Horse: the other red meat ?

dogtowner

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2009
Messages
17,849
Location
Wandering around
could be headed our way before long

ok I don't know what color horse meat is and they do intend to export the stuff to France and elsewhere. so I guess its good to open up some new business opportunities especially if it doesn't require more federal employees (not sure that will hold up). we have loads of dogs and cats too in case other counties are looking to import. my niece would not approve but she really has no plan on how to solve this problem just a really big heart.

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Horses could soon be butchered in the U.S. for human consumption after Congress quietly lifted a 5-year-old ban on funding horse meat inspections, and activists say slaughterhouses could be up and running in as little as a month.


Slaughter opponents pushed a measure cutting off funding for horse meat inspections through Congress in 2006 after other efforts to pass outright bans on horse slaughter failed in previous years. Congress lifted the ban in a spending bill President Barack Obama signed into law Nov. 18 to keep the government afloat until mid-December.


It did not, however, allocate any new money to pay for horse meat inspections, which opponents claim could cost taxpayers $3 million to $5 million a year. The U.S. Department of Agriculture would have to find the money in its existing budget, which is expected to see more cuts this year as Congress and the White House aim to trim federal spending.
The USDA issued a statement Tuesday saying there are no

slaughterhouses in the U.S. that butcher horses for human consumption now, but if one were to open, it would conduct inspections to make sure federal laws were being followed. USDA spokesman Neil Gaffney declined to answer questions beyond what was in the statement.


The last U.S. slaughterhouse that butchered horses closed in 2007 in Illinois, and animal welfare activists warned of massive public outcry in any town where a slaughterhouse may open.
 
Werbung:
We ate horse meat when I was a kid during a really bad financial time (the Carter years) I did not know what we were eating when we ate it but it was good. It looks much like beef only leaner. Taste like it too only actually... better?

I wouldn't want to eat it if I didn’t have to just because I am not used to it and it doesn’t have cloven hooves ::)
 
We ate horse meat when I was a kid during a really bad financial time (the Carter years) I did not know what we were eating when we ate it but it was good. It looks much like beef only leaner. Taste like it too only actually... better?

I wouldn't want to eat it if I didn’t have to just because I am not used to it and it doesn’t have cloven hooves ::)


I've eaten weirder stuff and lived to tell the tale but if the market is there and we can (possibly) put some Americans back to work instead of outsourcing to Mexico and Canada, why not ?
 
I've eaten weirder stuff and lived to tell the tale but if the market is there and we can (possibly) put some Americans back to work instead of outsourcing to Mexico and Canada, why not ?

Well the plan is not to put Americans back to work, its for putting UNION member Americans back to work :)

Dems and repubs both irritate me on the jobs issue. I hate outsourcing and both partys talk about fixing it but neither do
 
Let me see if I got this right?

Slaughtering and eating horse meat has been and is legal and safe? (why wouldn't it be?) So much so that as recently as 2007 the US gov was inspecting the slaughter of horse meat for human consumption.

But since 2007 no one has been slaughtering horses because there was a ban on funding inspectors to inspect the slaughterhouses?

Now the ban is lifted, but there is still no funding for the inspectors so it makes no difference anyway?

So the take-away from this is that the law requiring inspectors has effectively shut down an entire legal and safe industry merely because congress did not allow funding for the inspectors in the past and presently just does not fund the inspectors.

Can anyone still say that regulation does not stifle entrepreneurial growth?

And since we will be having inspections of meat the next question is why is it funded by congress? Why isn't it funded by having every company that wants to be inspected pay for an inspection voucher that will then be used to pay for the inspection? I see no reason that the general fund should be used to fund inspectors when those that will benefit could pay directly.

The inspectors provide a service; certifying that the meat is good and the company wants people to know that their meat is good - its a win win.

Additionally, the taxes that are used to fill the general fund have caused the American people to be fed up but an individual company that wanted to branch out into new lines of business would be glad to add revenue on top of the general fund in order to be inspected.
 
Let me see if I got this right?

Slaughtering and eating horse meat has been and is legal and safe? (why wouldn't it be?) So much so that as recently as 2007 the US gov was inspecting the slaughter of horse meat for human consumption.

But since 2007 no one has been slaughtering horses because there was a ban on funding inspectors to inspect the slaughterhouses?

Now the ban is lifted, but there is still no funding for the inspectors so it makes no difference anyway?

So the take-away from this is that the law requiring inspectors has effectively shut down an entire legal and safe industry merely because congress did not allow funding for the inspectors in the past and presently just does not fund the inspectors.

Can anyone still say that regulation does not stifle entrepreneurial growth?

And since we will be having inspections of meat the next question is why is it funded by congress? Why isn't it funded by having every company that wants to be inspected pay for an inspection voucher that will then be used to pay for the inspection? I see no reason that the general fund should be used to fund inspectors when those that will benefit could pay directly.

The inspectors provide a service; certifying that the meat is good and the company wants people to know that their meat is good - its a win win.

Additionally, the taxes that are used to fill the general fund have caused the American people to be fed up but an individual company that wanted to branch out into new lines of business would be glad to add revenue on top of the general fund in order to be inspected.


because they don't inspect everything. its done on a spot check basis. it would need to be paid for by the slaughterhouse who would have to build it into its charging scheme.

FDA says they intend to do the horses with existing funds. hell its just going to France and asia, no big deal :D
 
because they don't inspect everything. its done on a spot check basis. it would need to be paid for by the slaughterhouse who would have to build it into its charging scheme.

FDA says they intend to do the horses with existing funds. hell its just going to France and asia, no big deal :D

Exactly, the slaughterhouses SHOULD be the ones that pay for it and build it into their pricing schemes. that way horse meat would reflect the cost of what is required to process safe horse meat, oil should reflect the cost of producing safe oil, cigarettes should reflect the cost of producing safe cigarettes, and lamps should reflect the cost of producing safe lamps...

If something is too expensive to produce safely then we can know it and move to other products but if something is possible to produce safely and make a profit then that something can go on being produced. The way it is not corn reflects the cost of growing corn plus the cost of subsidizing farmers minus the cost of subsidizing ethanol and it is one great mess that no one can figure out. How much damage is being done to our economy because politicians are playing whack-a-mole?
 
Exactly, the slaughterhouses SHOULD be the ones that pay for it and build it into their pricing schemes. that way horse meat would reflect the cost of what is required to process safe horse meat, oil should reflect the cost of producing safe oil, cigarettes should reflect the cost of producing safe cigarettes, and lamps should reflect the cost of producing safe lamps...

If something is too expensive to produce safely then we can know it and move to other products but if something is possible to produce safely and make a profit then that something can go on being produced. The way it is not corn reflects the cost of growing corn plus the cost of subsidizing farmers minus the cost of subsidizing ethanol and it is one great mess that no one can figure out. How much damage is being done to our economy because politicians are playing whack-a-mole?


much but its more like lining the pockets of one's cronies that you, in turn, have your cut off the gravy train that is our government. I like to blame omnibus spending bills for their ability to remove public opinion from the mix.
 
Obama has so screwed up the economy that people are unable to keep their animals and there are way too many that are hungry, so it would seem to be a win-win situation......except for the horse that is, but then I really don't care about them.

Eat'um if you got'um.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top