$40 billion for Ukraine, no baby formula for the US

[hollodero]

(05-19-2022, 12:29 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Seems to me that it would give a small group, access to alot more Formula than the general public would have. Which would likely make the situation worse for the majority.

So because allegedly one group would benefit more than another group, generically speaking, one should rather not pass any bill at all? How does that make it better for the majority or anyone. That makes no sense to me.

And even if it is so, where is the Republican counterproposal? The attempt to get something done? There is none, as far as I can tell. Which makes Republicans appear like the ones who vigorously slam Democrats for not addressing baby formula shortages, but as soon as they do they just refuse to sign on. Almost as if they want this issue to remain unresolved until the midterms.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 01:10 PM)hollodero Wrote: So because allegedly one group would benefit more than another group, generically speaking, one should rather not pass any bill at all? How does that make it better for the majority or anyone. That makes no sense to me.

And even if it is so, where is the Republican counterproposal? The attempt to get something done? There is none, as fart as I can tell. Which makes Republicans appear like the ones who vigorously slam Democrats for not addressing baby formula shortages, but as soon as they do they just refuse to sign on. Almost as if they want this issue to reamin unresolved until the midterms.

Do you think the majority, that pays taxes, is gonna want to let a select few that don't pay or pay very little in taxes to get the loins share of the formula available on the market? Which will cause an even bigger shortage for the majority.

I thought Liberals were all for equality?? 

If it was something you needed to feed your family, don't even act like you'd give up your share to others.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 01:41 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Do you think the majority, that pays taxes, is gonna want to let a select few that don't pay or pay very little in taxes to get the loins share of the formula available on the market? Which will cause an even bigger shortage for the majority.

I thought Liberals were all for equality?? 

If it was something you needed to feed your family, don't even act like you'd give up your share to others.

But that was the bill (improving access for families in need) that sailed through with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it seems not even republicans share your specific concerns (which, imho, are a bit cruel to the children of poor families, that are not to blame for the amount of taxes their parents pay). What actually met fierce republican opposition in the house (and probably the senate) was the additional 28 million in emergency funding. Thought for ensuring the quality of foreign products and the like.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 01:53 PM)hollodero Wrote: But that was the bill (improving access for families in need) that sailed through with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it seems not even republicans share your specific concerns (which, imho, are a bit cruel to the children of poor families, that are not to blame for the amount of taxes their parents pay). What actually met fierce republican opposition in the house (and probably the senate) was the additional 28 million in emergency funding. Thought for ensuring the quality of foreign products and the like.

Point blank, you have a child that needs to be fed, supplies are short, are you willing to give up your share for others to hoard while your child goes hungry?

[*Nately120*]

(05-20-2022, 01:56 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Point blank, you have a child that needs to be fed, supplies are short, are you willing to give up your share for others to hoard while your child goes hungry?

Yes, because if we give all the formula to one group it will trickle down and we will all benefit. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 01:53 PM)hollodero Wrote: But that was the bill (improving access for families in need) that sailed through with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it seems not even republicans share your specific concerns (which, imho, are a bit cruel to the children of poor families, that are not to blame for the amount of taxes their parents pay). What actually met fierce republican opposition in the house (and probably the senate) was the additional 28 million in emergency funding. Thought for ensuring the quality of foreign products and the like.

IF those other suppliers were already meeting the FDA requirements, their products would be flying in.

What i see is the gov would just hurry and rubber stamp that shit and now we got a new problem to add to it.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 01:57 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Yes, because if we give all the formula to one group it will trickle down and we will all benefit. 

And that's a typical answer.

Pissed cause the rich get special privileges which causes a divide amongst social/financial classes, you'd rather keep perpetuating that cycle by pandering for votes from minority groups and giving them more rights than other groups.

Seems kinda hard for you to scream equality when you keep doing that. 

[*Nately120*]

(05-20-2022, 02:03 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And that's a typical answer.

Pissed cause the rich get special privileges which causes a divide amongst social/financial classes, you'd rather keep perpetuating that cycle by pandering for votes from minority groups and giving them more rights than other groups.

Seems kinda hard for you to scream equality when you keep doing that. 

Please, these last few years have done nothing but give a big ol' middle finger to people who look down their noses at people like me who just flat out don't want to have kids.

I do know the blaming the undefined number of border prison babies for a supply issue that is affecting millions of american babies is bad faith bullshit.  I mean, that much is clear. 

