Fifty-nine percent of consumers report it is extremely important (rated it as an 8-10 on a 10-point scale) for grocery stores and restaurants to provide information about the way the food they sell is grown and raised, and more than half want more information than they are currently getting, according to new research from the U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance.
Consumers want to know
- Thread starter cbcr
- Start date
Help Support Steer Planet:
I agree 100%. Let the consumer decide what they are willing to pay for; USA born, raised and slaughtered, grass fed, organic, "humanely raised", whatever..
What I do not understand, is why the issue with labeling. Let each "brand" label how they see fit, and let them market it. Non-GMO, grass fed, USA could all be VOLUNTARILY labeled and if the consumers buy it, then others will follow. It is called "free markets". Let the consumer decide.
What I do not understand, is why the issue with labeling. Let each "brand" label how they see fit, and let them market it. Non-GMO, grass fed, USA could all be VOLUNTARILY labeled and if the consumers buy it, then others will follow. It is called "free markets". Let the consumer decide.
knabe
Well-known member
People already have choice. They can get it at whole foods. The issue with choice of any type is they don't want to pay for it.
Break up the monopoly of the USDA grading system.
I don't believe the surveys. They say they want the labeling. Fast food is labeled and one uses the I formation.
What people really want is to tell someone else what to do.
We say we want freedom but each minute of the day we give up more and more.
We are completely unaware of unintended consequences.
People say they want choice but only vote for mandates.
They say don't tell me what to do but vote for the opposite.
There is only one logical conclusion.
The I said so law.
Break up the monopoly of the USDA grading system.
I don't believe the surveys. They say they want the labeling. Fast food is labeled and one uses the I formation.
What people really want is to tell someone else what to do.
We say we want freedom but each minute of the day we give up more and more.
We are completely unaware of unintended consequences.
People say they want choice but only vote for mandates.
They say don't tell me what to do but vote for the opposite.
There is only one logical conclusion.
The I said so law.
knabe
Well-known member
BTDT said:
Sort of like if they want a 16" inch ribeye or 10" ribeye?
knabe said:
Exactly knabe. High end restaurant's have discovered their market is 8-10 inch ribeyes that have less fat and more lean meat. So, they have found people who are willing to produce "miniature cattle" to produce what they want to purchase.
As for the way people vote, who the heck knows what people think when they go to the voting booth. I have talked to 8 people who voted for Obama because he was "for the poor people", and now they are complaining because they are finding they are having to pay for those programs (health care). I grin and say "hate to say I told you so.."
Gov't programs, regardless of what they are, all have a similar problem; the people writing the "rules" have no practice experience and they have too many favors to pay off. I am finding that with darn near ANY organization and the people who run for boards and committees.
People want their cake and eat it too! Like Knabe says, they want information, but are unwilling to pay for it. Was just listening to part of Agritalk this morning with Mike Adams, and some of the guest on the show keep talking about we are 3 and 4 generations removed from the farm. People have no idea. But one thing that even as they said it sometimes doesn't seem to make any difference to them what can be proven with facts, science, etc., if they still don't understand they are against it. Emotions seem to play a stronger role than fact.
Who's responsibility is it to tell the consumer? They say we as farmers need to, that may be true, but when farmers pay for check-offs and other promotions, isn't that what that money is supposed to be used for? It seems somewhat like going to a restaurant where the waiters and waitresses are paid very little per hour and they depend on the consumer to really make their pay.
Who's responsibility is it to tell the consumer? They say we as farmers need to, that may be true, but when farmers pay for check-offs and other promotions, isn't that what that money is supposed to be used for? It seems somewhat like going to a restaurant where the waiters and waitresses are paid very little per hour and they depend on the consumer to really make their pay.
knabe
Well-known member
BTDT said:
which ones? i've tried a couple around here, ie near menlo park to san francisco, and have not been impressed by the tiny steaks nor the grass fed steaks. i would rather have elk or deer for that type of "tasting" menu. tiny beef just isn't up there in the taste department (in my opinion)
knabe
Well-known member
dutch pride
Well-known member
This is all a result of cheap food prices IMHO. I think that in the US folks pay less of there average income for food than anywhere else in the world. If folks were more worried about how to pay for food or had to choose between paying for food or toys/vacations/hobbies/etc. there would be less demands made on the food that they attempt to purchase.
DLZ
DLZ
While some of that may be true, other countries have more information that is available to their consumers, but some of their consumers aren't as concerned as what consumers seem to be here in the USA.
Part of that could be due to the easier access to information that is available to the US consumer via the internet. Plus the HSUS doesn't seem to bother, to my knowledge the foreign countries like they keep doing here. This is also part of the problem when they and other groups put out false information and propaganda and they get some people to believe the lies as truth.
Part of that could be due to the easier access to information that is available to the US consumer via the internet. Plus the HSUS doesn't seem to bother, to my knowledge the foreign countries like they keep doing here. This is also part of the problem when they and other groups put out false information and propaganda and they get some people to believe the lies as truth.
Yes consumers think they want to know when asked what would they like to know on the label.
The real question is would consumer pay more to have a certain claim on the label.
For most claims they would not.
The next questions is do they know what the claims mean. For example natural is highly used, but basically means no ingredients added, which covers pretty much all meat that isn't pumped with solution.
Research has shown very few look on the label for country of origin for example.
The labeling requirement are expensive implement in packing plants. As you have to keep track of every piece of meat from that carcass and it adds labor and plant inefficiency.
Consumers typically look to see if the product is fresh, then they look at the price, and they look to see if it good for them. The last one has a different meaning for everyone is more about perception than fact.
The real question is would consumer pay more to have a certain claim on the label.
For most claims they would not.
The next questions is do they know what the claims mean. For example natural is highly used, but basically means no ingredients added, which covers pretty much all meat that isn't pumped with solution.
Research has shown very few look on the label for country of origin for example.
The labeling requirement are expensive implement in packing plants. As you have to keep track of every piece of meat from that carcass and it adds labor and plant inefficiency.
Consumers typically look to see if the product is fresh, then they look at the price, and they look to see if it good for them. The last one has a different meaning for everyone is more about perception than fact.
knabe
Well-known member
If somebody lies on labeling is caught, the free market should not be allowed penalize that company, only the government should be allowed. Citizens have no business making these decisions themselves. Citizens can't be bothered with making any decisions for themselves.
RyanChandler
Well-known member
knabe said:
Without the labeling, where would you suggest the consumer go to find the information? Without deceitful marketing practices, consumers wouldn't have to decipher just what exactly those claims mean-- it would be self explanatory.
It sounds to me like consumers are deciding. They're deciding they want their goods labeled. The goal here is not to protect packing plant profits; the goal is to provide essential information to the consumer that allows them to make the most appropriate nutrition choice for his/her family. The common good trumps the financial self interest of a few.
knabe
Well-known member
let producers label and break up the USDA inspection cartel.
customers want to buy direct and the whole infrastructure is set up to eliminate competition.
customers want to buy direct and the whole infrastructure is set up to eliminate competition.
knabe
Well-known member
That is all to common for China, look at all of the other products that have had ingredients that were harmful and poisonous. They just plain don't care. melamine in pet food, lead paint used on toys, pet treats that kill our pets and the list goes on and on.
