Quote:
Originally Posted by Superman
You've all heard it. Toy imports from China with lead. In some instances, massive amounts of lead.
Parents are angry. Having their kids and their toys tested. Disappointed with what they're learning.
A local TV news reporter was heard saying that only one investigator exists for this.
Sure, I'm kicking a beehive here. Somebody's got to do it. I hope to hear your views. Does it make sense to step up our oversight of imported toys? Or does it make more sense to stop worrying, and let parents find their own ways of figuring out whether toys are dangerous or not? No public testing or data available? Do we, the gubmit, prohibit toys imported with crazy high lead levels? Or do we let anything and everything in, and let parents worry about it.
If we let anything and everything in, and just tell parents to "deal with it," then some impacts can be anticipated. Of course, private businesses will pop up to sell information to parents. We might have several different companies each testing the same bazillion toys and publishing/selling the results at cost-plus-something. Some of you think that's a great idea, perhaps because it will cost a lot more money this way, and maybe add a couple of new corps to the NYSE. Another reliably predictable impact is that kids will eat lead, get dumber and make lousy adults. That'll be expensive to the rest of us.....that missing productivity that we accepted when we chose to save a few tax dollars.
One more thing. I've worked for an agency that regulates business. Gubmit workers in this position notice the political fight. Their budgets are constantly under attack from the conservatives, who blindly hate business regulation. The presence of only one single investigator for this is plausible. The attacks against these gubmit offices can be pretty vicious. At this point, the agency that is supposed to be tracking and regulating lead levels......is frustrated. They will be blamed, although the folks who eviscerated their budget are the ones actually to blame. Now, frankly, that will be reversed. Parents want better service than that. Better protection. So, there will be funding. And for a while, the attacks will subside. And then resume.
Now.......your comments.
|
Another reliably predictable impact is that kids will eat lead, get dumber and make more liberals. That'll be expensive to the rest of us.....that missing productivity that we accepted when we chose to save a few tax dollars.
Sorry; couldn't resist.
I think the environment in which we live today demands that our gubmint "do something". While I am as anti-regulation as the next guy (as long as that next guy is a fellow, level-headed conservative), the camel's nose has long since gotton under the tent on this one. He's standing right in the middle of it and farting.
The environment to which I refer is one where we, as U.S. citizens, have come to expect that government standards be imposed on much of what we buy. O.k., damn near everything we buy. I actually agree that is one of the more useful functions of gubmint in our consumer society. It's kind of a chicken or the egg question as to how we wound up like this, but even at that level, the question is moot today.
No one individual has the means or werewithal to ensure the products they buy are safe. Private sector "product testers", with very few exceptions, tend to eventually wind up with a financial "dog in the fight". We have seen this domesticaly, and have instituted governmental standards. These should apply in kind to any and all imported goods. I think the tax money it will cost to have the required oversight on this is a good investment in ourselves.