Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   And the latest Obamacare "HEY We didn't know THAT would happen" outrage comes from... (...spins wheel...): grocery stores   (foxnews.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, obamacare, Food and Drug Administration, Reference Daily Intake, Spin Wheel, Food Marketing Institute, grocery stores  
•       •       •

6599 clicks; posted to Business » on 07 Feb 2013 at 7:53 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



134 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-02-07 07:38:19 AM  
Knowledge is power, and God forbid we empower *anyone* other than the well-to-do.
 
2013-02-07 07:58:13 AM  
People would know what they are actually buying? The horror! The Free market will be crippled if consumers have accurate information.
 
2013-02-07 08:04:48 AM  
Every piece of legislation includes unintended consequences. It's the Law.
 
2013-02-07 08:08:06 AM  
Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners

ihaveeveryrighttocomplain.files.wordpress.com

Uh-oh
 
2013-02-07 08:17:02 AM  
Its a shame we need laws to keep people honest, but thems the breaks when you abuse your priveledges.
 
2013-02-07 08:25:15 AM  
What a horrible thing, allowing people to make informed choices when they purchase food.  I actually think this is a good thing.
 
2013-02-07 08:30:08 AM  
Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.


If you don't know what the fark your serving your customers, then you shouldn't be in the food service industry, dickweed
 
2013-02-07 08:31:20 AM  
I don't know why supermarkets should have to take any of the brunt of this.  Go after the corporations that are trying to get away with as much misleading labeling as they can so people don't know what they're buying.
 
2013-02-07 08:37:30 AM  
I'm sorry, no.

Everything they put out came with a label already.  They aren't in the back of the Publix making soup "just like momma used to make." The grabbed the bagged soup they bought from Sisco and put it out to sell.  If they didn't do that, they can grab one of any number of apps, add all the ingredients up and then divide by the servings.  Slap a label on the sign and go for it. The added cost is one hour.

moving on.
 
2013-02-07 08:39:11 AM  
Faux-rage
 
2013-02-07 08:42:36 AM  

You Are All Sheep: I don't know why supermarkets should have to take any of the brunt of this.  Go after the corporations that are trying to get away with as much misleading labeling as they can so people don't know what they're buying.


IIRC the FDA rule used to only apply to chain restaurants -- the McDonalds, Wendy's, Chipolte, etc.  I would expect that the FDA rule would also only apply to chain supermarkets like Publix or Kroger's and not the mom & pop place down the block.

A little googling shows this article about the FDA proposal from almost two years ago -- I don't see any updates to that though, other than Fox News.
 
2013-02-07 08:43:16 AM  
Oh and for those who didn't want to click through to the link I found -- it only applies to chains with 20 or more locations.
 
2013-02-07 08:45:17 AM  
It's sad as hell that we have to make laws forcing people to do what are entirely common sense things - like posting the ingredients and nutritional value of the farking food that you are serving to the paying customers.

/fake outrage is fake
 
2013-02-07 08:46:16 AM  
oh, and at least from my limited experience, this seems to already be the case in the UK and most of the EU.

Damn those socialists - always knowing what's in their food!  The horror!
 
2013-02-07 08:51:35 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: People would know what they are actually buying? The horror! The Free market will be crippled if consumers have accurate information.


No, see, this is socialism.  If people actually wanted to know what they were buying they would find out for themselves.  This is just another example of the government imposing itself on peoples' lives by telling them what they do and do not need.
 
2013-02-07 08:51:47 AM  
The rule stems from an ObamaCare mandate that restaurants provide nutrition information on menus.

This is clearly the demonic work of Socialism.
 
2013-02-07 08:52:19 AM  
Already the case in Canada, though I believe the grocery stores get an exception for hot/cold food they serve (bakery, deli, etc).

This is a GOOD thing.  Obesity-related health concerns are probably the biggest driver of health-care costs in the states.
 
2013-02-07 08:53:02 AM  

StrangeQ: Philip Francis Queeg: People would know what they are actually buying? The horror! The Free market will be crippled if consumers have accurate information.

No, see, this is socialism.  If people actually wanted to know what they were buying they would find out for themselves.  This is just another example of the government imposing itself on peoples' lives by telling them what they do and do not need.


How is providing information that would otherwise be completely unavailable telling someone what to do?

