- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Obamacare is Coming After Your Craft Beer
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:52 am to The First Cut
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:52 am to The First Cut
They should just ignore the new rule. that is what democrats do when they don't like something just say frick it.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:52 am to terriblegreen
quote:While I don't think the gov't should be mandating this. Breweries should list the calorie count imho.
This is so stupid. People drinking craft beer aren't worried about counting calories. Those people drink Michelob Ultra.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:53 am to The First Cut
Government should stay the frick out of business as much as they can. This is unnecessary.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:53 am to Clyde Tipton
OK so youre a small regulated business, you are already paying out the arse for healthcare for your employees and now you need another 77k to grow. This prevents growth, nothing more, of course any brewery wants to be in 150 locations.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:54 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
my next question is why is putting calorie content on the label hurting small business?
Making them spend money on expenses that in no way help the product or consumer
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:55 am to Salmon
quote:Is it really a huge cost? Let's say it can be presented like most bottles...in small print on the back label. Is it as easy as retyping a template for the label? The labels will be printed anyway on future product.
yes...the cost and if you don't do it, you can't have your beer in larger chains, which is generally high volume accounts for small breweries
quote:I see your point here and I'm not trying to be difficult. And I definitely think it's unwarranted...BUT, I don't mind having calorie content and other important nutrition facts, like added sugars, on the things we consume. Beer is basically like dessert, though...who cares how many calories are in it?
No, not at all
which is why it is useless, unwarranted legislation
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:55 am to MontyFranklyn
quote:
Don't come here with that type of logic
Logic? Where is the logic in our government trying to regulate shite like this exactly?
I'm pretty sure at this point this POS is trying to ruin as much shite as he can get his hands on before next January.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:55 am to BugAC
quote:
It is simply a tool to punish small business that is under all out assault as it is under this current administration, especially due to Obamacare.
I agree with you, but I have more faith in the market than in Obama. What I mean is people want craft beer. They will go to restaurants that have big selections. If a chain restaurant only has the big brand crap, they might be tempted to go elsewhere. Like my ETA from my previous post- ultimately this will hurt chain restaurants more than anything when they can only supply certain beers people want.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:56 am to Paddyshack
Something to the tune of 5-10k I see as reasonable, 77k seems a bit high.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:56 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
Is it really a huge cost? Let's say it can be presented like most bottles...in small print on the back label. Is it as easy as retyping a template for the label? The labels will be printed anyway on future product.
bottle labels won't be that expensive, but reprinting cans is expensive
quote:
BUT, I don't mind having calorie content and other important nutrition facts, like added sugars, on the things we consume.
I don't mind it either
I just don't think it should be legislated
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:56 am to NYNolaguy1
Also, the government will then have to define "craft beer" for us and that could be fun.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:57 am to Paddyshack
quote:
I'm pretty sure at this point this POS is trying to ruin as much shite as he can get his hands on before next January.
Yes. He actually sent a memo to the FDA instructing them to "ruin a buncha shite" to piss off the OT.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:57 am to Paddyshack
Since we don't enforce immigration laws, I don't see why this government intrusion should be given any consideration. Just ignore it like our current President does when he feels like it.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:58 am to lsu2006
quote:
Yes. He actually sent a memo to the FDA instructing them to "ruin a buncha shite" to piss off the OT.
so you're Team Hilary?
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:58 am to Salmon
"provide the caloric information"
easy enough to do on the company website with a link to certified testing results
labeling is not a cost factor, from what I am reading
rabblerabblerabble
easy enough to do on the company website with a link to certified testing results
labeling is not a cost factor, from what I am reading
rabblerabblerabble
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:58 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
Also, the government will then have to define "craft beer" for us and that could be fun.
Nah, this applies to all brewers.
I guess probably not to imported beer though? Or will they start having to put nutrition info in order to export to the US?
And if they are going to do this, why not wine and spirits as well? Why just the beer industry?
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:59 am to TulaneUVA
quote:
you can afford it.
If you're a business earning 15% OP, then you need $513,333 in revenue just to pay for this. And why do we need this? Because Obama thinks you aren't smart enough to realize that there are calories in alcohol.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:59 am to Salmon
How would this regulation affect beers on tap? It's not like they're gonna have to start laser engraving pint glasses with nutritional labels. And even small craft brewers currently label their bottles/cans anyway. All they would have to do is add a nutritional section to the label. It shouldn't affect the price they already pay for printing the labels. It's it's a design issue. The only financial impact I see is from potential loss of business by choosing not to comply with the regulation.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:59 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
BUT, I don't mind having calorie content and other important nutrition facts, like added sugars, on the things we consume.
This is nice. But it should not be mandated. If I want to know how many calories are in my craft beer, then I go to the website and look it up. If I bottle beer and want to add it to the label, that's my call to make. OR if my consumers want that information, then I'll add it to appease them. I should not be appeasing the government or facing penalties.
Posted on 6/3/16 at 10:59 am to roadGator
quote:
Since we don't enforce immigration laws, I don't see why this government intrusion should be given any consideration. Just ignore it like our current President does when he feels like it.
:golfclap:
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News