Op-Ed Columnist
Bad Cow Disease
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: June 13, 2008
In the case of food, for the sake of our health and our export markets, we need to go back to the way it was after Teddy Roosevelt, when the Socialists took over.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/opinion/13krugman.html?ex=1371096000&en=dfcbe139182ca627&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Wimbledon Wisdom
-
I recently ran across a graduation speech by the tennis great Roger
Federer. I especially appreciated this passage:
In the 1,526 singles matches I played...
1 day ago
.JPG)
.jpg)
4 comments:
After adding this post, I scrolled down and found Kevin's post-- moral of the story: Paul Krugmen gets around.
I agree with Kevin's comments, but think the argument extends beyond food (remember the tainted items from China). Clearly the amount of trade conducted today for consumption is much greater than in the days of Teddy Roosevelt and to think that the FDA or any type of government organization can properly handle its regulation is stretching it. However, I am not sure the public would ever feel secure enough to let regulation go to private companies, though in theory they maybe more safe.
Oh and about the shirts, good idea, I'll try finding the old design or re-doing it. I'll put out an ad sometime in the near future.
Seriously, I'm surprised he didn't chide the administration on global warming too. It seems every NY Times op-ed with that flavor ends with a stab at global warming. Krugman actually refrained, though I'm sure it was a struggle.
But I agree with him and disagree strongly with conservatives on this issue. That consumers would drive food and drug manufacturers to self-regulate is premised on the idea that perfect (or at least sufficient) information is accessible to them to make informed decisions. Given the complexities and differnt risk-utility profiles of drugs, that is highly unlikely. The same can be said for food, albeit for different reasons (levels of toxic substances, likelihood of long-term adverse effects of certain substances, etc.).
What Ian's point fails to grasp is that consumer advocacy groups will spring from the private market.
There are complexities in food and drugs. But who do you think has the bigger incentive to get it right. A business whose success depends on it or a bureaucrat? It is naive to think that we have government regulators to thank for our current level of safety.
Post a Comment