/look up socialism before you reply
 
2013-02-07 08:58:07 AM  
This is America, we don't want to know stuff!

BTW, can you believe how murky this president is? We need some transparency!
 
2013-02-07 09:06:01 AM  

Where wolf: I'm sorry, no.

Everything they put out came with a label already.  They aren't in the back of the Publix making soup "just like momma used to make." The grabbed the bagged soup they bought from Sisco and put it out to sell.  If they didn't do that, they can grab one of any number of apps, add all the ingredients up and then divide by the servings.  Slap a label on the sign and go for it. The added cost is one hour.

moving on.


Came to say this. They have the information for the ingredients already, They are just complaining for an excuse to raaise prices and gain public sympathy.
 
2013-02-07 09:13:29 AM  
How many jobs will this cost America, Hussain Fratbongo?!/121
 
2013-02-07 09:19:06 AM  
"
soups and bakery items. Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/06/jail-time-for-food-labels/ # ixzz2KDtReVoc
 "

or, gasp, a combination of BOTH in a process known as PREDICTIVE MODELING. but try explaining that to a laboratory manager, CEO, or FDA official. 'computers can do that?1' - homer simpson
 
2013-02-07 09:24:23 AM  
Oh look, the conservatives are outraged again.
 
2013-02-07 09:25:09 AM  
If it is too big a burden for the stores, let them close the deli/bakery sections down and use the money they save to put new farking wheels on the carts once in awhile.

Here is a helpful business tip for you grocery store dumbasses:  If your margins are too thin, make them bigger.  Quit hiring Harvard MBAs to change your business model every six months.  Quit with the loyalty card programs.  Quit selling dishes and DVDs and hardware.  Sell groceries.  Stay independent and don't restrict yourself to rules imposed by corporate grocery chains which may be doing your local customers a disservice.  And for God's sake, get your collective heads out of your asses.  You are selling groceries, not military fighter jets.  Oh yeah, and fix the goddamn cart wheels already.  The last thing you need is to be pissing people off before they even begin shopping.
 
2013-02-07 09:35:46 AM  
global.fncstatic.com

You're not outraged because you're not in the target demographic.
 
2013-02-07 09:36:58 AM  
On the whole a good thing.

But no whining people when the prices go up.
 
2013-02-07 09:44:18 AM  
All these poor business owners will be at a competitive disadvantage against each other, since they ALL have to comply with the new rules.

And how DARE Obama tell me what's in my food!
 
2013-02-07 09:49:24 AM  
The dump I'm about to take this morning could cost the city taxpayers millions if it clogs up a major sewage pipe.

It really could... probably not, but that shouldn't stop you from hating the mayor and the taxes that might go up.
 
2013-02-07 09:52:34 AM  
It'll be so big a burden on restaurants that people will buy their food online instead because it's cheaper.
 
2013-02-07 09:53:33 AM  
Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners

Every time some new regulation comes out, business whine about how it will overburden them and drive them out of business.

"Putting air bags/seatbelts/windshield wipers in cars will be too expensive and will wreck the auto industry!" "Safety features in mines will be too expensive and will wreck the mining industry!" "Raising the minimum wage will be too expensive and will wreck businesses!" "Nutrition labeling on groceries will be too expensive and will wreck the food industry!"

And yet it never does.
 
2013-02-07 10:02:00 AM  
Actually I have a question about this issue.

If the store makes the salad in-store using ingredients you can buy in the store then why can't they use the package labels to calculate the nutrition?
 
2013-02-07 10:03:44 AM  
If the Food and Drug Administration gets its way, your trip to the grocery store could get a tad pricier.

Good, because you eat too much.
 
2013-02-07 10:09:54 AM  
So to eat healthier they increase the cost of the food. Im sure poor people everywhere are gratefull
 
2013-02-07 10:12:40 AM  

serpent_sky: What a horrible thing, allowing people to make informed choices when they purchase food.  I actually think this is a good thing.




I can't wait until they go after hot dog carts. Oh and movie theater popcorn should have some kind of graphic and warning sticker like cigarettes.

fark you fatties!
 
2013-02-07 10:16:12 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: serpent_sky: What a horrible thing, allowing people to make informed choices when they purchase food.  I actually think this is a good thing.

