Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
This can cost me potential sales both present and future, because if I move to a different plant that does not use nuts, the consumer may not ever pick up my product ever again to check to see that it doesn't have any peanut taint.
This cost is ALWAYS passed onto the consumer.
|
Oh please you present the arguement as if it is such a burden on the final cost of the product. Since the incidence of nut allergies is so low the amount of lost sales can't be that high. Furthermore, what does the certification cost? A couple thousand dollars? Spread that around all the products made there and the cost is quite insignificant. Oh wait, nevermind, I just finished reading a bunch of articles about all the jobs lost because manufacturers had to disclose some of the potential allergins that might be present in their product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
and as far as the fatality vs. injury, that's a major flaw in the discussion. The point is that I could be hit by a bus and if there were fences that only opened to allow me to cross the street when the light was green... a few dollars here and a few dollars there.
The problem with the car seat isn't that it's about saving $50 it's about being FORCED by law to no longer have the choice or decision to make the choice. It's a REQUIREMENT in pretty much all states.
|
Hyperbole much? You're right, there is no difference between mandating carseats and fences that engage automatically that would protect people in crosswalks. None at all.
The only flaw in the discussion is that it is pointless to base the analysis on fatalities. If an accident is severe enough to kill someone in a seat belt it probably was severe enough to kill someone in the car seat. However, in a less serious accident, a restraint system that is designed for the body size of a toddler will protect them from injuries better than one designed for somone twice as tall. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. Younger kids even use 5 point harnesses, which are even safer (NASCAR doesn't use them for the lulz).
Adults are FORCED to wear seatbelts (they's takin' R freedum). There is an additional cost either way. One way would require cars to have restraints that can be used for kids (passing a cost to everyone) or to force parents to buy the seat. The way you piss and moan about having to subsizide other peoples' costs I would think you'd prefer it the way it is.
It isn't that much and there are programs for those who can't afford it.