Hello my name is Cody Tate this is my overall opinion of the court involving GMO's and the government involvement. First I would say that the overall message I got from this Is that the that the antigovernment party won the overall argument.
The first set of evidence I have for this is Rosie's opening statement. I felt that she acted like the government put our nutrition first and the importance of the FDA. Yet she didn't have any evidence backing this ,also she lied about having evidence of the FDA scientists and they're having support from the scientist which I have no information from. The evidence that was emailed to me so I have no notification that there was any test actually done. Then she's like yeah the FDA has several scientist testing the GMO's yet there was not even a name provided.
Now moving towards the anti-governments opening statement it's not that they had real good evidence in this. I would actually say that this wasn't the strongest point think it was one of the weaker points made, but they did talk about how the private party was able to do you things successfully that the government was not able to do. They conveyed this with actual evidence which I did like that they were not just coming with it out of nowhere. (which was a big thing to me). So I would say that was still a winning point in their favor.
Now onto Mary Ann Milarky ,she talked about the importance of the FDA. She talked about how the government can only be organized and that if private party had control they couldn't be organized and how they can't make a system that would work. Also, another big thing that really grinds my gears How she was acting like the companies were scaring people into buying their food , because they have non-GMO label. I felt like you should be able to put a non-GMO label because some people just do not support GMO's . If that's what they don't want to eat I don't feel like you should be able to tell them that they can't have a sticker to tell you what they are eating. and Ms. Milarky also acts like the government had no role in the opinions of the FDA and what they supported , and in how they were influenced by the government . I didn't feel a complete sense of honesty when she was giving her speech because I feel like a part of the government is definitely going to be influenced by the government meeting I don't think I know so yes I would say I did Not think it was a win for the pro-government side.
On to Mary Ann Hawk I felt that she was the most prepared for this court hearing. I feel that her evidence straight to the point and she didn't pretend to know stuff that she didn't. Which is good but then again I didn't see any true evidence pop up that would go against private party in any negative connotation. Then she talked about her work with salt institute and how it would not function without The governments support. But I'm not sure if I can agree with how she says that she's talked about how much the government donate, but there was so much to be donated by private party so I can't say it's to complete Win but I felt that it did help out the pro-government side a little bit.
Milton Friedman ,so Milton Friedman was our first witness of the antigovernment team. He conveyed very good points about how they talk a lot of smack about how maybe the private party is going to be so corrupt and not care about our overall well being while the government isn't working and he really gives a good message showing this. e shows that A GMO environment that starts out in the free market it gives you the proper freedom to be able to do the things that is needed while the governments gonna do too much in the way publicity well free markets going to aim exactly what they want to do a thing to do in the time they need to and he thinks it's using the overall more success won't know what the government can do for us
Now onto Bill Gates Bill Gates talks about how the government has sort of a sense of corruption it goes off the same group of people because they just want to act like friends and it's not worried about her overall health and it's only worry about the money and he talks about how the money spent to feed the hungry but really on the backend all that monies given to Monsanta oh well they're putting a big portion his pocket and they're doing a little bit of public good so it looks like they're spending their money in a good way yet they're really notI felt like that this conveyed but overall good picture for the antigovernment team so I would say that was a very big win in their case
Ron Paul the last witness of antigovernment so he said with his evidence that the FDA has not been successful and that the government is creating products that are that are in all reality still bad for us because of all the callbacks the government gets to the point that you get through environment where there experimental drugs so it could sort of covers there but so people might get the health risks in conditions from the things that happened but there's nothing we can do about it because it's experimental so it's right to protect them and doesn't actually worry about the people and he is a big Influence on how if the free-market had rain that it would create a system where companies go bankrupt if they were providing something that we actually like and the pro-government team brought up about how that may be the rich are going to have all the rights because they're so rich but I don't want you to buy 100,000,000 1/2 is just not going to happen so going off of her actual talking about GMO's in the control of private party or the governmentI feel that he has a true point that is very strong saying that the free market has the overall best chance of providing us with a successful safe product
The closing statements both of them I felt there were just very repetitive of everything that was spoken so I would say still my overall message was given from the witnesses and opening statements so the winning team I would state would be the antigovernment thank you