I can't wait until they go after hot dog carts. Oh and movie theater popcorn should have some kind of graphic and warning sticker like cigarettes.

fark you fatties!


AMC has started putting the nutrition facts up.  1500 cal medium pop-corn anyone?
 
2013-02-07 10:16:31 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: All these poor business owners will be at a competitive disadvantage against each other, since they ALL have to comply with the new rules.

And how DARE Obama tell me what's in my food!


But doesn't this only apply to chains?  So it would put some stores at a disadvantage.  For example, we've got three "natural foods" grocers within the same mile-long stretch where I live.  Two are large chains, one is a small chain (three locations).  So the first two will have to follow the regulations but the third won't.  Will that hurt the chains?  Maybe, I don't know.  But isn't that something we should consider before adding regulations that are not uniformly implemented?

And do we really need the grocery stores telling us that piling bacon, cheese, and croutons on your salad makes it no longer healthy?  They don't have to put nutritional info on the celery in the produce, but suddenly when it's sliced and put in a salad bar it becomes a danger to our waistlines?

I don't think it's a big deal and I'm not going to get worked up over it, but it would be nice if lawmakers fully considered all the impacts of their regulations, even if this particular one won't be that big of a problem.
 
2013-02-07 10:20:22 AM  
This is a good idea.
These regulations will add to the cost of food, affecting poor people the most, but obesity is a larger problem among the poor so this will make poor people skinny.
It is also make people smarter since they will certainly spend lots of time going over the nutritional labeling of the Albertson's potato salad before they buy it.

This is a win for everyone.
 
2013-02-07 10:20:34 AM  
Actually if the FDA wanted to do something constructive, remove high fructose corn syrup from the menu.  Instead of saying "we don't know if it's really good for you but more study is needed" and then poof there it goes.

The FDA is just a paper tiger that gets influence so much by corporations it's just...criminal.
 
2013-02-07 10:21:23 AM  
Hey like they said, they had to pass it to know whats in it, but now insist on making others give you the 411? HAHAHAHA priceless!
 
2013-02-07 10:23:16 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: It's sad as hell that we have to make laws forcing people to do what are entirely common sense things - like posting the ingredients and nutritional value of the farking food that you are serving to the paying customers.

/fake outrage is fake


Its all a slippery slope for when Obama outlaws fast food. You watch. We'll all be forced to eat broccoli and pear wedge salads and look back sadly on if we'd only fought them when they tried to label fast food with as much grease and simple sugars as it really comes with.
 
2013-02-07 10:24:32 AM  

You Are All Sheep: I don't know why supermarkets should have to take any of the brunt of this.


They aren't.  All they see is the cost needed to comply with the changes and think they're being punished.  They don't consider that all of their competitors have to make the exact same expenditures, so what they think of as persecution is actually a level playing field.  In those cases the costs are passed onto the customer so the businesses aren't paying for them anyway.  The "brunt" will be a nominal increase in food costs.

This is, of course, excepting anti-competitive regulations (glorified Bills of Attainder) specifically designed to raise costs of entry.  Yes, those do exist.  This is not one of them.  That they can't tell the difference says all you need to know about who's doing the complaining.

kalor: If the store makes the salad in-store using ingredients you can buy in the store then why can't they use the package labels to calculate the nutrition?


I take it you've never seen wholesale shipping.  "Not labeled for retail sale" is a bit of an understatement.
 
2013-02-07 10:27:09 AM  
AMC has started putting the nutrition facts up.  1500 cal medium pop-corn anyone?

Is that with or without butter flavoring?
 
kab
2013-02-07 10:28:37 AM  
FTA:

"[The information] should help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs."

The information is readily available for anyone seeking it, and already exists on pre-packaged food items, as well as most menu's at restaurants.

Obesity isn't caused by folks binging on the chicken noodle soup at the salad bar.  Whoever passed this is farking clueless.
 
2013-02-07 10:29:53 AM  

rugman11: And do we really need the grocery stores telling us that piling bacon, cheese, and croutons on your salad makes it no longer healthy?


Which has fewer calories. A bran muffin or a doughnut?

Which is lower in fat. A slice of pizza or a hamburger?

Which is lower in sodium, the turkey sandwich or the roast sandwich?

