A Home-Based Baker Shouldn't Have To Choose Between Her Dog and Her Business
Each state has different cottage food laws that don’t actually protect public health and safety.

Hula is a good girl. She gets overly excited when guests visit, and sometimes she pokes her nose through the backyard fence and barks. But she follows one important rule: She avoids the room between the kitchen and driveway.
No dogs are allowed inside. Hula, a 7-year-old Belgian shepherd mix, learned quickly when her human parents renovated the space in November 2022, adding an oven, freezer, cooktop, and mixers. "She knows not to go in there," says Hula's mom, who uses the pet-free zone for a homemade cookie business and asked to remain anonymous for this piece.
The door mostly stays closed anyway, creating clear boundaries between the main kitchen for family meals and the workspace for "cottage food," which refers to homemade food for sale. The setup eliminates any sanitation concerns about indoor pets.
"I have really high standards for myself," says Hula's mom. "My product is a reflection of me and my integrity."
Despite the safeguards, Hula's mere existence jeopardizes the business. North Carolina, where the family lives, bans pets in homes used for cottage food production. The state Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services makes no exceptions. Even a goldfish or hamster could turn an otherwise legal business into a criminal enterprise.
The pet prohibition puts Hula's mom in a bind. She could stop selling cookies, move to another state, or lease space in a commercial kitchen, which would mean driving 30 minutes each way to bake on a fixed schedule while paying thousands of dollars in rent—killing flexibility and profit.
The other options are unthinkable. The family could return Hula to the shelter where they rescued her as a puppy. Or they could banish her permanently to the backyard. Hula's mom refuses.
"Your pet is part of your family," she says. "I don't think it's fair to make me choose between business and family."
Rather than comply, Hula's mom took her cottage food operation underground. She pays taxes and obeys other laws, but she skipped the mandatory home inspection and certification. Now she must look over her shoulders when she bakes. She cannot advertise, participate in big community events, or do anything else to draw attention to herself.
Too much success could alert government agents, who could show up and bust her. No puppy dog eyes could stop the assault on economic liberty—the right to earn an honest living in a safe and responsible manner.
The zero-tolerance pet policy is just one example of misguided and sometimes unconstitutional cottage food restrictions nationwide. All 50 states and Washington, D.C., authorize these home-based businesses. But most jurisdictions also hold them back.
Our public interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, filed lawsuits in Minnesota, Nebraska, and New Jersey to end some of the most stifling cottage food regulations. We sued Wisconsin twice. Yet these are not the only states with problems.
Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, and Washington state cap annual revenue at $25,000, leaving little room for profit after expenses. Hawaii bans online sales and mail-order delivery. Many states demand laboratory testing of acidified foods.
Massachusetts requires inspections, but does not set uniform standards. Cottage food producers must navigate different rules in 351 cities and towns. Some municipalities decline to set up inspection programs, making it illegal to sell a single homemade cookie under any circumstance. Other municipalities set the bar impossibly high. One aspiring cottage food producer failed a Massachusetts home inspection because her laminate countertop had a freckle-sized chip near the sink.
The biggest difference nationwide involves cottage food types. Every state allows the sale of homemade cookies, bread, and other shelf-stable foods. But that's where the agreement ends. Some states allow homemade popcorn and chocolates. Other states don't. Some states allow homemade pickles and canned vegetables. Other states don't.
Most states ban the sale of homemade foods that require refrigeration. But a handful of states allow it—putting cheesecakes, pumpkin pies, and fresh salsas on the menu. Seven states allow the sale of homemade meals such as pizza. Overall, Wyoming tops the chart and Delaware is the biggest loser for cottage food freedom on an Institute for Justice report card.
The disparity produces something like cottage food roulette. Producers who live in places with friendly laws are lucky winners. Hula's mom and many others are losers, and they rarely get an apology.
Regulators who make their lives difficult claim the meddling is necessary to protect public health and safety. Yet the patchwork of laws nationwide undercuts the argument. Real-world experience shows cottage food is safe no matter where a person lives.
California allows the sale of homemade foods containing meat. Georgia limits cottage food producers to a narrow list of authorized fare. The difference is huge, but the result is the same: little or no evidence of harm.
Arizona lawmakers considered the data and passed one of the nation's strongest food freedom laws on April 13, 2023. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs responded with a veto, citing the imagined public health and safety problems that have yet to materialize anywhere.
Hula stays out of politics. But her mom is ready to growl about the cottage food obstacles—especially the pet prohibition in North Carolina. "This makes me mad," she says. "It seems so arbitrary."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Those big glops of dough are going to melt into one sheet and end up as cookie squares.
They're dog-fur-reinforced to maintain rigidity.
Which I’ve always heard called “cowboy bars”. I’m sure that’s Nebraska-speak.
Cite?
How's Martha Fuckin' Stewart for a cite?:
https://www.marthastewart.com/1153937/cowboy-coconut-bars
Bet you thought you were being really funny by asking for a cite. I don't mind providing cites. Why would someone mind providing a cite?
"I don’t mind providing cites."
Only when you're not lying though, right Mike?
"Why would someone mind providing a cite?"
