From: (Gerry Gryschuk)
Subject: Re: Labelling (was: Quebec)
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:23:23 GMT

From article <1992Nov4.233705.20077@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, by mousseau@paun01.pa.msu.edu (Normand Mousseau):
> 
> In article <1992Nov3.193950.26054@julian.uwo.ca>, wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:
> 
> |> I think your arrogant for saying that the Yanks are arrogant for being logical 
> |> and pragmatic...
> |> 
> 
> 	Yes, logical and pragmatic.  This is why the FDA has proposed
> a new sets of reglement concerning labels on food.  Unless, of course,
> you desapprove this new legislation and believe that companies should have the
> right to put wathever they which on the labels.  For example: wrong weight,
> false ingredients, false characteristics, etc.

I'd like to jump in here and just say personally I'm quite liberal as far
as this goes. They can put anything on the label demonstrably true and I
don't care. On the other hand putting anything on which is demonstrably false
can most likely be considered fraud and thus actionable without having
to rely on some "labeling" division of government. Similarly not warning
people of possible harmful consequences would probably be actionable given
that the harm could easily be demonstrated, an example might be cigarettes.

> 
> 	A true market is not the solution to all problems.  In a true market,
> for exmaple, it is impossible to find medical coverage if you are sick. But
> the solution is simple after all: die.  FOr the same way, since Canada 
> accepts  two official languages, it is simply normal that I, a french
> speaking canadians, be protected and informed with labels in my own
> language.

As far as medical coverage goes you should buy it before your sick, that's
the whole point, ie. saving for the future as it were. I smoke and therefore
have to accept the consequences of my actions, now if you can convince the
government to give me back all the money they have taken from me in the last
10 years I'd be happy to remove myself as a burden on the rest of Canada on
the otherhand as long as they're holding on to my money I don't see any reason
not to use the services when my time comes.

See this is one problem with a national health care system it doesn't force
me to accept the consequences of my actions when the time comes or allow
me to not worry about it and simply accept my fate.

As far as labeling in french goes you are correct that products you buy in
a predominantly french portion of the country should be expected to have
labels you can easily read. On the other hand there should be no reason to
label products in french which are designated for a part of the country or
world which doesn't use french to any significant extent.

> 
> 	With regards to the cost, let me remind you that on average, the
> cost of bilinguism on label is negligible although you can always find
> an particuliar case where it isn't.  There are advantages at living in 
> a bilingual country and there are inconvenients. But such is life...

Fine let the advantages and inconveniences work themselves out and don't
impose them where government sees fit that only creates inconveniences
where none should exist.

Just so you have a better idea of my beliefs, the only place the government
should mandate bilingual services is in government operations leave everyone
else to live the way they see fit.
--
Gerald Gryschuk            Saskatoon,Saskatchewan = a place with 9 months
gerry@sask.usask.ca           of hockey and 3 months of poor skating.
Go Habs!!!		              (The Bum rules!!!)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada