manufacturers association

Newly released food expiration dates finally make sense, which will save Americans billions

  • On Wednesday, two of the largest trade associations in the food industry announced that they would do away with “sell by” labels.
  • They’re going to standardize the food dates on labels as part of a voluntary initiative.
  • The Food Marketing Institute and the Grocery Manufacturers Association will begin phasing the two standardized freshness and quality labels immediately, with the goal of having every member company use them by summer 2018.
  • The phrases are:
    • 1. BEST if Used By
      • This label will reflect a “quality date.”
    • 2. USE By
      • This label will reflect a firm expiration date. Foods should be disposed of after this date.
  • Using common product date wording could eliminate confusion and result in Americans throwing out less food. Read more (2/15/17 5:36 PM)

follow @the-future-now


October 18, 2016

Ask yourself this most important question!

Why were GMOs very quietly but deliberately unleashed onto America’s grocery shelves in the mid 1990’s without OUR knowledge and consent?

I have yet to find a legitimate answer to this question, no matter how much I get trolled by Monsanto’s minions on social media.

It is no coincidence that big biotech, major food corporations, and government agencies like the FDA, USDA and EPA are no longer trusted by a majority of Americans. Would you rely on people that have intentionally poisoned you for decades? Why would anyone blindly put their trust in corporations and governments who have proven beyond all reasonable doubt that they are paid liars like the media that sells those lies to you every second of every day?

Where are the most basic questions about GMO health and environmental safety that any rational individual can ask? I can tell you that the answers are NOT found in any 90 day, short-term rat health study that big biotech like Monsanto passes off to the FDA for rubberstamp approval! Why were these GMOs so quickly approved by a government agency that is supposed to protect us?

What about our Congress? The DARK Act was passed by both the senate and house. Then, the backstabbing of consumers (that’s all of us) was given a final jab at the hearts of all Americans when our Traitor-in-Chief signed the DARK Act that our elected leaders passed, despite the fact that about 90% of Americans wanted and still want transparent GMO labeling. You will hear the same old, tired excuses from food companies that it costs too much to change a label, but they do it whenever they ship their GMO, poison-laden food products overseas. They have to; otherwise, their GMO junk will never make it further than a Boston tea party.

Why don’t the corporations that ship food and beverages to foreign countries every day at least label these genetically modified products that are made in the U.S.A.? Doesn’t it seem a bit suspicious to you that these same major corporations, like Coca Cola and Kraft, funneled millions of dollars to the Grocery Manufacturers Association, or GMA, to defeat GMO labeling laws in Colorado, Washington State, Oregon and California (twice)? In the meantime, biotech brat Monsanto stole Vermont’s GMO labeling law, and turned it into a weak federal labeling law (the DARK Act) that has the same eight, glaring loopholes in it that Vermont’s state GMO labeling bill had before our elected leaders and president deserted us, again, by signing this sinister act of American betrayal.

I am sure you are wondering at this point how much of what I stated is true. Where are the facts? They have been in front of you the entire time. I repeatedly point them out in my articles and social media posts. Other basic human rights activists have been doing the same for years. For big biotech, big Ag and big food, this is all just a money game. The losers in the end are the confused consumers who willingly keep shoving “glyphotoxic” (glyphosate and genotoxic) crap down their throats and also into the mouths of their children and grandchildren.

So, ask yourself all of the questions that I asked again, starting with the first one. Can you come up with any simple answers?

Or, maybe you already have that bitter taste of betrayal that consumes America’s barely beating heart.

John Loeffler
-Calling Out Corruption

Madam C.J. Walker’s “Wonderful Hair Grower”

Photo:  This tin for Madam C. J. Walker’s “Wonderful Hair Grower” was a product of entrepreneur Madame C. J. Walker’s hair care line. Gift from Dawn Simon Spears and Alvin Spears, Sr., Collection of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture.

Hair care entrepreneur Madam C.J. Walker was first exposed to the hair care business in the late 1880s when she moved to St. Louis, Missouri. She worked for Annie Turnbo Malone, an African American hair care entrepreneur and owner of the Poro Company, selling her hair care products for about a year and a half in the city. 

After experimenting with her own ingredients, she began marketing her products across the country. Her philosophy of “hair culture” grew to high demand among African Americans.  