Only to you, because you're a sealion, and usually make frivolous citation requests as a form of trolling and harrassment.
Martha ex-con Stewart?
I’m sure that’s Nebraska-speak.
No citation given for this part yet sea lion. Please cite.
Do you have a cite that shows they are specifically ‘cowboy bars’. As the link you provided doesn’t really verify your claims.
No, the link I provided is the best I could find. Admittedly, it indicates that rectangular chocolate chip cookies may be commonly called “cowboy bars” because they are similar to cowboy cookies in being durable. But the link isn’t conclusive.
This is PBS, which I know is poo-poo'ed as a citation source here, but, you know what, this isn't a political discussion:
https://www.pbs.org/food/recipes/giant-cowboy-cookies/#:~:text=Some%20claim%20cowboy%20cookies%20hail,and%20coconut%20is%20undeniably%20delicious.
"Some claim cowboy cookies hail from Texas, a state many cowboys call home. Others say the treats were named for their ability to withstand long days in saddlebag. Whatever its origin, the combination of oats, chocolate, pecans, and coconut is undeniably delicious."
LOL, even though it's on a PBS site, it's also Martha Fuckin' Stewart.
You forgot to turn your sock on for your samefag response.
Lots of words for not minding to provide a cite.
Don’t make fun of the retard.
That's what they meant when they said 'Just bake the cake'.
This is an interesting topic. I am in Florida and I have a friend who has a home based cookie business. She had to obtain a special license for the cottage bakery, but it did not require separate kitchens or pet free zones.
She sells these amazing little works of art. They are basically sugar cookies with beautiful icing artwork on them. They are customized for events or holidays. And they are insanely expensive. Like $6 per cookie. Maybe more. Even the cheapest holiday cookies that she designs to be quick and easy to pipe are $3 or $4 per cookie.
She is crazy busy. She is a solo operation, and she can barely keep up with demand. I really don't understand the market. It amazes me that there are enough people willing to drop over two hundred bucks to have 40 cookies on a platter for a baby shower.
Even with all of that, there is no way she could have a business of she had to pay for a commercial kitchen in a commercial space. Her business does not scale. It depends on the skill of the individual artist. She could bring people in and train them and perhaps serve more customers, but it would be difficult to find such people and I don't think she makes as much as she might make working similar hours in an office job. So hiring people at a low wage is even more difficult.
There are products and services that would not exist if we didn't have this capability in our system of regulation.
My daughter has caught the bug. She sees the opportunity at local parks. Hot kids and families playing in the sun. So she bought a bunch of Popsicles and headed to the park. She turned a $25 profit her first time out, and she was hooked.
She just ordered a snow cone machine with her earnings. Now we are trying to navigate how to handle this. What liabilities do we face? What licenses should she actually have? How the heck is she going to power the thing? She sees franchised food trucks selling snow cones for $6 and figures she will clean up at $2 from a decorated wagon.
So this morasse of layered regulation is pretty close to home for me. Finding out what all the rules are is difficult. (But just looking at the absence of vendors at local parks makes me think that it isn't easy. We will have several hundred at the nearest baseball fields on weekends, and nobody shows up to do this.)
Hiring a lawyer to navigate it for me would cost way more than she is ever going to make. It really is a good lesson in how regulation can stifle access to services.
It's pretty much the same for *any* business, really. I've tried a couple of times, and it's just too damned hard to follow all the fucking rules to run one yourself. It ends up just not being worth the effort. This country has regulated itself to death. The economy would be fine if the government would just get the fuck out of the way. And they'd probably end up with more tax revenue overall. But then the bastards who get their jollies from telling other people what to do couldn't get their fix.
Some people can operate or even build a business.
Others (including plenty of disaffected anti-government cranks) are destined to be employees.
It is better to recognize your station, either way.
Fuck off and die, asshole bigot.
Kirkland was just excited by the headline because he's got a fetish for being sodomized by large-breed dogs.
Don't be so hard on yourself, Reverend. Someday you'll be dead, and everyone you ever cared about will soon forget what a pitiable failure you were.
You’re proof that most disaffected wokie beta male soyboys are ultimately relegated to entry level grunt work, for an alpha male conservative boss.
Beta males like you. Although I’m sure you’re supplementing your minimum wage income by getting a few bucks here and there as a transit authority bus restroom glory hole attendant.
They saw the incels getting attention and were like, “hold my seltzer”
My husband and I started a mechanical engineering business and do work for some big, multi-million dollar corporations. It’s nearly impossible for a small business like us to get in their doors-even when we are the experts on the machine we repair. I’ve spent hours and hours and hours on compliance, and I couldn’t seem to jump through all their hoops. They wouldn’t even tell me what hoops I was failing to jump through! I finally had to hire an outside company whose entire business is compliance-they we’re able to successfully navigate the hoops. Owning my own business had made me more anti-government than ever!
There’s a “radical individualist” around these parts named Chemjeff who has some very statist thoughts on the regulation of bears in trunks.
Avoid.
Even with all of that, there is no way she could have a business of she had to pay for a commercial kitchen in a commercial space. Her business does not scale.
A friend of mine started a catering business after being laid off during COVID and has to do exactly that. Luckily for him his business does scale.
