The food/chemical industry? This "survey" was done by a University.

It's funny that you think that makes a difference in the US. That you are so naive as to believe there is some magical invisible wall between corporations and the "research" they fund.

I haven't been keeping close watch, but I believe that every time a GMO labeling referendum has been put on the ballot, it has failed to pass.

Because elections in the US are designed to prevent people from voting.

A majority of voters in Oregon just voted down a GMO labelling law.

Now I bet if you thought about it, you could figure out why that statement is not true.

If it can only be used to discriminate in a particularly stupid way, then perhaps it should.

You understand that consumers get to discriminate regarding the products they buy, and for whatever reason they want.

If someone doesn't care for Apple laptops, but Apple laptops are better, should they not be able to "discriminate" between Apple and non-Apple products? Since I don't like green socks, should I not be allowed to see the color of the socks I'm buying because I might "discriminate" against green socks, even though they perform exactly the same function as blue socks?

Nobody, not even the most ardent supporter of GMO foods, can claim that the GMO plants are bio-identical to the non-GMO plants, because if that was the case, how the fuck can they be covered by intellectual property laws?

And who the fuck gets to decide what information a consumer may have and what they may not? You? Monsanto?

we believe we have a chance to win and break the political party stronghold for good

That'll last all of about 5 minutes after election, should he win. Then he realizes he has to spend all but about 1/2 hour a day asking rich people for money. One of the senior members of the state legislature will sit him down and explain how everything works and the next thing you hear from Mr Fark is how climate change is a hoax, coal is the cleanest form of energy and the Second Amendment was passed down to Moses direct from God. And how human life starts at the very moment the man's sperm endows the less-important woman's egg with the glory of Jesus, so STFU, you reproductive choice cows.

I can confirm through painful first-hand experience that the word 'angry' is entirely superfluous in that context.

People still steal car radios? Even the stock manufacturer fitted ones? Crikey.

I find I sometimes want music or the radio for distraction. If I get bored while driving I'm more likely to take unnecessary risks. If I'm enjoying my drive I'm more sedate.

This is kind of a dishonest way for the food/chemical industry to try to push an agenda. Most people don't listen to the questions they're asked. They start thinking of an answer before the question has even been completely asked. I'll be most were really answering the question, "Do you support mandatory labeling of food that's been grown using intellectual property developed by companies that are famous for creating the world's most deadly products?" And the answer to that question about labeling of GMOs is always over 90% when the public is asked.

I can understand that faced with such overwhelming public sentiment for labeling that the chemical/food industrial complex would try anything to turn things around, but this is pretty underhanded. The fact is that consumers overwhelmingly want one little bit of information, as innocuous ask the little kosher "K" commonly on food labels. A simple yes/no to the question, "Does somebody own the intellectual property on the corn in this cereal?" is apparently so dangerous that the answer must be forbidden to consumers at all costs.

It can never be "pro-science" for information to be withheld from consumers. Even if that information is inconvenient to certain powerful corporations.

So your answer is what? Destroy the quality of life for people in San Francisco?

I'd fucking love the US urban sprawl here in the UK. It would mean we had the masses of land available to spawl over.

More relevantly, it's not a felony to not drive without a licence. Sadly this seems to be an option many people are ignoring.

I've never used my driving license as ID for boarding an aircraft. Other forms of identification are available. Do you really think that people that don't drive also never fly??

Trains can take you between towns, not just across them.
Snow does not preclude bike riding.

Other than for commuting, taxis are cost-competitive to car ownership in the UK. They're frequently less convenient, but not more expensive, especially if you live in an urban location that lets you use public transport for a proportion of your journeys.

I appreciate you're playing devil's advocate but the barriers to not owning a car aren't insurmountable, even in the US. As someone else in the thread suggests, learn to drive safely or move to New York.

"Driving is a privilege" is not an excuse to penalise people unfairly for non-driving related matters such as child support.

The importance of driving for an inclusive social life and employment is not an excuse for dangerous driving.

Why does industrial control still use DOS? Can you even boot a modern computer into DOS or is industrial control using DOSbox?

I guess it doesn't matter. Practically every tool ever invented by man is still in use somewhere, for something.

not everyone pays for their electricity

So as long as your parents are paying for the electricity, all those bitcoins are just free money? Wow. Why isn't everybody mining bitcoins? It would end world poverty!

I used to spend all kinds of time trying to load high as much as I could

Maybe that's why I can't remember. I read somewhere that I was supposed to "load high" and I took it a little too seriously.