In 1911, she incorporated the Madam C.J. Walker Manufacturing Company and began recruiting sales agents in major cities across the nation. Her efforts led to the creation of both the Madam C.J. Walker Hair Culturists Union of America and the National Negro Cosmetics Manufacturers Association in 1917. Walker’s efforts provided African American women steady employment as well as a career they and their communities could find pride in.

Rest in peace, Madam C. J. Walker.  Remembered as this nation’s first female African American self-made millionaire (though when she died she was worth $600,000) (which may have had something to do with her having given away a lot of her wealth), Sarah Breedlove saw and filled the need for products specifically developed and marketed for African American women and their beauty needs, particularly shampoo and pomade, a glaring need in the beauty industry at the time.  She died on this date in 1919 at the age of 51.

Stamp details:
Issued on: January 22, 1998
From: Indianapolis, IN
SC #3181

tbh i need to start doing art shit on the side to afford this faster but uhhhh im terrified of commissions lol!

The Huckster Populist

The tectonic plates of American politics are no longer moving along the old fault lines of “left” versus “right” or even Democrat versus Republican.

As we’ve seen this bizarre political year, the biggest force welling up is rage against insider elites in both parties, and against the American establishment as a whole – including the denizens of Wall Street, large corporations, and the mainstream media.

Now, with Bernie Sanders essentially out of the race, Donald Trump wants Americans to believe he’s the remaining anti-establishment candidate.

It’s smart politics but it’s a hoax.

Trump is even more of an establishment figure than Hillary Clinton – inheriting a fortune from his father, spending years bribing politicians to subsidize his hotels and casinos, and repeatedly using bankruptcy to shield his money while leaving creditors and workers holding the bag.

But Trump is also a brilliant huckster who knows his mark.

“Bernie Sanders and I are in complete accord [on] trade,“ Trump said last week in Ohio. ”[Sanders] said we’re being ripped off and I say with being ripped off. I’ve been saying it for years he’s been saying it for years. I think I am saying it even louder …. Globalization has made the financial elite who donate to politicians very wealthy. But it has left millions of our workers with nothing but poverty and heartache.”

By putting opposition to trade at the center of his economic agenda, Trump gets a twofer – landing blows against big American corporations and Wall Street, and also against the Clintons (he traces America’s economic problems to the North American Free Trade Agreement that Bill Clinton signed in 1993, and the entry of China into the World Trade Organization, which Bill Clinton supported, and says Hillary “voted for virtually every trade agreement.”)

It’s pure demagoguery. Trade isn’t to blame for the declining wages and job security of most Americans.

The real problem has been the unwillingness of the biggest beneficiaries of trade (and also of job-displacing technologies) to share the gains with the rest of America – through larger wage subsidies, stronger safety nets, better schools, and easier access to higher education. Trump’s Republican Party has been the main culprit.

Trump vows to cancel the pending Trans Pacific Partnership – “another disaster done and pushed by special interests who want to rape our country” – which Hillary Clinton praised in 2012 as “set[ting] the gold standard in trade agreements,” and then reversed herself after Sanders came out strongly against it.

Too bad Clinton delegates on the Democratic Party’s platform committee muddied the waters last week by voting down a proposal by Sanders delegates to put the party on record as opposing the TPP, noting instead that “there are a diversity of views in the party” on this matter.

The central problem with the TPP is it would penalize member nations for raising health, safety, environmental, and labor standards. But this aspect of the TPP doesn’t trouble Trump, who calls America “overregulated.”

Trump’s faux populism extends to “powerful corporations, media elites, and powerful dynasties,” who, he said last week in Pennsylvania, again echoing Sanders, have “rigged the system for their benefit will do anything and say anything to keep things exactly as they are.“

Unwittingly, the GOP establishment seems intent on proving Trump’s point. Mitt Romney condemns him, conservative media pundit George Will is deserting the Republican Party because of him, big business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers blast him, Republican mega-donors like Paul Singer rebuke him, and Wall Street Republicans like former Goldman Sachs CEO and Bush Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson (who initiated the Wall Street bailout) announce they’re voting for Hillary Clinton.

"It’s almost – in some ways, like, I’m running against two parties,” Trump crowed recently. “The people who rigged the system are supporting Hillary Clinton.”