There are products and services that would not exist if we didn’t have this capability in our system of regulation.
That is by design. Remember that to people in government, businesses are the enemy. They view their role as protecting the people from profiteers who would gladly kill their customers if it meant earning a buck (since most lawmakers are lawyers, which is a profession that attracts psychopaths who would do exactly that, I figure most of these rules are projection). So they create barriers to business in the form of rules requiring them to constantly ask permission and obey orders, in the hopes that they’ll say fuck-it and not bother.
"That is by design. Remember that to people in government, businesses are the enemy. "
Nonsense. Business writes the regulations. They call it regulatory capture. You really should familiarize yourself with the concept. Bigger business writes the rules so that smaller businesses can't compete. Business is not the enemy, they work hand in glove and often cross back and forth over the course of their careers. That two billion spent on the presidential election campaigning? Mostly coming from business, spent on business. Business is the enemy? Get your head out of your ass!
I'm quite aware of regulatory capture. Heck, I probably introduced you to the subject. And congrats for completely missing my point. Judging by the tone of your post you're in attack mode and not interested in anything I have to say except to find something to attack, so I won't bother elaborating. Enjoy your two-minutes of hate.
"I’m quite aware of regulatory capture. "
Then why are you blaming government for the rules written by business? I am not convinced you understand regulatory capture. Doubtless you've heard the words, but really understand what they mean? I don't think so. Who, if anyone, do you imagine is capturing these regulatory bodies?
Regulatory capture is when established businesses make, or convince government to make, rules in the name of protecting us from the evil businesses that will do anything for a profit. Regulations are always sold as protecting the people from bad guys. Who are the bad guys? Businesses. If you could set your contempt and condescension aside for a moment you might find that we’re in agreement.
For example established bakeries don't want competition from cottage bakers. What do they do? They convince government that upstarts will intentionally or unwittingly poison customers, therefore the politicians need to create rules to protect us from enemy bakers that would otherwise harm us.
"Regulations are always sold as protecting the people from bad guys."
In this case, I'm not sure. You don't want dogs roaming around cookie factories. The regulations make sense. The problems arise when the same regulations are applied to cottage industries run on a smaller scale. The regulations could be written to exempt cottage cookie makers but the regulation writers aren't terribly concerned with the cottage industries, and to the extent they are concerned, they are happy to eliminate them as competition.
The stuff about government psychopaths hating business is misdirection from the real issue of regulatory capture.
Yeah man, the "real issue of 'regulatory capture'", I am on board with shit! Google it, the Google Knows All!!!
Google also "concentrated benefits, diffuse costs"! (Roots of "special interests" powers). THEN you'll be edumacated on all ASSociated matters here!
(Pay me $100 and I'll grant ye a "free speech license" for saying stuff like you've just said, by the way! PURELY in the "pubic interest" now, OK? GREASE my palms, Baby! Pubic Servants == "Special Interest" Numero Uno!!!)
"“I’m quite aware of regulatory capture. ”
Then why are you blaming government for the rules written by business? I am not convinced you understand regulatory capture. Doubtless you’ve heard the words, but really understand what they mean? I don’t think so. Who, if anyone, do you imagine is capturing these regulatory bodies?"
trueman is truly and abysmally stupid, probably stupid enough to imagine this makes sense.
Hey, asshole, who set up the regulatory agencies?
Sevo the Pedo (Hippo wearing a speedo) set up the regulatory agencies! Now ya know!
This sounds like a product of AS. Like AI, Artificial Stupidity is able to provide automated responses for a desired topic, often including key words and pop references.
This sounds like a product of ASS (Artificial Self-Superiority). Often an ASS will use poop references, sometimes even in a smug-Smaug's-smegma way! My smegma-way or the highway, says Smug Smaug! There can be no other way!
Speaking of abysmally stupid, I see the spastic asshole has arrived.
Wrong question: "Hey, asshole, who set up the regulatory agencies?"
Right question: Who captured the regulatory agencies?
Yes, of course you pathetic pile of shit, those nasty business people could capture regulatory agencies even if there weren't any.
What a fucking ignoramus:
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
"Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
I’m quite aware of regulatory capture. Heck, I probably introduced you to the subject.
If you ever want evidence that sarc has an unearned sense of greatness, here it is. He claims to be introducing people to terms known for over a century. Obscure terms? No. Well known terms introduced in introduction to economics.
And if you want to see his victim mentality, look at how he attacks trueman. Lol. God damn.
A friend of mine started a catering business after being laid off during COVID
Forward the name of your friend to Anthony Fauci and say, “Here’s one”.
And they are insanely expensive. Like $6 per cookie. Maybe more. Even the cheapest holiday cookies that she designs to be quick and easy to pipe are $3 or $4 per cookie.
Phbbbt! Poor people. LOL. 🙂
They can eat cake, right? But not gay cake.
But they would exist if our “system of regulation”, instead of making a carve-out for someone like her, had much lower, cheaper requirements for a commercial kitchen.
Why do the politics of "cottage food laws" work? Why isn't the constituency for general deregulation of food business powerful enough, or the opposition to it weak enough, to allow that rather than this picayune exception-making?
