Trust the government. They know what is good for you.
I am bemused and depressed by the amount of faith people have in the goodness of government. People see a problem, think up a good intention, and then hand more power and money to the government expecting the “government-god” to guide them to truth, justice and a wheelbarrow full of candy.
And of course, the government abuses it’s power. The promoters of government find excuses, object that they would have done it better, insist that the government needs more money, complain that government failure was beyond prediction, and justify themselves by pointing to their good intentions.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But people can’t eat good intentions. And now, thanks to more EU bureaucracy, people in Europe can’t eat cakes if they are made for a cake show.
TRADITIONAL bakery exhibitions are at risk of being consigned to history thanks to a new European directive.
New EU regulations have banned the consumption of cakes and confectionary entered at country fairs and agricultural shows immediately after baking competitions.
The chairman of Mayo County Council, Cllr Joe Mellett, said the new rules were the “death knell” for the Irish agricultural show.
“When you see things like this it’s no wonder the people voted No to the Lisbon Treaty. This will be the end of the traditional baking competition at local shows across the country, therefore impacting on local revenue. It’s just ridiculous.”
Under the rules adjudicators of bakery sections in local shows are only permitted to taste the traditional favourites such as apple tarts or cheese cakes. Once the judging is over, the produce must be immediately destroyed. As a result, only bite-sized versions of the cakes will be entered in shows.
The directive has already been made law in Scotland.
Mr Mellett, one of the founding members of his own local agricultural show in Swinford, said he “could not believe” the latest EU directive.
“Honestly, when I saw this first I thought it was something to do with April Fools’ Day. I just couldn’t imagine someone sitting down and coming up with this rule.
“It is a real deterrent to those entering shows. If you thought your prize produce was going to be destroyed immediately after a tiny taste was taken from it, then you would not want to enter a competition.”
He added: “Local people are doing their best to continue on traditions, particularly in places like the west of Ireland, and this is what they are met with.”
But the statists won’t lose faith. That’s what it means to have faith. This is just one silly policy… but surely if we just keeping giving more power to politicians and bureaucrats (with the best of intentions of course) then we can make the world a better place. Sigh.
People are dying from obesity, and you want them to eat as much as they like? Tsk, Tsk!! Of course governments care for you, how can you be so cynical to suggest otherwise? In fact, since this is so obviously true, I hope they get around to banning all dissent from such lovable laws! Free speech should mean you can freely praise the EU as much as you want, whenever you want!
In fact, I have noticed that some mudcakes are not being made from good quality mud! I want the EU to investigate and harmonise mudcakes!!!
What was the point of this directive….? I am sooooo confused right now 😦
Watching a show on SBS about the little red school book. I am curious, would Libertarian today support it’s publication or be against it.
This will be the end of the traditional baking competition at local shows across the country, therefore impacting on local revenue. It’s just ridiculous.”
Why simply not just ignore the laws. The best way if getting rid junk like that is to simply ignore it.
Are yous serious? You think there are libertarians that would be for the ban on any freaking book?
I would have thought you’ve been around here long enough and learned something by now.
Let them eat cake!!
The fact that you don’t know infers three possible answers:
1. You are ignorant and have been rude, pretentious and have made uninformed and unnecessary criticism of libertarians. Swallow your pride and learn to use a search engine.
2. You are a mendacious blockhead who has tried to smear libertarians. You are very sloppy in your work. You make us look clever and worthy of more support.
3. You are too stupid to bother replying to anymore.
I hope the answer is 1.
Obviously, by the way, libertarians will always object to censorship.
Ignoring a writer or a philosophy is not a good way of informing others of evil or stupidity.
I do think the governement should do more and stop with these stupid inquires of crap. Instead of taking action some govenments choose to stall and stall like the premier before iemma. Neglect,abuse and unproductive govenments are what we do not need. http://www.poweronlinepublications.com
“Obviously, by the way, libertarians will always object to censorship.”
Assuming, of course, that all parties are consenting (not quite what I wanted to say 😦 I can’t think of a way to say that it is ok if the only thing hurt is a couple of feelings :S). I wouldn’t count banning of child abuse or non-consensual violence censorship
Banning child abuse or coercion in general isn’t censorship.
There seems to be some disagreement in the area of cake competition regulation as is reported in the “Irish Times,” with the suggestion that the report is “half-baked Euro-lies.” If this is the case it would be interesting to see the reasons for the ban on consumption in Scotland and Ireland.
Zealots have learned that when the public find their ideas idiotic there is another avenue to follow to ensure those ideas are followed, and that is of course persuade the regulators that there is something in it for them even if only the approval of the elitists in order to have it done by force of law.
I ran into a fascinating little publication “Better Regulation – simply explained,” which gives a great idea of the attitudes involved with such gems as this: –
European law is at the heart of what makes the European Union special. Without it, we would rely on cooperation and goodwill: essential components to make Europe work, but not enough to guarantee the freedoms and rights enjoyed by today’s Europeans.
Every federation has it’s share of stupid laws created by central government. The beauty of the EU federation is that as stupid as their central government legislature may be, the central government has very little taxation power and very little scope to expand it’s taxation power. I’d put up with a ban on cakes in Australia if our central government could be as confined in it’s tax powers as the EU is. We could still eat black market cake.
Black Market Cake – is that anything like Black Forest Cake??? :p
This is reminiscent of another EU rule regarding the eating of meat – animals are not allowed to be slaughtered in the home or at a village festival, they must be killed in an abbatoir by a professional slaughterer. Ergo, the industrialised killing of livestock is not only encouraged, it is compulsory!
This law seems particularly wasteful though. It’s amazing that in their eagerness to regulate and ‘protect’ European agriculture, the EU creates a bureaucracy so large and with so many needless laws that waste of valuable foodstuffs seems inevitable.
Though it must be said, European folks have a long tradition of avoiding unecessary regulations.
This regulating seems to only apply to commercial premises, not occasional producers, but nonetheless is a stupid law.
I agree with the limitation on taxation being the most effective block to central, authoritarian government. It worked to frustrate Charles in his attempt to subjugate Parliament, only problem is that in our willingness to allow Parliament to protect up from tyranny, the enemies of freedom took the guise of our saviours.
What we may need is a rich influential philanthropic individual to challenge the tax system head on in the courts. A Mabo for libertarians.