It’s all an act. The real Donald Trump thinks U.S. wages are too high, and has fought against the unionization of his hotel employees.

His businesses outsource abroad like mad. Most of the suits, ties and cuff links he peddles are made in China; his luxury line of furniture comes from Turkey; the crystal for his Trump Home line is produced in Slovenia.

And the real Trump is on the side of the super wealthy. He proposes to cut taxes on the rich from 39.6 percent to 25 percent, and reduce taxes on all business income to 15 percent (thereby slashing the top tax rate of hedge fund and private-equity managers from the current 23.8 percent to 15 percent).

The real Trump isn’t a populist. He’s a plutocrat. Above all, he’s a con man. And the people being conned are average working Americans who are buying Trump’s ruse of being a man of the people.

Happy National Handwriting Day!

“Though computers and e-mail play an important role in our lives, nothing will ever replace the sincerity and individualism expressed through the handwritten word,” ~ David H. Baker, WIMA’s Executive Director

I’d like to thank Abbey Sy, an experienced letterer, blogger and a moment-collector, for granting my request to be my guest today. She has this beautiful handwritten art of hers that I wanted to share everyone (see above!), because it’s the National Handwriting Day! She writes almost everyday; and go drop by her blog too!

National Handwriting Day’s Birth

The Writing Instrument Manufacturers Association (WIMA), a national trade association focusing on pens, pencils, and markers, has suggested the world that there is something powerful about handwritten words that make letters much much more intimate. One day they came up with an idea on their inspiration and called it the National Handwriting Day.

Let’s Do This!

Let us join on the celebration of handwritten letters today: posting our handwritten quotes online, using our favorite pen and writing our favorite quotes.

You may post it on the fridge, write it in your diary, or give it to a very special friend.

In Tokyo during September of 1999, Namco had a fancy booth at 37th Amusement Machine Show, hosted by JAMMA (Japan Amusement Machinery Manufacturers Association) and JAPEA (Japan Amusement Park Equipment Association). Cameo by eternal waifu UmJammer Lammy.


Gov. Phil Bryant signed the controversial Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act into law Tuesday morning, saying he did so to protect the rights of people with “deeply held religious beliefs.”

HB 1523, authored by House Speaker Philip Gunn, has drawn state and national attention with groups as varied as the Human Rights Campaign and the Mississippi Manufacturers Association all calling for the governor to veto the bill.

Minutes after signing the bill, Bryant appeared on the JT Show on SuperTalkMS, a conservative talk radio show, to discuss the bill. He defended the bill, saying it only prevented “government from interfering with people of faith who are exercising their religious beliefs … in matters of marriage.” Bryant said it would not allow discrimination of anyone.

“This bill does not create one action against any class or group of people. It doesn’t create a new action or a new defense of an action against those people,” Byrant said.

cheesekneesandbees  asked:

Could you actually explain what's wrong with GMOs? 'cause i haven't heard anything bad about them and i don't know why people are so upset; except for the myth that they're killing the bees(As far as i know they're not, broad-band pesticides are, which are not used on GMOs)

okay, Gmos are Gentically Modified Organisms; plants or animals created through the gene splicing techniques of biotechnology. This experimental technology merges DNA from different species, creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacterial and viral genes that cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding.

why gmo supporters support gmos??

because they are darwinist cropnazis and believe in crop eugenics. They want to eliminate the organic market with these frankenstein seeds because these seeds apparently are stronger; they hold up against insects, cold weathers, are faster to grow, they grow bigger and will “”“help the hungry all around the word”“”. 

Now, why is everyone against it?

Monsanto ( the main company behind this) has NOT been labeling it’s food. in other words, anything you may be eating contains these un natural ingredients. They are using us as human guinea pigs and neoliberalism is helping them by not putting enough regulations. 

now we have asked these fools to label their shitty foods but they refuse. the company states that it’s healthy and perfectly fine to eat gmos but do not want to tell us which foods contain it. 

second, monsanto is driving small business and farmers out of business. Yes, that is capitalism, however if there is no competition then we are stuck with these un natural foods. Not everyone wants to be forced to eat unnatural products. If you control our food supply, you are taking away our democracy, our freedom, our choices and favoring capitalism instead. This is corporate greed.  