Because the people in government are convinced that home cooks will add poison to their recipes if they sell them to the general public, and that can only be stopped by regulations and inspections.
But that would be a reason cottage food exceptions not be adopted. We see these cottage food laws do exist, providing loopholes for some small makers in some jurisdictions, so the people in government must trust home cooks more than big makers. Otherwise they'd get rid of the requirements for the big makers as well.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link——————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
If your kid really has that entrepreneurial bent, consider creating a general purposes LLC. That, to start, is a place you can shove these things to limit liability. If someone does decide they want to sue or fine her, they fine the company and worse case, it goes bankrupt.
But if it doesn't go bankrupt, it can remain there as a shell for the different things she or you might do. We had one for awhile and we shoved our rental into there, and I did some tech writing under contract from the corp. Eventually we stopped doing anything that required limited liability, and folded up shop.
What, are S.Corps chopped liver now?
I haven't checked in the past decade or so, but when we did ours, the LLC was less complicated for administration, filings, board officers, etc.
Yeah, my understanding is the LLC is the shortest path for someone trying to hang out a shingle for very little upfront cost and paperwork complexity to protect yourself from losing your personal assets if something related to the business goes sideways.
"Hot kids"
That would sound weird out of context.
But dogs cause police shootings!
They are VERY dangerous.
And who wants lead in their cookie?
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info visit on this web Site……………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Arrest, indict, and imprison the perjurious criminal “Doctor” Anthony Fauci.
Impeach Garland.
Impeach Mayorkas.
And last but not least, impeach the scumbag-in-chief Joe Biden. Yep, I said it yet again!
And I’m just going to keep on saying it over and over and over and over and over again here every single week until we the American people get what we voted for: some justice and accountability for the three years (and counting) of absolute hell these bastards have put this country through because of their lies and crimes.
So let’s go already McCarthy, what the hell are you waiting for? The time for talk is over, we want action and we want it now. Your #1 most important job by far the rest of this term is to do everything you possibly can to clean up the dirty cesspool that the Department of Justice has been turned into.
Hey Mikey, remember when Donnie promised to investigate Hil-Dog then lock her up? That was hilarious.
You morons will believe anything.
Wait a second, Plugstick…
Are you trying to insinuate that Hillary DIDN’T illegally destroy 33,000 emails, shredding the hard drives and smashing phones, and SIM cards after they were subpoenaed?
Or that in 1980 she DIDN’T cheat on her taxes by not reporting income from commodities trading?
That in 2010, 2011, and 2012, she DIDN’T lied to the IRS by falsely saying that her foundation did not get any money from foreign governments?
That she DIDN’T take gifts from foreign governments which is illegal for cabinet members to do?
That she DIDN’T illegally store classified spy satellite data on North Korean nukes on her private email server?
That she DIDN’T perjure herself by signing a sworn statement saying that she had turned over all of her work related emails which was later revealed to be false?
That she DIDN’T break U.S. law in Benghazi?
That she DIDN’T illegally give classified material to people who had not been cleared to have it in their possession?
That she DIDN’T illegally ignore 237 of the 240 Freedom of Information Act requests that she had received when she was Secretary of State?
That she and her officials DIDN’T take bribes as demonstrated in the Uranium One investigation?
And that doesn’t even touch the 71 Clinton associates who “committed suicide” during investigations of Hillary and Bill.
Or all the criminal scandals that were brushed under the rug like Mena Airport drug operation, the Arkansas Development Finance Authority scandal, the Morgan Guaranty scandal and Whitewater.
You really are a shill, aren’t you.
Or looking at the Steele Report fraud that her campaign cooked up.
Unlike Fatass Donnie, Hil-dog wasn't storing any classified information illegally - email or hard copy.
I'm not going down your list of debunked fake scandals. Let's just say you wingnuts do in fact believe anything.
"Unlike Fatass Donnie, Hil-dog wasn’t storing any classified information illegally – email or hard copy."
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar. If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental. turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
And this is a level 10 lie, even for Pluggo.
I'll give turd the 'benefit of the doubt' and assume stupidity rather than intent, but the lying pile of lefty shit tried, when HRC was found to have a personal server (in order to avoid the FOIA) to conflate that with having a private email account.
Yes, the lying pile of lefty shit certainly is stupid enough to swallow that bullshit. The lying pile of lefty shit is also dishonest enough to hope others would buy that bullshit.
Abysmally stupid and makes up for it with an equal helping of dishonesty; should be prosecuted for kiddy-porn besides.
“Hil-dog wasn’t storing any classified information illegally – email or hard copy.”
Imagine being so retarded that you think you can get away with making that claim here. You’re not still hanging out on the HuffPo comments, Shrike.
Hillary Clinton had emails on server more classified than top secret
“Hillary Clinton’s private email server contained information that was classified at a higher level than “top secret,” the inspector general of the intelligence community told members of Congress in a letter obtained by CBS News.”
Hillary Clinton was never a President, Shrike. She stored and destroyed classified documents illegally.
Even James Comey testified that she broke the law, although he tried to cover for her by implying she didn’t know what she was doing was illegal.
