Vermont about to pass GMO-labeling bill

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I believe you answered your own question.

1: If people care enough about GMO labels -> They will demand them with their purchasing power

2: People demand things with their purchasing power by purchasing or not purchasing things.

3: It has become increasingly more [ed: redundant] difficult to purchase NON-GMO products.

4. Therefore, it has become increasingly difficult not to purchase GMO products.

5. GMO products do not have labels on them identifying them as GMO.

6: Therefore, it is becoming increasingly difficult to use purchasing power to demand GMO labels

 

how could you tell?

 

I honestly don't even begin to understand the argument that companies shouldn't have to disclose GMOs in their labeling. I just looked at the back of a box of generic macaroni and cheese and it contains 21 "ingredients." There is a precedent of thoroughness and transparency, so what's one more line?

Also, those same companies contribute to the "alarmism" when they refuse to tell people about the supposedly harmless ingredients in their food. If there is truly no cause for concern, why the foot-dragging?

 

Because by putting the label on a package, it implies that there is a cause for concern. People associate such labels with items like cigarettes and alcohol.

 

It doesn't surprise me that you don't understand logic. Put simpler: how might a consumer use his/her purchasing power to demand GMO labels if, in most cases, the only products available to purchase are unlabeled? Hunger strike?

 

Let's take the corporation-as-person approach, and keep in mind I'm not arguing for or against GMO labels, just against the illogic of your beliefs. You say you believe GMOs to be harmful, but do not believe corporations should be required to disclose GMOs on their labels. Let's say Person X has HIV: should he be required to disclose that fact to a sexual partner? Or should we allow the free market to work it's magic. Caveat emptor, baby!

 

If it is not logical, you should be able to disprove the deductive proof. Feel free to do so.

As for the rest...

The thing you Big Bad Government folks don't seem to grasp is that the Vermont legislature isn't doing something FOR the people...it IS the people. If the people don't want GMO labels, then they will vote in legislators who will repeal the GMO label act. Because the legislators are the people's representatives. It's just like the Bundy case: that land is your land, that land is my land, etc. I'd like my kids and grand kids to live in a country where there is some open space. I care more about the tortoise than Cliven Bundy's cattle. It's my land just as much as his land. It's your land just as much as my land. The government is doing my bidding by trying to make him pay. Why is that so hard to grasp?

 

Every food item has ingredient labels. I looked at a can of root beer last night that very clearly said CONTAINS CAFFEINE. Was it warning me about something or just helping me make an informed choice?

If the law requires companies to print giant letters across the front of the package, or say that GMOs are harmful, your argument has merit. It's more likely we're talking about fine print on the ingredients label.

 

My understanding is that it's way more akin to an actual graphic label on the packaging than it is fine print on the ingredients label.