Guest Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 10 minutes ago, Innovindil said: Muh chlorine chickens brah. If they're good enough for tens of millions of muricans, they're good enough for me. 4 minutes ago, Strokes said: I’d quite like our weak cows to get roided up too, them steaks over the pond are amazing. No thanks. They chlorinate chicken to remove disease and stench because they are reared and handled in appalling conditions. Why would you want to eat that? American stalls aren't even close to being the best. They're just big. I've no doubt the harm of steroids within butchered foods will come out if it hasn't already.
Innovindil Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 27 minutes ago, toddybad said: No thanks. They chlorinate chicken to remove disease and stench because they are reared and handled in appalling conditions. Why would you want to eat that? American stalls aren't even close to being the best. They're just big. I've no doubt the harm of steroids within butchered foods will come out if it hasn't already. Okay, so don't eat them. Why can't I?
Buce Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 7 minutes ago, Innovindil said: Okay, so don't eat them. Why can't I? Because you'll become a mutant and eat our children.
Guest Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 47 minutes ago, Innovindil said: Okay, so don't eat them. Why can't I? Because, as a nation, we should expect a level of quality. Not everybody can determine differences. I don't believe for one second you want to eat chlorinated chicken. The whole point of limited regulation - which you agree with - is for a minimum standard. Chlorinated chicken does not pass the minimum standard. I could sell you cheaper chicken if I reared it on tainted food and stored it at room temperature. But cost is not the decisive factor. You can't eat then for the same reason that you can't legally possess heroin. It's in the public interest not to allow it.
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 1 minute ago, toddybad said: Because, as a nation, we should expect a level of quality. Not everybody can determine differences. I don't believe for one second you want to eat chlorinated chicken. The whole point of limited regulation - which you agree with - is for a minimum standard. Chlorinated chicken does not pass the minimum standard. I could sell you cheaper chicken if I reared it on tainted food and stored it at room temperature. But cost is not the decisive factor. You can't eat then for the same reason that you can't legally possess heroin. It's in the public interest not to allow it. How much for your chicken? 1
Buce Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Strokes said: How much for your heroin? Edited 14 February 2018 by Buce
Buce Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 Just now, Strokes said: I’m a crack man. Shouldn’t this be in the Swingers thread? 1
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 1 minute ago, Buce said: Shouldn’t this be in the Swingers thread? What thread are we in? That stupid chlorine one again?
Innovindil Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 19 minutes ago, toddybad said: Because, as a nation, we should expect a level of quality. Not everybody can determine differences. I don't believe for one second you want to eat chlorinated chicken. The whole point of limited regulation - which you agree with - is for a minimum standard. Chlorinated chicken does not pass the minimum standard. I could sell you cheaper chicken if I reared it on tainted food and stored it at room temperature. But cost is not the decisive factor. You can't eat then for the same reason that you can't legally possess heroin. It's in the public interest not to allow it. I've been to America twice, I can't guarantee that it was chlorinated (not sure if it all is or not), but I've eaten their chicken. Didn't taste any different to "ours". Shockingly, like millions of Americans, I'm still alive. I know that it's not to "the standard", my argument is that if it's fine for America, a country where if you so much as sneeze on someone you'll get sued, it should be good enough for us. 1
Guest Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 6 minutes ago, Strokes said: What thread are we in? That stupid chlorine one again? Yeah, the one where innov pretend to want to eat that muck just because half the tory party would gladly feed our poor any old shit.
leicsmac Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 4 minutes ago, Innovindil said: I've been to America twice, I can't guarantee that it was chlorinated (not sure if it all is or not), but I've eaten their chicken. Didn't taste any different to "ours". Shockingly, like millions of Americans, I'm still alive. I know that it's not to "the standard", my argument is that if it's fine for America, a country where if you so much as sneeze on someone you'll get sued, it should be good enough for us. And then win in court because you can afford better lawyers than the plaintiff.
Guest Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 5 minutes ago, Innovindil said: I've been to America twice, I can't guarantee that it was chlorinated (not sure if it all is or not), but I've eaten their chicken. Didn't taste any different to "ours". Shockingly, like millions of Americans, I'm still alive. I know that it's not to "the standard", my argument is that if it's fine for America, a country where if you so much as sneeze on someone you'll get sued, it should be good enough for us. Why should it? Americans by the million carry guns. We don't. In the far East they regard semi formed chicken foetuses in eggs as a delicacy. We don't.
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 20 minutes ago, toddybad said: Why should it? Americans by the million carry guns. We don't. In the far East they regard semi formed chicken foetuses in eggs as a delicacy. We don't. In France they eat snails and horses we don’t. If you don’t want it don’t buy it, so long as it’s clearly labelled and any risks are known what is the problem?