FBI said no criminal activity.
(here is where you say DERP DEEP STATE DERP)
Shrike: "Hil-dog wasn’t storing any classified information illegally"
Shrike two posts later: "FBI said no criminal activity."
Look at you move those goalposts while pretending you didn't lie in your first claim.
First you say she wasn't storing classified info illegally and then you flip on a dime and say it's okay because it wasn't "criminal". And the FBI definitely said it was illegal, even if they claimed it wasn't criminal.
You're far too stupid to fifty-cent here, Shrike. Open Society needs to hire better shills.
FBI did say criminal activity but they wouldn’t weigh in about intent. Despite her destroying phones and wiping the server.
Comey even admitted intent wasn't required. But 2 tiered justice system.
The KGB didn’t do anything wrong either.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
It’s a proven fact she did, you stupid child fucking cunt.
She wiped those hard drives with a cloth . . .
Didn't see it, but she also sold political access for 'donations' to the 'foundation' (electtion fund).
Throw yourself off a bridge, pedo scum.
Trumpers will scream loudly about locking liberals up for mostly imaginary crimes. But when presented with Trump clearly violating the law, they twist themselves into knots trying to excuse his crimes. A key difference between Trumpers and liberals: if Clinton or any other D committed a crime, we are just fine with them getting prosecuted. We want the law to apply equally to all.
What clear violation? If clear why is Bragg inventing statutes that even leftist legal analysts have trashed?
"A key difference between Trumpers and liberals: if Clinton or any other D committed a crime, we are just fine with them getting prosecuted. We want the law to apply equally to all."
Is that true, though? If Hunter and Jim Biden's business deals do get hard-linked to Joe, are liberals going to be all like, "Joe Biden must be impeached! The rule of law must be upheld!"
No.
You have about 33% of the country on either side that doesn't care how terrible their side is actually acting.
So true.
Yeah, that’s basically you he’s talking about, Mike. Not just Tony's Molly sockpuppet. Have you been taking Sarcasmic lessons in suppressing self-awareness lately?
Intentional lack of self awareness.
Self awareness is racist.
Fair. Self awareness is whiteness.
If a Republican did what Biden has done, I would want them executed. I strongly suspect a number of them may be that corrupt. Including Mitch McConnell. If it came out that he is guilty of the same things the Biden Crime Family has done, I would pay good money to be on his firing squad.
The problem you have with democrats is that they hate this country. Republicans love America. The only thing a democrat loves is government, by them.
Now there's a way to pay off the national debt...
"A key difference between Trumpers and liberals: if Clinton or any other D committed a crime, we are just fine with them getting prosecuted. We want the law to apply equally to all."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Sorry. Equal under the law? Unless they are black or brown or female or gay or trans or indigenous or oppressed or whatever the victim cult book club read last month?
Yeahhhhhhh…remember when Democrats were up in arms about the power dynamic between the President of the United States, and an unpaid intern, when news of an affair came out? There certainly weren’t women saying “So what? I’d blow him too because he protects my abortions.” They’ve got consistent principles, after all.
I’m past locking most of you up. The real true believing Marxist shsluld be deposited in landfills by the dump truck load. Then we pave over the landfill when full.
The end.
Hey! That's not cool.
That's waste of good fertilizer.
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1652010817586446338?t=FEcexqy8NnsyYSKBSasf0A&s=19
They arrested Trump, Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro, and Roger Stone
They raided Mar-A-Lago, Rudy Giuliani, and Project Veritas
They investigate parents who speak out at school board meetings
They got Tucker Carlson off the air
Imagine still not believing in the Deep State
MAGA:
My Associates Got Arrested
My Affidavits Getting Adjudged
My Attorneys Giving Allocutions
My Aides Getting Arraigned
My AnonAssholes Going Away
My Ass Got Arrested
You seem to have missed it, but the obviously political arrests and Stasi raids are the problem, Kirkland.
Imagine pretending you're a libertarian and actually gloating about arresting a president over tax reporting that wasn't even illegal, or jailing his affiliates on phony charges, or raiding their homes on Hillary's phony Russia allegations.
You're about as fascist as they get, aren't you, Kirkland.
It started with Rick Perry.
https://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=161693
you should read the forum posts in the thread that I linked to. It is very educational.
"Gov. Rick Perry of Texas was indicted on two felony counts on Friday by a state grand jury...
The investigation centered on Mr. Perry’s veto power as governor. His critics asserted that he used that power as leverage to try to get an elected official and influential Democrat — Rosemary Lehmberg, the district attorney in Travis County — to step down after her arrest for drunken driving last year...
One night in April 2013, Ms. Lehmberg was stopped by sheriff’s deputies with an open bottle of vodka in the front passenger seat of her car in a church parking lot in Austin and was arrested for drunken driving. She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 45 days in jail."
Sasuga Democrats.
Asshole bigot:
"My brain got fried"
Eat shit and die.
It’s going to be so awesome when Marxists like you are cleansed.
At some point, you would think that continually investigating and charging your main political opponents would be viewed as some sort of threat to democracy, wouldn't you?
https://twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/1652145972338622465?t=nkoUZJoB7B0sXC913u6MMQ&s=19
Media: Republicans overreacting, nobody is banning gas stoves.