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 01:56 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Point blank, you have a child that needs to be fed, supplies are short, are you willing to give up your share for others to hoard while your child goes hungry?

Well, no. I just think that is not the issue. And neither do the Republicans. If you see this as a problem, you might just as well take it up with your own party just as much as with the liberals. Passed with unanimous consent.
The way I see it, Democrats attempted two things. 1) increase the number of formula available (which requires funds) and 2) making sure that families with little money still have access to it. Contrary to your concerns it's the first point Republicans are opposed to, not the second one.

(05-20-2022, 01:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: IF those other suppliers were already meeting the FDA requirements, their products would be flying in.

What i see is the gov would just hurry and rubber stamp that shit and now we got a new problem to add to it.

Ah well, they actually wanted funds to ensure no fraudulent products from abroad are getting sold. It sure takes funds to ensure just that. Without funds, it might come to what you fear, which seems to be the republican proposal (since there is none to be seen, I assume it is). Regarding your own ideas that do not align with Republicans, it seems you'd propose giving the good stuff to taxpayers who can afford it and those who can not, well take the shitty foreign products or just learn to get by. Is that your idea? And if not, what is.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 02:10 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, no. I just think that is not the issue. And neither do the Republicans. If you see this as a problem, you might just as well take it up with your own party just as much as with the liberals. Passed with unanimous consent.
The way I see it, Democrats attempted two things. 1) increase the number of formula available (which requires funds) and 2) making sure that families with little money still have access to it. Contrary to your concerns it's the first point Republicans are opposed to, not the second one.



Ah well, they actually wanted funds to ensure no fraudulent products from abroad are getting sold. It sure takes funds to ensure just that. Without funds, it might come to what you fear, which seems to be the republican proposal (since there is none to be seen, I assume it is). Regarding your own ideas that do not align with Republicans, it seems you'd propose giving the good stuff to taxpayers who can afford it and those who can not, well take the shitty foreign products or just learn to get by. Is that your idea? And if not, what is.

They responded too late to this. 
Should have addressed it when if first started getting recalled. Get the inspectors in those plants asap so that they can keep producing instead of stopping altogether. Any one can figure it out if they are recalling and not producing more at the same time that soon enough there will become a shortage, considering they already have a good strangle hold on the market.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 02:17 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: They responded too late to this. 
Should have addressed it when if first started getting recalled. Get the inspectors in those plants asap so that they can keep producing instead of stopping altogether.

Wow that's surprising. The state taking over means of production. Or in short, a socialist idea.

I mean, ok I can get behind it, but that you can is astounding. I guess not many free market Republicans would agree with you.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 02:20 PM)hollodero Wrote: Wow that's surprising. The state taking over means of production. Or in short, a socialist idea.

I mean, ok I can get behind it, but that you can is astounding. I guess not many free market Republicans would agree with you.

Normally, if it was a balanced market, i would prefer to let the free market take care of itself.

Silmanic has a pretty much a monopoly on the formula market. Can't afford to play games with that much of the market share.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 02:39 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Normally, if it was a balanced market, i would prefer to let the free market take care of itself.

Silmanic has a pretty much a monopoly on the formula market. Can't afford to play games with that much of the market share.

OK fair enough. I asked for your answer and you gave me one, one I'd personally approve of. I would ask though if this idea would really be viable politically. I can imagine quite some republicans would have fiercely opposed such a move and called it a radical leftist ploy. I'd say this would even be tricky to push through in my country, and we're way less averse to government interference than America is.

The second thing I'd say is that this is not a fix for the present problem and hence a bit of a hindsight idea. Doesn't mean you're wrong, just means it's not the plan folks could follow through right now. And I take it right now action is still needed.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 02:45 PM)hollodero Wrote: OK fair enough. I asked for your answer and you gave me one, one I'd personally approve of. I would ask though if this idea would really be viable politically. I can imagine quite some republicans would have fiercely opposed such a move and called it a radical leftist ploy. I'd say this would even be tricky to push through in my country, and we're way less averse to government interference than America is.

The second thing I'd say is that this is not a fix for the present problem and hence a bit of a hindsight idea. Doesn't mean you're wrong, just means it's not the plan folks could follow through right now. And I take it right now action is still needed.

Not sure i was 100% clear.

Plants were shut down in Feb.
Inspectors should have been there in a few days after that. Supervise everything getting cleaned and get production back online asap.

