The clean air act and "annual effect avoided". This is just like "Jobs saved". Completely, and 100% unverifiable! Make up anything you want because nobody can fact check you. In 1914 influenza killed millions, and for decades to come you were more likely to die of an infection than live into old age. The armed forces are going green to appease the politicians and if we were really threatened they would not care less about it. If you had more to worry about than your latte, you neither would you.
The last two comments are very well written and valid. But the issue is not about fuzzy love its about whether or not it is healthy to eat a chicken or its eggs that has been festering in filth, and handled without hygenic care. And as a Consumer I would like to know where my chicken came from, and how it was kept. I am inspired to eventually have my own farm, for vegetables, fruits and other. for this very reason. So a company that says its eggs came from cage free hens should engage in the process of raising "cage free hens/eggs". And the consumer can then make their informed choice of purchasing either "industry standard" or cage free, simple as that.
Hauter's closing comments should give one pause.
She seems to posit that if only these corporate criminal enterprises would "do the right thing", we all would have plenty of cake, and no bar to consuming it, as well.
But that presupposes that the profit system is capable of "fairness", that the model can exist in the absence of exploitation.
I've seen nothing to indicate such a possibility.
It's the same fallacious argument we've heard ad nauseum that the Waltons (no John Boy extant) are so incredibly wealthy that they can afford to pay their workers a living wage and their suppliers a fair price.
But aren't they are so obscenely rich precisely because they don't?
It's akin to proclaiming that a thief would merit absolution were they to return some portion of their ill gotten gain, while maintaining their lucratively larcenous lifestyle.
If the system is inherently unjust, no amount of mitigation can ever be considered morally sufficient, can it?
Not a very good article, long on rhetoric and nearly devoid of specifics, also misleading...no mention of the "gobbling up" of small and medium sized, already established organic food companies by the organic corporate giants, like Hain Celestial, which is expanding as much as, and in the same food lines, as the supposed "bad" corporations.
One way I can tell when an organic company has been swallowed by a bigger organic or non organic fish is to see heavily discounted products at Grocery Outlet, apparently dumped on the market because of the impending label changes.
The organics marketplace on the corporate level operates just the same as any for-profit corporation does, even down to the slick PR.
The last two comments are very well written and valid. But the issue is not about fuzzy love its about whether or not it is healthy to eat a chicken or its eggs that has been festering in filth, and handled without hygenic care. And as a Consumer I would like to know where my chicken came from, and how it was kept. I am inspired to eventually have my own farm, for vegetables, fruits and other. for this very reason. So a company that says its eggs came from cage free hens should engage in the process of raising "cage free hens/eggs". And the consumer can then make their informed choice of purchasing either "industry standard" or cage free, simple as that.
Pages