NY Democrats: Gas Stoves are banned going forward.
[Link]
It's not happening and it's good for you.
But this is all because "cottage food" laws are written as exceptions to more general commercial food laws. How about instead of granting these businesses these exceptions to allow them to operate under conditions that may be too strict or expensive for many to qualify, we provide a level, but lower floor for all food businesses?
What's the purpose of the "cottage food" laws: to allow some people to defray the cost of a hobby, or to make foods more varied and affordable for consumers? Since the purpose of all work is consumption (or it would be called "play" rather than "work"), shouldn't the latter be the aim?
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info visit on this web Site……………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
I'd like to figure out why we have this type of regulatory arrangement. Why don't we have analogous "cottage drug" laws that would make easier for (specifically) small drug-making businesses to operate? Or "cottage insurance" laws, allowing small insurers to operate with less regulation? Or banks?
Seems there are a lot of "get big or get out" legal arrangements, but that the focus there is on the level of regulation per se, not on facilitating a few small-timers' entry into the business.
Thousands of "Bank of Mom and Dad" operate without regulation!
Because yuppies don’t go to the adorable downtown farmer’s market on Saturday mornings to buy cottage drugs, and post selfies of the adorable cottage-made pastries they found to Facebook.
Hmm, come to think of it “cottage drugs” might sell really well at the farmer’s market. Never mind.
So then why do you think there are no such regulatory breaks for small makers of drugs, toys, cars, pesticides, electricity, etc.? Presumably there’d be yuppie customers for these things.
My answer was half-serious: the carve outs exist because it’s pleasant to buy homemade goods at the local farmer’s market. The other things aren’t as visible.
They toys one I’m not sure about. I’m not so sure that one couldn’t make “cottage toys” in a lot of states/localities without any regulatory complications at all. I know that everywhere I have lived with my family, we have always run into some guy who fixes up old kids’ bikes and sells them out of his garage. That's not exactly toys, but it's similar.
Also, I used to take my kids to those workshops at Home Depot where they build their own toys and birdhouses and stuff. And same thing for Boy and Girl Scouts activities. There didn't seem to be any regulation around those activities.
Right, because they're not selling what's produced. Or at least not introducing them into interstate commerce.
The Girl Scouts don't even make the Girl Scout cookies.
Wickard v Fillburn did do away with that distinction, but we’re talking about state and local laws, anyway.
Wickard did away with the distinction only in constitutional law. Many previous and subsequent federal statutes specify it. That is, they say they apply only to business in (or in some cases, affecting) interstate commerce. So Congress could constitutionally legislate otherwise, but has explicitly chosen not to in many cases.
Cite? I've seen your YouTube. None at home depot.
They advertise them on a sign at the entrance to the driveway.
The problem is consumer product safety regs, and hand makers not being able to make production runs of such size as to even be testable according to certain safety criteria. Same with common fireworks. Hand makers typically make one- or few-of-a-kind.
If you're just fixing kids' bikes, you're not making and selling them. You're providing a service.
But you have to have rules. Otherwise, what will the bureaucracy have to do?
What is left out of the story is that the dog identifies as a human, and everyone who disagrees is a bigoted nazi
And a non binary human at that. They/them Hula is misgendered throughout this hate filled screed. It's practically genocide.
She could just say the dog is to help cure her anxiety and threaten the ADA to go after any inspectors.
It's true that most dogs have been surgically sterilized.
Nobody needs 23 kinds of contaminant-free cookies.
Remember that emergency use vaccine that was going around a couple years back that nobody was forced to get and wasn't actually a vaccine at all? Remember how everybody lined up to get the jab was required to provide scrupulously documented informed consent? Yeah me neither.
https://archive.vn/utayl
IN-DEPTH: US Officials Reject Compensation for People Diagnosed With COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries
LOL, DeSantis got married at Disney World:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-ron-desantis-get-married-disney-world-1797238
"Despite the animosity between the Florida governor and Disney, it is indeed true that DeSantis was married at the corporation's park in Florida."
So a lot of people loved Disney befor they started pushing pedofilia.
You are a waste of life. You should slit your wrists
You mean the old Disney that used to exist that new Disney is censoring themselves?
Not seeing the joke here. Most people are against government favoritism, even if it benefits things they enjoy.
What was the joke Mikey?
Mikey is a joke
Fair.
Was that before or after the company started shilling for child genital mutilation, White Mike?
Gotta say, even though DeSantis is a douche, his wife has all the qualities Americans love in a First Lady: young, beautiful, fashionable.
"Boaf sides, see? I'm neutral enough to say his wife is hot."
Sexist monster.
Matt Welch smiles.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-abc-news-admits-it-censored-rfk-jr-interview-false-claims-about-covid-19
In a remarkable video, ABC News presented a pre-recorded interview with presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, telling viewers that parts of what was said had been edited out because he said something about the COVID vaccine that the news network disagrees with.
So if he's such an obvious loon, isn't ABC doing its viewers a disservice by hiding his crazy theories from them? What if they vote for him now, because they think he's reasonable?