GMOs are now present in 75 to 80 percent of conventional processed food in the U.S. according to the Grocery Manufacturers Association.

are we free if we can’t choose what we eat anymore?  most of our god damn supplies contains this chemical crap!!!!! and the rest of the 20-25% of our foods are extremely expensive due to the fact that organic markets need to survive! meaning only a small amount of people can buy these healthy non chemically processed foods. Monsanto is like walmart, they price their product really cheap so they can destroy the competition and make us dependent on them.

Monsanto’s actions are designed to maximize its corporate profits, not to serve the people. Its entire seed-and-herbicide business model is designed to trap farmers in a system of economic dependence… to turn farmers into indentured servants who can never return to traditional farming after their soil has been destroyed with Roundup.

They betray humanity. They destroy life. They malign Mother Nature herself, and in doing so, they threaten the very future of sustainable life on our planet.

The revolution we need is a revolution against the corporation

As we see our present-day society being utterly destroyed by corporations — banking, agriculture, pharmaceutical, etc. — we must get serious about what needs to happen to change the structure of corporations so that they serve humanity rather than destroying humanity.

Here are some suggestions worth considering:

#1) Strip away corporate personhood protections.

#2) Deny all patents on seeds, genes and medicines. Such things should belong to everyone, not to a monopolistic few. This would also take the profit out of medicine, meaning drug companies would no longer have a financial incentive to fabricate and promote fictitious diseases.

#3) Ban all corporate lobbying and campaign contributions. No corporation should have access to lawmakers, period. Lawmakers should serve the people who elected them and no one else.

#4) Disband all corporations that currently function as a danger to humanity. This would include, of course, Monsanto, Merck and many others. Who decides this? Whoever wins the revolution, of course. (Isn’t that always the case?)

#5) Nationalize the Federal Reserve and make it “America’s bank” so that Fed money is owned by the People and benefits the People instead of globalist banks.

#6) Halt the “revolving door” where government regulators take high-paying jobs at the very corporations they’ve been regulating. Once a person works in an influential position for a government regulator, they should be forever restricted from working for the industry they once regulated.

#7) End “Free Speech rights” for corporations. Corporations are not people. They have no God-given rights. By ending this fabricated “right,” we could institute strict advertising limits that would prevent corporations from advertising harmful products to children and adults.

Stop supporting evil

The ultimate solution, of course, is a consumer solution: Stop purchasing products from evil corporations! This means you need to stop buying non-organic corn products such as breakfast cereals, corn tortillas, and corn snack chips.

Stop buying lawn pesticide chemicals. Stop buying medications. Stop buying toxic perfumes, cosmetics and personal care products. Stop buying soda pop and aspartame!

YOU help shift the world in a more positive direction by shifting your own personal purchasing habits. And that’s something you can control right now, today, starting with the very next dollar you spend at the store.

BUY ORGANIC, non-GMO products wherever possible. You’ll be changing the world one purchase at a time. That’s a genuine, practical way to diminish the power of evil corporations starting right now.

Democrats and Republicans are a political cartel. 

Cartel: An association of manufacturers or suppliers with the purpose of maintaining prices at a high level and restricting competition.

Or, in our case, an association of political parties with the purpose of maintaining concentrated political power and restricting or repressing competition. 

There’s a reason elections don’t change shit. 

Neil Young Boycotts Starbucks Over GMO Lawsuit

Neil Young is seeking a new source for his daily latte. The rocker announced on his website this week that he’s boycotting Starbucks over the coffee company’s involvement in a lawsuit against the state of Vermont’s new requirements to label genetically modified ingredients.

Neil Young Boycotts Starbucks Over GMO Lawsuit
By Miriam Coleman November 15, 2014 at 6:42 PM
Neil Young Neil Young is boycotting Starbucks (Photo: Angela Weiss/Getty Images)
Neil Young is seeking a new source for his daily latte. The rocker announced on his website this week that he’s boycotting Starbucks over the coffee company’s involvement in a lawsuit against the state of Vermont’s new requirements to label genetically modified ingredients.

“I used to line up and get my latte everyday, but yesterday was my last one,” Young wrote. “Starbucks has teamed up with Monsanto to sue Vermont, and stop accurate food labeling.”

