Des-beat,

You have a violent streak…..meds…bro….meds

Jimbo…..move. So sour and hurting…..you depress us.

Prop 65…….it’s only use is as a punchline to a myriad of jokes. (Well that and as a revenue source for vexatious litigants).

As to food makers……..Let’s not forget that the egg-bill, applied to out of state producers as well, has caused eggs to shoot up from $0.50 to $1.00 a dozen.

Some have argued that this “hurts the poor”, but then I thought about it and realized: They could give a flying f***. That’s what food stamps are for. And besides, their spawn gets three hots a day for free at their local K-12 Indoctrination Center.

The only ones getting hosed are dumb ass middle class folks like myself.

And the cost of all these ignored labels will be passed onto the consumer and hit the poor the hardest. Booze has sugar, labels on them? What’s next for government to get into people’s business?

The only good news is that when the warning labels appear on many if not most foods, they will become meaningless — as meaningless as the “Prop 65” warnings on anything in California that contains (gasp!!!) chemicals!!

Meaningless and ignored.

One little-noted benefit to CA food makers. The CA-only label will make many small producers in other states cease selling in CA, as the trouble of adding labels for just one state becomes too big a burden. Makes one wonder where the funding is coming from for this new “disclosure” push.

Well– of course we all do— and a ton on the gov tab—–

so
I say
soda is just fine
the gov will have e.r.’s for us,