This is a follow up to my previous post, "Protecting Children From Lead Toys".
There has been a website setup titled "National Bankruptcy Day". It has been given this title because on February 10, 2009 any toy that is sold in the US must be tested by an independent party for for lead and phthalates. This is due to legislation passed last July titled the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008. It does not matter when the toy was manufactured, whether it is second hand or brand new, the toy needs to be tested and certified or it is deemed a banned hazardous product.
The people that host and sponsor the National Bankruptcy Day site predict a large quantity of small to medium sized US toy manufacturers and retailers are going to be put out of business as they're forced to dispose of their untested toys and unable to pay for the required testing in time for the February 10th deadline.
You can read one article about the trouble this act is causing here.
You can read the press release from the passing of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 here. The legislation was voted into law by congress 424 - 1. The lone individual that voted against this economically disastrous legislation: Ron Paul.
In a time when jobs are needed, those that create jobs are being forced out of business. Once again, love live free enterprise.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
That's what happens when we trust the "free market" of strangers looking to make a profit no matter what. Sure, you can trust many of them, even most of them, but there are those who are either too stupid or too cynical to care and regularly pass faulty or dangerous products. Australia is a good example. Many of the drug companies were selling drugs with alternative ingredients that didnt hurt anyone... BUT THOSE WHO THOUGHT THEY WERE RECEIVING THE ACTUAL DRUG. They were basically selling placebos, FOR YEARS..
"Australia is a good example. Many of the drug companies were selling drugs with alternative ingredients that didnt hurt anyone... BUT THOSE WHO THOUGHT THEY WERE RECEIVING THE ACTUAL DRUG. They were basically selling placebos, FOR YEARS.."
So throw everyone of them in prison for fraud.
I'm not sure I understand how what this post is talking about is the fault of the free market...
"So throw everyone of them in prison for fraud.
I'm not sure I understand how what this post is talking about is the fault of the free market..."
It's simple. If they had been regulated there would not have been room for them to do what they did.
Failure of the free market? Obviously, the free market allowed them to do what they did,
"the free market allowed them to do what they did"
and people shouldn't be allowed to to do what they do. i understand now.
"and people shouldn't be allowed to to do what they do. i understand now."
Businesses should be watched for corruption, yes. It doesnt take that much resources to do it, and it is definitely not "Big Brother", because it is not contradicting any fundamental freedoms. Businesses DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELL DANGEROUS PRODUCTS>
"Businesses should be watched for corruption, yes. It doesnt take that much resources to do it, and it is definitely not "Big Brother", because it is not contradicting any fundamental freedoms. Businesses DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELL DANGEROUS PRODUCTS>"
Sure they. Any product can be considered dangerous. But lets not argue that.
Yes, business should be watched for corruption. That's the job of the police. The point is to not punish those who have not corrupted, or committed a crime, because someone else has.
"Yes, business should be watched for corruption. That's the job of the police. The point is to not punish those who have not corrupted, or committed a crime, because someone else has."
I see no "punishment" if the costs are paid for by the state.
"I see no "punishment" if the costs are paid for by the state."
Well the state has no money, so they have to rob someone for it. So someone is getting punished.
"Well the state has no money, so they have to rob someone for it. So someone is getting punished."
I think it would be easier for the state to merely redirect funds from other programs or increase taxes a bit.
Post a Comment