Re: Adjudicating Pollution Disputes (was Digest Number 3425)

[Guest guest]

wrote:

" How is it that you intend to solve the problems then? Are you going to

demand access as a consumer into the warehouses and factories that produce

and store your food? I don't think you will be obliged by the business. Are

you prepared to test the food yourself? You can't engage in civil litigation

if you are not given police power to investigate the possible wrongdoing.

These businesses aren't incompetent, they are doing what they wish to

maximize their profits because they think they can get away with it. "

____

,

Inspections can be done privately or publicly. The difference between a

public regulation system of the government and private regulation systems are

that in the latter you can have diverse sets of standards and have the selective

pressure of the market yield the best sets of standards and the most

valuable and efficient methods of inspection at the least cost.

As a side point, while I'm not the moderator, I'd like to point out that it

is much easier for everyone reading if you change the subject line to reflect

the subject rather than the digest number.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Date Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:12:37 EST ChrisMasterjohn@... wrote

> Inspections can be done privately or publicly.

How will you coerce a business to be inspected privately? And will I be able to

obtain such inspection results under a freedom of infomation act? Or will I have

to pay a large fee? Or will the results be hidden from the public?

>The difference between a

> public regulation system of the government and private regulation systems are

> that in the latter you can have diverse sets of standards and have the

selective

> pressure of the market yield the best sets of standards and the most

> valuable and efficient methods of inspection at the least cost.

Where is your evidence for this statement? The standards used for government

inspections are diverse and particular to the industry. The standards are

selected (or should be) on the basis of what will produce public safety and are

created with input from industry and business, often conforming to GMPs (good

manufacturing practices) or current food science research (ie HACCP = Hazard

Analysis and Critical Control Point).

The notion that private is always less expensive then public is not borne out in

practice. As part of Bush's programs the federal government is continuing to

attempt to outsource various functions to private firms with little success. A

large part of this is due to the fact that when the private bids have come in,

they are often more costly then the current public system. In some cases the

contracts have been made and federal workers have been called back to refill

those jobs because the private business was unable to accomplish the tasks as

specified. Although some limited success may occur with outsourcing I predict

mostly failure based on what has occued so far.

" ...the White House Office of Management and Budget's own figures for all CSI

competitions [Competitive Sourcing Inititive] undertaken in fiscal 2003 -- at a

cost of $88 million -- show that public employees proved to be better and

cheaper than private contractors in nine cases out of 10. "

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0709-12.htm

>

> As a side point, while I'm not the moderator, I'd like to point out that it

> is much easier for everyone reading if you change the subject line to reflect

> the subject rather than the digest number.

Yeah, I really DO know that, I just seem to be a bit slow these days. Detox

maybe

On another side point I just finished up making a gallon of good Kim Chi and

just started a pot of kraut going today. Yum!