Vermont passed a law last spring that requires all food products containing GMOs to be labeled as such by July 1, 2016, with the exception of dairy products, meat, alcohol and food served in restaurants. Shortly afterward, four food industry organizations filed a lawsuit against the state that challenged the law’s constitutionality. Among the plaintiffs is the Grocery Manufacturers Association, whose more than 300 members include both Starbucks and Monsanto. (The other three plaintiffs are the Snack Food Association, the International Dairy Food Association and the National Association of Manufacturers.)

“Monsanto might not care what we think – but as a public-facing company, Starbucks does,” Young wrote. “If we can generate enough attention, we can push Starbucks to withdraw its support for the lawsuit, and then pressure other companies to do the same.”

“Considering that Starbucks has been progressive on LGBT and labor issues in the past, it’s disappointing that it is working with the biggest villain of them all, Monsanto,” he continued.

“There’s much more at stake here than just whether GMO foods will be labeled in a single U.S. state. Vermont is the very first state in the U.S. to require labeling. Dozens of other states have said that they will follow this path – in order to encourage this, we need to ensure that Vermont’s law stands strong.”

Young closed his note by directing fans to the website of the organization SumOfUs to donate or sign a petition, and asking them to “pressure and call out members of the Grocery Manufacturers Association.”

This isn’t the only recent instance of Neil Young rallying fans to join him in a boycott on environmental grounds. Back in August, he explained his reasons eschewing non-organic cotton and urged fans to do the same.

Read more:
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

regarding trolling

as my understanding has it, i make no assumption that my understanding or my experiences or anything of the sort are universal, “trolling” in a traditional sense mostly refers to people making bad faith arguments, often with the desire of eliciting a certain reaction. often times, of course, the purpose of such arguments was solely to annoy someone, but on rare occassions it could be used to expose some sort of flaw in an argument or viewpoint

more recently, however, the working definition of “trolling” has come to include things like harrassment and death threats and other such behavior. the purpose thereof, as i can tell, is to diminish the seriousness of such acts by equating them with a rather “juveline” contrariness and reducing a desire to threaten and intimidate simply to a desire to annoy. this of course serves to reinforce the power of dominant groups by letting them write off their acts of enforcing their own positions of power and privilege, through such acts as harassment and threats, as mere acts of “trolling”. the redefinition of “trolling” then serves to diminish the severity of acts committed in the defense of power

there is another redefinition of “trolling”, however, that is in action and it, fundamentally, serves the same purpose albeit in a different, and seemingly contradictory, way. this is the act of journalists and other people who have public platforms to characterize any sort of criticism of them as an act of “trolling”. see someone like jeremy scahill characterizing anyone who dares to criticize him as a “troll” ( this is how the journalist, and really it is not limited to them it comes from anyone who is in a position of power, uses the label of “troll” to dismiss any criticism without ever having to address it or acknowledge any merits that it may or may not have. in this case, as in the other, the conflation of “trolling” with harassment and abuse serves the interests of power, although for seemingly different reasons. in this case, it is not to diminish actual abuse, in this case it is to simultaneously dismiss legitimate criticism by not only framing it as a bad faith argument (the “traditional” definition of trolling, as such) but to also implicitly connect the act of criticism with abuse and harassment. in this sense, the idea of invoking “trolling” is not to diminish abuse but to amplify or manufacture it.

the conflation of “trolling” with abuse and harassment, then, not only serves the interests of those who are able to commit abuse relatively freely (by allowing them to dismiss the seriousness of what they do) but also those who seek to characterize any legitimate criticism as abuse (by allowing them to invoke the manufactured association between “trolling” and abuse). this conflation functions in diminishing abuse but also, due to conflating abuse with “trolling” as in the traditional sense as put forth, associates any sort of criticism, with the bad faith accusations involved with “traditional” trolling taken into account, with harassment and abuse, therefore making anyone who dares speak out against anyone who has a public platform inherently abusive

we then arrive at a point where the conflation of “trolling” with harassment serves the interests of power in multiple, seemingly contradictory ways. on one hand, it allows those in positions of power to diminish their own abuse and harassment as mere acts of “trolling” but on the other hand it perverts the legitimate criticisms of those in power by associating them with “trolling”, and in turn, with the very harassment and abuse that power seeks to diminish