begin quoting Todd Walton as of Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:35:07AM -0700: > On 6/6/05, Stewart Stremler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > begin quoting Todd Walton as of Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 11:02:16PM -0700: > > > Yeah but... Wouldn't sub-standard food mean a loss of revenue, in the > > > long run? > > > > So what? > > So overlooking violations of the standard would not mean more money, > when it is claimed that the overlooking is for the purpose of gaining > more money.
What standard? I thought you were presuming a situation where there was no standard to refer to, and the loss of revenue was with regards to the business in question. > > > And if not, then what's the point of the standard in the > > > first place? > > > > To maintain a minimum level of sanitation. Sick or dying citizens are > > a drain on the economy, after all. Plus they tend to be cranky voters. > > So, you're agreeing with me, but in a disagreeing tone of typing. It's a matter of who does the caring. The _business_ may not care, but the government might. I'm not trying to be "I agree but am trying to sound like I'm not". I just see distinct perspectives. -Stewart
pgppNkC541OUG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
