LogFAQs > #958596018

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Do you agree with those nyc sanitation workers throwing out all that produce?
ParanoidObsessive 10/01/21 3:13:17 PM #17:	adjl posted... If they can't guarantee the safety of the food, they can't in good conscience give it to anyone else. This. adjl posted... In truth, lacking the necessary permits is probably more a matter of red tape than a genuine safety concern, but the law can't tell the difference. If you can't trust someone to get the proper legal permits, how can you trust them to faithfully adhere to all health and safety requirements? If they've already shown a willingness to cut corners/flout their obligations, how can you ever assume they're not doing the same when it comes to more important things as well? I might be biased, though. I have a friend who works for the DEP who's told me a few stories about just how criminally irresponsible businesses (both large and small) can be, even when it comes to public health issues. Like businesses that have issues where sewage is bleeding into "fresh" water lines and the business owner just wants to keep paying the fine for it rather than fixing it, because it's cheaper, regardless of whether or not it might be getting people sick. PK_Spam posted... theyd rather throw it away than at least process it for pet food. If I don't trust food to be hygienic enough for me to eat, I sure as fuck don't want anyone processing it into food for my pets to eat either. Not to mention that the time it would take to transport food from a place where it's confiscated to a place where it could be effectively processed would almost certainly result in it spoiling to some degree along the way, making it unusable anyway. The infrastructure for that simply doesn't exist at the moment. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:958596018] in Do you agr... [t:79687705]...</cite> <quote><cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>If they can't guarantee the safety of the food, they can't in good conscience give it to anyone else.</quote> This. <cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>In truth, lacking the necessary permits is probably more a matter of red tape than a genuine safety concern, but the law can't tell the difference.</quote> If you can't trust someone to get the proper legal permits, how can you trust them to faithfully adhere to all health and safety requirements? If they've already shown a willingness to cut corners/flout their obligations, how can you ever assume they're not doing the same when it comes to more important things as well? I might be biased, though. I have a friend who works for the DEP who's told me a few stories about just how criminally irresponsible businesses (both large and small) can be, even when it comes to public health issues. Like businesses that have issues where sewage is bleeding into "fresh" water lines and the business owner just wants to keep paying the fine for it rather than fixing it, because it's cheaper, regardless of whether or not it might be getting people sick. <cite>PK_Spam posted...</cite> <quote>theyd rather throw it away than at least process it for pet food.</quote> If I don't trust food to be hygienic enough for me to eat, I sure as fuck don't want anyone processing it into food for my pets to eat either. Not to mention that the time it would take to transport food from a place where it's confiscated to a place where it could be effectively processed would almost certainly result in it spoiling to some degree along the way, making it unusable anyway. The infrastructure for that simply doesn't exist at the moment. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1