View Single Post
  #66   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
clare at snyder.on.ca clare at snyder.on.ca is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 450
Default OT - Should Recalls Cause A Company's Demise?

On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:13:07 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Oct 6, 10:01 pm, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 14:50:09 -0500, Tim Wescott
wrote:





On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 13:53:11 -0400, john wrote:


Tim Wescott wrote:


On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 20:05:04 -0700, Too_Many_Tools wrote:


Today it is beef....tomorrow toys...the next day...well something
else...fasteners, tires, tools?


It would seem that lack of quality control has just cost this company
its existence and its employees their livelihoods.


Should a company be responsible for its own quality control or is it a
responsibility of government to protect us?


I would like to hear your thoughts on this.


Thanks


-- snip --


It is the responsibility of government to protect us. Us as consumers,
not us as manufacturers. I think that being able to assume that my food
is safe, and my kid's toys are safe, and my walls and roof and piping, is
a fine thing and I want to stick with that.


LOL You know what they say about the word ' assume


Rule # 1 on buying ground meat.... don't get any from a big packing
house. Fresh ground local meat is the only way to go.


And did you know E-Coli is a MAJOR problem in corn-fed beef and almost
unheard of in range fed or grain finished range fed beef?
American beef is virtually100% corn fed or corn finished beef.







True, and I probably sounded like I (as a consumer) want more protection
than I really do. Please nothing rotten, and I'll make sure that what I
get is thoroughly cooked anyway. Please don't adulterate it in a way I
can't tell. If it's really bright freaking red then I'll know that
there's either dye or CO involved, if you sell me a used car that has
struts missing from the engine compartment I'll know it's been totalled
even if the title isn't branded, if you sell me a new car I'll have looked
it up in Consumer Reports, etc.


I do try to buy meat that looks like it's been ground a few feet away from
the counter, but I'll bet that doesn't work 100% at any rate.


On the other hand, when I step onto a manufacturing floor I don't want
government inspectors (with some exceptions, based on gender, age,
appearance and attitude) sticking their hands down my shorts. No, I
don't mind too much that I am required to make a safe product -- I
wanted to do that anyway, and I like to know that my sleazy competitors
are required to live up to my standards. But I _would_ mind having a
bunch of regulators who barely passed "Physics for Civil Servants"
sitting in on my design reviews, questioning my innovations.


I hate to say it but lawyers keep things safer than any government will.


Yes, but it's the government (in the larger sense -- not a huge executive
branch) that gives the lawyers scope to work in. Without a balance of
power, and a constitutional right to redress, what could the lawyers do?


And if I screw up? Well, in a free world giving someone the freedom to
screw up means letting them feel the pain of it afterwards. If I have
to take a bunch of stuff back because I misrepresented it as safe food
or safe children's toys, then that's life. And if my business is so
weak that doing so puts me under -- that's life too.


Here is a problem, intentionally screwing up a product to save a buck
should be punishable civilly and criminally. If it is an accident the
lawyers will take their toll.


I would extend that 'intentional' to being negligent -- if you're working
on something that's safety related and you're not dotting all the 'i's and
crossing all the 't's then a consequent accident is your fault, even if
you didn't intend for something to go wrong. It may not be as bad as if
you deliberately cut corners _knowing_ that it would cause a problem, but
cutting corners and not _looking_ to see if it would cause a problem is
almost as bad.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I seem to recall reading that is not feeding them corn...it is the
feeding lot lifestyle versus home on the grass range.

I guess if I were standing in my own excrement, I would likely end up
as E.coli in who ate me too.

TMT

Nope. Hay fed and grain fed feedlot cattle do NOT have the e-coli
population corn fed cattle have. I's something to do with the corn in
the gut making it a "perfect host" for E-coli.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com