Libertarians: Is this a legitimate function of Government?

C

Cypress

Will work for Scooby snacks
Is this a legitimate function of federal government?:


FDA issues new regulations to improve the safety of dietary supplements

WASHINGTON (AP) -- For the first time, manufacturers of vitamins, herbal pills and other dietary supplements will have to test all of their products' ingredients.

The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it is phasing in a new rule that is designed to address concerns that existing regulations allowed supplements onto the market that were contaminated or didn't contain ingredients claimed on the label.

Last year, the agency found that some supplements contained undeclared active ingredients used in prescription drugs for erectile dysfunction. In the past, regulators found supplements that didn't contain the levels of Vitamin C or Vitamin A that were claimed.

The rule applies to all domestic and foreign companies that manufacture, package and label supplements for sale in the U.S. It requires them to analyze the identity, purity and strength of all the ingredients that go into their products before they are distributed.

If, upon inspection, the FDA finds that supplements do not contain the ingredients they claim, the agency would consider the products adulterated or misbranded. In minor cases, the agency could ask the manufacturer to remove an ingredient or revise its label. In more serious cases, it could seize the product, file a lawsuit or even seek criminal charges.

Snip….

"The final rule will help ensure that dietary supplements are manufactured with controls that result in a consistent product free of contamination, with accurate labeling," said Dr. Robert E. Brackett, director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DIETARY_SUPPLEMENTS?SITE=PAREA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Click to expand...
 
Yes. Those who might be poisoned or allergic to unlabeled ingredients in drugs/supplements/vitamins could die/become sick. There is a direct victim. This would be a legitimate function of government.
 
Excellent. Good to hear that.

I've debated libertarians who claim that the FDA, or the CDC should not be federal functions. Along with virtually all the other consumer, science, and environmental regulatory functions of the Federal government.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Excellent. Good to hear that.

I've debated libertarians who claim that the FDA, or the CDC should not be federal functions. Along with virtually all the other consumer, science, and environmental regulatory functions of the Federal government.
Click to expand...

You mean Dano?
 
Cypress said:
Excellent. Good to hear that.

I've debated libertarians who claim that the FDA, or the CDC should not be federal functions. Along with virtually all the other consumer, science, and environmental regulatory functions of the Federal government.
Click to expand...
It depends on what it is about. In this case the most efficient would be the Federal Government as it could apply accross the board and most would easily fall within the Interstate Commerce clause.

States could attempt to battle it individually, but imagine the labels... The requirements being different in all 50 and the territories? Whew... It would get overly long.
 
Yes, for the same sane reasons expressed in post#2.

No use of force or fraud. In cases where the common citizen can not be expected to be able to discern the 'goodness' of a product whose use may have fatal consequences, government oversight / examination / regulation would be legitimate functions; however, some independent entities like UL and Consumer Reports function well. It was CR that forced the SUV rollover issue.
 
This highlights the problem with libertarian ideology. It makes for interesting conversation, but it is not applicable to modern society.

The CDC, FEMA, EPA, FDA, CIA, and a host of federal functions have legitimate roles to play in today's society that cannot be handled on the state level.

It's an ideology devoid of socio-ethical responsibility which MUST be resident in our society and is often devoid of even the practical functionality of a modern society.

Individualism is not, nor should it ever be, more important then what is in the best interests of America or it's future.
 
Last edited:
blackascoal said:
This highlights the problem with libertarian ideology. It makes for interesting conversation, but it is not applicable to modern society.

The CDC, FEMA, EPA, FDA, CIA, and a host of federal functions have legitimate roles to play in today's society that cannot be handled on the state level.

It's an ideology devoid of socio-ethical responsibility which MUST be resident in our society and is often devoid of even the practical functionality of a modern society.

Individualism is not, nor should it ever be, more important then what is in the best interests of America or it's future.
Click to expand...
This highlights what you get when you don't read the thread. So far every libertarian that bothered to answer agreed that this would be a legitimate power of government.

It also highlights the main ignorance people have for libertarians, they take the extremes and use it to define every person with such an opinion without regard to the fact that they, the person pigeonholing libertarians with stereotypes rather than listening, don't like being pigeonholed with all "liberals" if they are defined by the extremes or some other stereotype.
 
blackascoal said:
This highlights the problem with libertarian ideology. It makes for interesting conversation, but it is not applicable to modern society.

The CDC, FEMA, EPA, FDA, CIA, and a host of federal functions have legitimate roles to play in today's society that cannot be handled on the state level.

It's an ideology devoid of socio-ethical responsibility which MUST be resident in our society and is often devoid of even the practical functionality of a modern society.

Individualism is not, nor should it ever be, more important then what is in the best interests of America or it's future.
Click to expand...

Individualism is best for America and it's future.
 
Black, the reason I don't believe in socialism anymore is because I don't want everything in my life to be run like the DMV. Sure, poor people may make more under socialism (for a while). They just aren't going to have anything to spend it on, because it'll all be shit. The consumer shouldn't be favored over the worker, the business shouldn't be favored over the consumer. It should all be considered equally, because just about everyone is part of a business (or making their own money), a consumer, and a worker.

A society in which everyone does as much as they can for themselves will be just as productive as a society in which everyone does as much as they can for everyone but themselves... and it's far more likely to happen, also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top