Caveat Emptor

I had some quick learning to do when I transitioned from electrical engineering to graduate studies in topics about which I was fascinated but were all brand new.  Every day I was encountering new phrases that might have been elementary to some but were the metaphorical Greek and Latin to me.  And sometimes they were literally in the Latin.

This was also in the prehistoric days before Google. Before the internet as we understand it today.  Which meant that any time I ran into new phrases, it was darn difficult to figure out what the hell it meant. Sometimes, despite my ultra-self-consciousness and introvertedness, I managed to get myself to faculty's offices and ask them to clarify.

One of the phrases that initially stumped me was caveat emptor.  I chanced upon a faculty searching for a book in the library.  Lowdon Wingo.  I had never come across such a name ever.  He was ancient even back then.  (He will one supercentenarian if he were alive now)  I gathered up all my courage and asked him what caveat emptor meant.

Buyer beware!

That, by itself, gave me a lot to think about the market system.

If the buyer is not carefully looking through the product details, then?  So long, sucker!  Uncle Sam doesn't really care about the human buyer, but is always far more keen on the most important person ever--the corporation!

Economic life in the US has not changed all that much over these years.

Across a span of cosmetics, including makeup, toothpaste and shampoo, to items ranging from household cleaners to fruit juice to cheese, hundreds of potentially harmful ingredients banned in the EU are legally allowed in the US. ...
“Generally, the EU has got it right. In the US we have a strong favouritism towards companies and manufacturers, to the extent that public health and the environment is being harmed. The pendulum has swung in an extreme way and it’s really going to take a general awakening by the public.”

Caveat emptor!

Want an example? "In cosmetics alone, the EU has banned or restricted more than 1,300 chemicals while the US has outlawed or curbed just 11."

Why is it so here in the US?

The clout of powerful industry interests, combined with a regulatory system that demands a high level of proof of harm before any action is taken, has led to the American public being routinely exposed to chemicals that have been rubbed out of the lives of people in countries such as the UK, Germany and France.

I don't  understand such a behavior.  Don't American industry leaders and lobbyists have children and grandchildren that they worry about?  Why would they not want to make sure their little ones will have an awesome future?  Why would they want to condemn those innocent kids to caveat emptor?

I know; that was a rhetorical question.  That was answered well in Thank you for smoking, remember?

Oh well ... so, is there any hope?

“I’m hoping for dramatic changes in our politics but there’s little chance of that,” said Bergstein. “The federal government is barely functioning, so consumers have to realize they have the power to become more vocal and demand change. The awareness is still not there, though.”

Caveat voter!

El Pollo Local?

Among people walking around with smartphones that were made in China, wearing clothes that were made in Bangladesh, and planning their dream vacations abroad, there are plenty who seem to be uber-maniacal about eating food that is locally produced.  As if everything else foreign is ok, but the cucumber shall not be from more than a few miles away!  An illogical and unrealistic fixation on "local":

While local food has emerged as an alternative to industrial food, many people have simply transferred their expectations from the grocery store to the farmers’ market. Consumers still expect a global array of products, despite natural restrictions in season or geography. Additionally, emotional expectations surrounding food have increased. People want to imagine chickens free-ranging in a pasture without knowing anything about their deaths. They want their farmers to be simple, iconic food heroes.

It is all emotional. Indeed.  Thinking, as opposed to merely going with emotions, is hard work:

Consumers should be dogged in insisting that food be represented accurately. This includes asking questions and requesting labelling programmes at farmers’ markets. It also helps to know about crop seasonality in your region. Watermelons appearing at winter farmer’s markets were not likely grown anywhere in North America, much less locally.
It’s up to consumers to advocate for policies that allow farmers to succeed. If you care about artisan cheese wheels, you should care about dairy prices.

When it comes to smartphones, we do not care about how the phones are made, and the conditions in which the labor works in order to get us those phones.  This disconnect then helps us not even think about the harsh impacts on the environment in those countries where the manufacturing happens, or about the terrible working conditions.  If we did, then we would want to act on it,  But then the smartphones will be more expensive, and the tshirts won't be available for $5.99.

With the "local" food, while we might prefer the connection between us and the growers, we rarely ever look into the realities of the local food.  With romantic notions, we developed the idea of CSA--community-supported agriculture.  

It was a private transaction in which all the money went directly to the farmer. It did not rely on distributors or brick-and-mortar stores, and it gave farmers a crucial infusion of cash for the winter, used to buy seeds, repair equipment and expand into new growing methods.
The goal was for C.S.A. farmers and members to build a mutually supportive long-term relationship. Members would get straight-from-the-farm produce from a farmer they knew and trusted, and farmers would get financial stability.

But then strange things happen:

Now, online hubs are using sophisticated distribution technology to snap into the food chain, often using “C.S.A.” to describe what they deliver.
The term is not regulated in most states, so companies can define it as they wish. Peapod, the online shopping service owned by the international grocery giant Ahold, delivers farm-sourced boxes throughout the Northeast; FreshDirect offers a variety of C.S.A. options in and around New York City.

In case you thought that this somehow helps out the farmers:

Depending on how and where these new businesses buy their produce, consumers can receive all the benefits of C.S.A. membership, while the farmers get only a fraction. Some farmers say that after years of steady growth, their C.S.A. memberships have dropped since the arrival of services like Local Roots or Farmigo.

As I often remind students, it takes a lot of work to be an engaged consumer and an engaged citizen.  That means a whole lot of critical thinking day in and day out.  

Taking the time to tease out whether buying granola made in Brooklyn qualifies as supporting local agriculture can test the patience of consumers

A "patient consumer" is an oxymoron in this world of instant gratification.  I read a sarcastic comment the other day that instant gratification takes too long!   Oh well, maybe we humans were always impatient and unthinking and it is I who have been living with an unrealistic fixation on a world of critically thinking consumers and citizens.  It is a good thing that I am also on my way to extinction ;)