Production is just now getting back underway. That's what? 2 and a half months of No Production and product recalled? Totally inexcusable for the market size they command.


As far as what to do for now? 
use tax payer money to cover the S&H for getting it direct to families that can't wait any longer or that can't find the product in their areas.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 02:57 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Not sure i was 100% clear.

Plants were shut down in Feb.
Inspectors should have been there in a few days after that. Supervise everything getting cleaned and get production back online asap.

Production is just now getting back underway. That's what? 2 and a half months of No Production and product recalled? Totally inexcusable for the market size they command.

OK I just question the government's actual authority to get production back asap through interference like that, and even more so the political viability. It is not exactly a hands off, free market idea.

The way I see America, this is never the preferred option; and in that sense, the blame rather would go to the producer than the government. Or the sort of monopoly one producer of formula seems to have, which is an often seen result of said "hands off" economy. But as I said. I'm all for your idea, I just doubt too many Americans would be.

Also, my other practical point imho still stands. Congress can't pass a law that demands a time machine being used to travel back to February and fix the issue back then. Even if that's what should have been done, and even if it's the Democrat's fault it wasn't done. It doesn't fix the problem right now, and it still needs fixing right now, independent from mistakes made in the past. In that sense I still do not understand what Republicans are doing right now.

(05-20-2022, 02:57 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: As far as what to do for now? 
use tax payer money to cover the S&H for getting it direct to families that can't wait any longer or that can't find the product in their areas.

... what would S&H mean? Sorry, maybe everyone knows that, but I do not. (Not that there's a republican proposal where I could learn about it...)

Imho, I'd say spending money for quality control of additional foreign products sounds like a viable quick fix.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 03:07 PM)hollodero Wrote: OK I just question the government's actual authority to get production back asap through interference like that, and even more so the political viability. It is not exactly a hands off, free market idea.

The way I see America, this is never the preferred option; and in that sense, the blame rather would go to the producer than the government. Or the sort of monopoly one producer of formula seems to have, which is an often seen result of said "hands off" economy. But as I said. I'm all for your idea, I just doubt too many Americans would be.

Also, my other practical point imho still stands. Congress can't pass a law that demands a time machine being used to travel back to February and fix the issue back then. Even if that's what should have been done, and even if it's the Democrat's fault it wasn't done. It doesn't fix the problem right now, and it still needs fixing right now, independent from mistakes made in the past. In that sense I still do not understand what Republicans are doing right now.



... what would S&H mean? Sorry, maybe everyone knows that, but I do not. (Not that there's a republican proposal where I could learn about it...)

Imho, I'd say spending money for quality control of additional foreign products sounds like a viable quick fix.

Shipping & Handling fees. 
Pay that part so it's sent direct to the Home that needs it.



QC of foreign products would be ok, but will still take time to test and make sure they meet the guidelines.
As i said, if they already were, then get their product in here asap. 


And just to point this out. I have no idea if the product contamination came from one plant or multiple. If narrowed down to one plant, then product recalled that was produced at a different one should likely be fine. OFC if multiple plants, then trash it all.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 03:21 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Shipping & Handling fees. 
Pay that part so it's sent direct to the Home that needs it.

How is that not just the sort of subsidizing the sparse product for poor families that leaves taxpayers in even shorter supply?

It seemed you initially were very much against such kinds of ideas.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 03:25 PM)hollodero Wrote: How is that not just the sort of subsidizing the sparse product for poor families that leaves taxpayers in even shorter supply?

It seemed you initially were very much against such kinds of ideas.

??
This would be for everyone, not just a few.

[hollodero]

(05-20-2022, 03:30 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: ??
This would be for everyone, not just a few.

But there'd be still too little baby formula overall. Your plan does not increase the product volume.

And in that sense, you suggest subsidizing it. Which in the end helps poor families more than those that can afford the fees.

But maybe I'm just overlooking something here

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-20-2022, 03:43 PM)hollodero Wrote: But there'd be still too little baby formula overall. Your plan does not increase the product volume.

And in that sense, you suggest subsidizing it. Which in the end helps poor families more than those that can afford the fees.

But maybe I'm just overlooking something here

? 
It's not limited to just the poor, it's open to anyone that calls/orders it direct.


The bill that was proposed allows WIC to take more and cause an imbalance in what's left.


Now that they are producing, the shortage will end in about a month. Not sure if there is enough time to get foreign products tested approved and shipped before the market recovers