at least some of you? It certainly bothers me.

 

Except it's people with a vetted background and training competing against each other while charlatans are kicked out of medicine and relegated to perfumes and teas.

[213374U]

Warning labels are fine. disclaimers are fine. Hell even a license that says "This person knows what they are doing" is fine. Criminal charges because she didn't have that? Not fine. Caveat emptor. Don't tell consumers what they can and can't buy, or who from.

I wouldn't throw her in jail for that either, I guess. Throw in contempt of court however and it's a different matter altogether.

 

And you're not telling consumers what they can and can't buy -- you're telling services and goods providers what they can and can't offer and how. Much like how the food industry is subject to a more or less close scrutiny by specialists on the government's payroll. Unless you are a specialist yourself, you are simply not qualified to make an informed decision on whether additive X is bad for you. The disagreement is on where the line where you consider the government is treating you as "too stupid to make informed decisions" lies. I'm sure a PhD. in biochemistry may feel babied by the government when the FDA makes decisions for him -- but you should be grateful (most of the time).

[Hurlshort]

Not sure what Sharp_One is talking about, I buy food direct from farmers regularly. Now those farmers are subject to certain rules and inspections. A few years ago a farm was caught using human compost. Thank goodness for the inspectors in that case.

 

Alternatively, my neighbor can also raise animals and share them with us, but if they try to sell them at a market they will be subject to rules.

[Raithe]

For the other fun world news...

 

StratFor - Catalonia declares independence ; well, more or less

[Zoraptor]

 

Warning labels are fine. disclaimers are fine. Hell even a license that says "This person knows what they are doing" is fine. Criminal charges because she didn't have that? Not fine. Caveat emptor. Don't tell consumers what they can and can't buy, or who from.

.. Unless you are a specialist yourself, you are simply not qualified to make an informed decision on whether additive X is bad for you..

 

 

That's the critical thing. If you know much about computers then people who fall for MS Tech Support scams seem like idiots, but they just don't know enough about computers to make informed decisions and on the face of it MS phoning up about your computer issues does make sense, so does your bank telling you to change your password for security reasons. If you go to professional services- builders, electricians, dieticians, or whatever- you're usually going to them because they are experts and you aren't. You cannot be expected to easily tell a fraudulent but convincing con from the genuine article though you should at least be sceptical of deals too good to be true. Of course the first two examples are outright illegal and cannot be regulated, but you can protect against renegade professional services.

 

As to why professional associations may want to take action against cowboys by dobbing them in or whatever, a lot of professional services have terrible reputations due to the rogue elements, and that terrible reputation impacts the good workers who get the safety accreditations and do the proper workmanship and use the right tools. And bad advice and workmanship can be outright dangerous.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Zoraptor

[Volourn]

Just another way for the govt to steal, murder, rape, control, and enslave.

 

 It starts with 'fines', she refuses to pay, they send the cops to arrest her, she resists, they murder her. And, people in this thread will  say the law's actions were 'justified'.

[Blarghagh]

Wow, that escalated quickly.

[Guard Dog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FONN-0uoTHI

 

 

[Malcador]

Just another way for the govt to steal, murder, rape, control, and enslave.

 

It starts with 'fines', she refuses to pay, they send the cops to arrest her, she resists, they murder her. And, people in this thread will say the law's actions were 'justified'.

I can see this is your defense against a parking ticket.

[Volourn]

Trust me. I never get parking tickets.

[213374U]

For the other fun world news...

 

StratFor - Catalonia declares independence ; well, more or less

 

As of today, government's already taking the constitutionally prescribed steps to suspend Catalan autonomy. Considering that the Catalan police are expected to do nothing, their chief has been charged with sedition and Spanish law enforcement officers deployed there are under literal siege, I'm now seeing the military being called upon to "restore order". A cherished national tradition that has never caused trouble in the past.

 

And ultimately this escalation of tensions is nothing more than a convenient smokescreen to deviate attention away from the myriad corruption cases both ruling parties are involved in. It's not by coincidence that waving a painted piece of cloth in front of a beast's eyes to draw its attention is another cherished national tradition.

 

****ing hell people are stupid.

[HoonDing]

Nothing you can do about the government, folks. Except maybe, those 2nd Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know.

[Guard Dog]

Nothing you can do about the government, folks. Except maybe, those 2nd Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know.

 

Sure there is. We do it every two years here in the US. However people keep checking Democrat or Republican and nothing ever changes. If you really want to change, then change your vote. There are other options. 

[Maedhros]

Just by looking at the presidents (and the candidates) you have and have had over there it's pretty obvious why people distrust the government. I cannot for the life of me understand why in a huge country with so many talented people there aren't any better alternatives?

[redneckdevil]

It's because the President is basically the "face". "Look at me, look at what I am doing. Look at what I said and tweeted.....just don't pay attention to those people in the House or Senate, don't worry about what they are doing, look at me!".

[Hurlshort]

Speaking of tweets: https://t.co/tMM6MMXawL