Where's Sandra? [Sets up 12-D chess board] This feels like a controlled opposition psy-op. They didn't filter RFK Jr. because they didn't like what he had to say, there's no fucking end or consequence there. They filtered him to draw attention away from Biden and legitimize Kennedy (or both of them) under an umbrella of "See! Democrats get censored too!"
GoreKennedy v.BushDeSantisCalifornia using dogs to sniff children for covid.
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/dehumanizing-california-tests-covid-sniffing-dogs-schoolchildren-cdc
Joe Biden is fucking jealous.
Is Jealous a dog?
What gave someone the idea that Covid-infected people's feet would smell different from normal?
The Science. It is show to gain compliance.
Why not? Cops have shown how dogs will "signal" drugs at just the right time. Why can't public health gestapo use dogs the same way for covid-deniers?
In a bit of good news. Officer recieved 260k after suing for being demoted for not joining union.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/state-trooper-gets-260000-settlement-after-demotion-for-not-joining-police-union
These rules are set up for health reasons. Restaurants and any other commercial food manufacturers follows the same rules. That "freckle-sized chip" could easily be a source of bacteria or mold. That is why stainless steel is used in restaurants. Botulism is awful regardless of the size, location, or profit margin of the food vendor who gave it to you. If you are not serious about ensuring the health of your customers then you should not be in the business. Making exceptions to the rules is not the answer.
Except, as the article says, such harms are simply not occurring in places with the most lax regulations. The evidence that draconian regulation actually prevents harm does not exist.
If making exceptions is not "the answer", why is it done?
"These rules are set up for health reasons."
No, they were set up because unelected bureaucrats need regulations to justify their own existence.
Gee, Molly, haven't seen your lying lefty ass around here recently. How can we miss you if you won't stay away?
Fuck off and die.
Suicide?
No problem with that.
If we stick to libertarian ideals, restaurants and other food producers would get seals of approval from private endorsement companies that publish their standards. Then they would get a sticker to put in the front window of their shop or an icon to put on their packaging.
To a small degree, private seals of approval are something that exist.
So how can we get jurisdictions to accept such private approval as, not an addition to government permission, but instead? Are there places in the world that allow for such bypassing of government requirements?
I know what you might be thinking: USP-NF. No, I'm afraid the satisfaction by a product of a USP-NF monograph doesn't afford the maker any alternative to FDA or state pharmacy board licensure of the manufacturing.
"So how can we get jurisdictions to accept such private approval as, not an addition to government permission, but instead? "
Stop electing Republicans who say they'll abolish regulations but never really do. Elect Libertarians.
I take it you actually mean vote Libertarian and elect Democrats, right Shrike?
Note he didnt say to not vote for democrats.
Because Democrats never say they'll reduce regulation, they will never earn my vote. I *thought* that would go without saying, but then again, Reason commenters by and large lack common sense.
You voted for Biden shrike. Youre in here defending him daily.
This comment has been deleted by its author.
I don't know what a Shrike is (was that a typo maybe?) but I vote Libertarian. Period. The other candidates on the ballot - whether Demopublican or a Republicrat - are irrelevant to me.
"I don’t know what a Shrike is"
Oh wow, imagine not realizing every knows.
Trump ordered all agencies to cut regulations and ordered 2 cuts for every new regulation. Then The Resistance happened.
Many gop governors are cutting regulations such as licensing.
But how can you get enough votes to elect Libertarians? LP has proven it sucks at the one job it's supposed to do: politics. It sucks in activists and makes them irrelevant. At least in something like the Republican Party they can be taken seriously.
I have no idea how to move things like that in a more libertarian, market-oriented direction.
Hadn’t heard of USP-NF before.
Justice Alito Has ‘Good Idea’ Of Who Leaked Dobbs Opinion; Suggests Motive Was Assassination.
Alito said that the Supreme Court “did a good job with the resources that were available,” but said that the evidence was not strong enough for an official designation of guilt.
“Those of us who were thought to be in the majority, thought to have approved my draft opinion, were really targets of assassination,” Alito said. “It was rational for people to believe that they might be able to stop the decision in Dobbs by killing one of us.”
Civilization ends when people stop acting civilized.
Why did American scientific journals help China censor the truth about COVID-19?
Chinese Censorship Is Quietly Rewriting the Covid-19 Story
Lol, just kidding. We all know why.
TLDR - But are they forcing the baker to marry her dog and bake it a cake?
If she did that, they would probably back off.
Third Major American Bank Collapses, Regulators Will Soon Take Company Over: Report
Of course two months earlier Jim Cramer gave it the kiss of death.
I've seen what people have to go through to set up a small business these days. The bar is set very high, keeping people or ordinary means out. If you can't afford a good attorney, compliance consultant, tax advisors, and accountants, you're risking ruin and even imprisonment by daring to start even a tiny business.
But surely that varies between types of business and between jurisdictions. Remember how we read here how difficult it was to start a business in Peru? So there must be better and worse countries, states, and localities for particular businesses. And probably in many cases a jurisdiction that makes it easier to start one type of business than another jurisdiction also makes if harder to start some other type of business than that jurisdiction.