You can't answer any of those questions without information specific to each item as it's sold at the establishment.

But by all means go ahead and pretend your intentionally outlying example was in any way relevant to the larger topic at hand.
 
2013-02-07 10:33:39 AM  

kalor: Actually I have a question about this issue.

If the store makes the salad in-store using ingredients you can buy in the store then why can't they use the package labels to calculate the nutrition?


Because math is socialist.
 
2013-02-07 10:38:40 AM  

kab: FTA:

"[The information] should help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs."

The information is readily available for anyone seeking it, and already exists on pre-packaged food items, as well as most menu's at restaurants.

Obesity isn't caused by folks binging on the chicken noodle soup at the salad bar.  Whoever passed this is farking clueless.


fark you, because money, hippy.
 
2013-02-07 10:38:54 AM  
Now if we can only get them to restrict EBT cards to healthy food, that would help more than labeling.
 
2013-02-07 10:41:20 AM  

You Are All Sheep: Actually if the FDA wanted to do something constructive, remove high fructose corn syrup from the menu. Instead of saying "we don't know if it's really good for you but more study is needed" and then poof there it goes. The FDA is just a paper tiger that gets influence so much by corporations it's just...criminal.


You mean well but you obviously do not belong in that pits of vipers that are business & politics.  If this happens, HFCS has to be legally defined, and in doing so it'll take two seconds for Big Corn to figure out what is HFCS but not legally HFCS.  For example, if you define HFCS as a fructose-glucose mixture where the ratio is anywhere between 50/50 to 80/20, you'd better believe they're reformulate to 45/55 and 85/15.  They could probably get HFCS back on the market within a couple of weeks.  Never mind that 85/15 would be almost all fructose and thus even WORSE for your body; you think businesses give a rat's ass about ethics?  And if you ban the mixture entirely they'll just package the fructose and glucose separately.  And this is all assuming Big Corn won't spend millions lobbying to give HFCS an absurdly narrow definition that can easily be circumvented.  I've seen the USDA try to re-define terms out of existence.  There's a reason why "natural" is unregulated; according to the USDA, you can label Borg meat as "natural".

Contrary to popular belief, legislation is hard.  Like, wicked hard.  There isn't a law in existence that businesses won't try to pry open loopholes in ways that would make goatse blush.  I'm not kidding.  No, really, I am NOT kidding; working private sector has exposed me to human behavior that is so shocking that a foot-wide bunghole starts to look like decency.  The larger companies actually pay armies of lawyers to pore over legislation line by line for anything they can use to basically shiat all over the its intent.  You know one reason why no one in Wall Street went to jail over the financial collapse?  Because they are very, very good at doing things legally.  Businesses are an important part of our economy so I'm not out to destroy them, but they need to be kept on a very short leash.  I'd sooner trust a drug dealer than a guy in a suit.
 
2013-02-07 10:43:21 AM  

kab: FTA:

"[The information] should help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs."

The information is readily available for anyone seeking it, and already exists on pre-packaged food items, as well as most menu's at restaurants.

Obesity isn't caused by folks binging on the chicken noodle soup at the salad bar.  Whoever passed this is farking clueless.


Really? Safeway posts the nutrition info for the sandwiches they make at all the in-store delis? Giant tells you how much sodium is in 1 serving of the soup (and defines what a "serving" is) in every store? News to me...

// obesity is caused partially by people not caring what they eat
// seeing the nutritional facts may - WILL - cause people to start caring a bit more, thus blunting that contribution
 
2013-02-07 10:47:30 AM  

Arkanaut: kalor: Actually I have a question about this issue.

If the store makes the salad in-store using ingredients you can buy in the store then why can't they use the package labels to calculate the nutrition?

Because math is socialist.


Well, they can do that. You need to look up the nutritional data for each part of the salad - the lettuce, the dressing, the cheese, the croutons, etc - plus you need to weigh everything. Next you enter this data into some sort of program that calculates and prints the resulting label info for the combined product.  And you damn well better do it accurately since you don't want to end up in court  for presenting erroneous nutritional information.

For some reason the grocers think that will cost them time and money.  But lots of farkers in this thread think that's not a problem, so maybe they should volunteer their time and skills analyzing salads so this regulation does not add to the cost of the salad.
 
Displayed 50 of 134 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report