Bryn Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 We should be improving food quality and more importantly animal welfare. Honestly, what is wrong with people? Everyone is so hateful and disinterested with anything outside of their own needs.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 1 minute ago, Bryn said: We should be improving food quality and more importantly animal welfare. Honestly, what is wrong with people? Everyone is so hateful and disinterested with anything outside of their own needs. Yeah but it's pretty easy to say that when I guess you can easily afford chicken. But for those at the bottom, a possible 20% reduction in the cost of chicken is huge. As much as I'd love us to eat higher welfare meat and all those luxuries as I try to do now, it really seems unfair to dictate an unnecessary cost to people that just need to feed themselves something.
Guest Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: Yeah but it's pretty easy to say that when I guess you can easily afford chicken. But for those at the bottom, a possible 20% reduction in the cost of chicken is huge. As much as I'd love us to eat higher welfare meat and all those luxuries as I try to do now, it really seems unfair to dictate an unnecessary cost to people that just need to feed themselves something. Chicken is already £3 a pop with disastrous consequences for animal welfare. Nobody is moaning about the price of chicken. It's a false argument brought about by right wingers that want to stave off regulation so they can sell shit at huge profit. Unfortunately right wing supporters are stupid.
leicsmac Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 11 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: Yeah but it's pretty easy to say that when I guess you can easily afford chicken. But for those at the bottom, a possible 20% reduction in the cost of chicken is huge. As much as I'd love us to eat higher welfare meat and all those luxuries as I try to do now, it really seems unfair to dictate an unnecessary cost to people that just need to feed themselves something. Money means little to a sick man, and much less to a dead one. I'm not saying that this chicken thing will lead to such things, but cutting regs to save consumers money has numerous incidences of not ending well.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 2 minutes ago, toddybad said: Chicken is already £3 a pop with disastrous consequences for animal welfare. Nobody is moaning about the price of chicken. It's a false argument brought about by right wingers that want to stave off regulation so they can sell shit at huge profit. Unfortunately right wing supporters are stupid. Yes I'm definitely sat here - as someone who won't buy it and doesn't have any stake in the sale of chickens apart from that - with the desire to sell shit at a huge profit. For someone that pretends to care about the poor, you're not doing a very good job at easing the cost of living for them.
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: Chicken is already £3 a pop with disastrous consequences for animal welfare. Nobody is moaning about the price of chicken. It's a false argument brought about by right wingers that want to stave off regulation so they can sell shit at huge profit. Unfortunately right wing supporters are stupid. If people have the choice and the knowledge, what is the problem? If you are right they will still buy the same chicken they buy now.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 2 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Money means little to a sick man, and much less to a dead one. I'm not saying that this chicken thing will lead to such things, but cutting regs to save consumers money has numerous incidences of not ending well. I'm not disputing that just cutting regulation to save consumers money isn't always good. But this is something the EU says is of "No safety concern" and gives the opportunity to give people a choice to consume cheaper chicken. I mean British beef still has a bad rep across the world because of BSE but I doubt most people complaining about chlorinated chicken give that a second thought. It's very easy to worry about animal welfare and all that when you're in the financial position to do so. I have no idea how much households spend on chicken but a potential 21% saving isn't to be sniffed at.
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 12 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Money means little to a sick man, and much less to a dead one. I'm not saying that this chicken thing will lead to such things, but cutting regs to save consumers money has numerous incidences of not ending well. You live in the states right? Do you eat the poultry?
ajthefox Posted 15 February 2018 Posted 15 February 2018 I'm not really all that arsed either way, but the idea that we should be deregulating (in an industry that has been hammered for animal welfare and hygiene often enough as it is) to reduce the price, rather than looking at a positive solution is inherently backwards to me. If you can't afford the cheapest chicken, your problem isn't the price of the chicken anyway. 1
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 15 February 2018 Author Posted 15 February 2018 14 hours ago, Rogstanley said: I don't disagree that education of any sort can be beneficial, but doesn't the fact that those examples went on to be successful in things not related to their degree actually prove the degrees were pointless? Butterfly effect notwithstanding, Rowan Atkinson would still have been a talented comic without his engineering degree, Chris Martin would still have had an aptitude for producing generic pop songs without his Ancient World Studies degree. How many people have gone to study liberal arts and by doing so missed their true calling as a world class engineer? I take it you’ve never been to Uni? The thing that sets University appart from normal schooling is both the method of learning and the way it develops critical thinking. The subject being discovered is only a proportional aspect of that period in education; and even then, plus whatever that subject is will build transferable skills that will be of benefit to any industry, not just ones relating to the core subject. And finally, it should also not be forgotten that a University education also helps one explore a much wider range of drinking games.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 15 February 2018 Author Posted 15 February 2018 1 hour ago, Strokes said: In France they eat snails and horses we don’t. If you don’t want it don’t buy it, so long as it’s clearly labelled and any risks are known what is the problem? Only when it’s not sneaked it into our burgers. I would suggest however that our food standards position in this country is an area that we should look to protect and indeed further improve, not water down. Generally speaking, if you set a bar, there will always those that will be tempted to go under it (Lionel Messi for example), so having a sufficiently high bar tends to act as a counterweight to how low someone is willing to go / and helps impose a moral consumer confidence penalty if that bar is breached.
Recommended Posts