Can you give examples of where, when, and what these businesses were?
The tax shit is federal. I'm sure there are tax differences state by state, but at least some of it is nationwide. And there's plenty of other federal laws that need to be complied with.
The ‘Hurtful’ Idea of Scientific Merit
Ideology now dominates research in the U.S. more pervasively than it did at the Soviet Union’s height.
"...Merit isn’t much in vogue anywhere these days..."
Well, look at the droolin' imbecile we have for POTUS.
Get woke! Science! now means Lysenko-type propaganda designed to support the government narrative. And with mandatory inclusion of bent-gender feelings and indigenous fold lore Science! will soon mean approved doctrine to support state theology.
"California Approves Regulation to Phase Out Diesel Trucks by 2036"
[...]
"New commercial trucks, such as garbage trucks, delivery trucks and other medium and heavy-duty vehicles, would need to convert to electric under the rule, CNBC reported..."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-approves-regulation-to-phase-out-diesel-trucks-by-2036/ar-AA1awUQV
Looking forward to full garbage cans and empty shelves.
If the shelves are empty, the garbage cans will be as well, won't they?
Not if the electric garbage trucks can't empty them.
The homeless will do that, and there'll be no refilling.
Well, they will empty them. On the streets and sidewalks. And since functioning street-cleaning vehicles will be illegal, it'll stay there.
Dunno about garbage trucks but currently about 2% of class 8 full size semi trucks are electric. And they are short haul experimental vehicles. I guarantee you no driver will take a long haul into or out of CA in one of these things. Most owner/ops and small carriers will not go into CA as it is due to their insane regulations and AB5 has put most of the in state drivers out of business. That leaves CA only with mega carrier contract freight. The spot market is dead there. And the mega carriers are unlikely to be anywhere near all EV for many decades. California consumers pay for every penny of the state mandated inefficiencies every time they purchase anything. And it will only get worse no matter how many unicorn farts are harnessed to power the EV utopia envisioned by the evil assholes CA voters have chosen to oppress them.
“Dunno about garbage trucks but currently about 2% of class 8 full size semi trucks are electric…”
And we are to see a 98% increase in this number minus a grid to provide charging, and and minus industry to produce them, in 15 years.
These are not serious people; they are idiots comparable to grease-ball Newsom who assumed re-starting businesses was as simple as making them illegal.
I would be shocked if it was as high as 2%.
I drove a tractor trailer all over the country in '21, and I certainly never saw one. Even in CA.
And actually, lots of small carriers will go into CA. As long as you aren't hauling between two points *in* CA, the ridiculously overbearing emissions crap doesn't apply. I did flatbed work, and we just made sure to either start or end outside of CA.
Now, there are plenty of other reasons that driving a truck in CA sucks, like the lower speed limit, the excessive price of fuel, the utter lack of parking, and so forth, but it's doable.
Actually the *larger* carriers hate it more, because they have their drivers as actual employees, which means they need to put up with all the stupid regulations CA has made for their drivers whose home is in CA.
So now when the power goes out you'll starve too.
Washington Post says voting threatens democracy
Isn't that adorable (and predictable)?
'The Jeff Bezos newspaper titled its entry in the hair-on-fire coverage of a western Michigan County’s politics, “In a thriving Michigan county, a community goes to war with itself.'
Of course when conservatives or just anti-progressives assert themselves democratically, it is war--evil, occupational Nazi pogrom war. When newly-arrived liberals turn a city or county blue, they are freedom-fighters engaged in liberation.
In any case, "uncurated" voting is a constant threat to (D)emocracy and must be outlawed.
Corporations simultaneously release slew of similar messages offering to ‘opt out’ of Mother’s Day
I guess Mother’s Day can be horribly offensive if you've aborted them all or are a non-birthing-person transwoman.
"We know motherhood and all the associated feelings, emotions and memories can be tricky–and even triggering for some people. The last thing we want to do is hit you with celebratory ‘yay mom’ energy that doesn’t match up with your vibe"
Especially if you hate your mom after she questioned your social-Marxist politics and discouraged your gender revisions.
And by "vibe" they mean mental illness.
These laws are local, not national, laws. The voters in each state are free to cause them to be abolished or altered. That's state's rights at work. It sounds like the voters in most states have chosen some restrictions on commercial kitchens in the home - that's democracy at work.
It's legitimate to believe that there should be no food safety laws - buyer beware and consumers, if they care, will come to rely on private certifications (much like UL).
It's legitimate to believe that there should be no mandatory food safety laws but that government offers a certification program that food producers and providers can voluntarily adhere to, pay for, and advertise as some consumers may have more confidence in a government program than a private program.
But, if one believes in mandatory food safety laws, they should be applied uniformly. No exceptions for small businesses (just because fewer people will die due to each individual failure? Really?). Perhaps a "no pet" policy doesn't make sense - in which case Kellogg's should be allowed to have pets in their factory floors if they choose to in order to increase production worker morale.
In this particular case if a no pets in the kitchen rule exists, obviously the government should enforce it else it's meaningless. Perhaps this would be via surprise inspections (including tests for pet DNA etc in the kitchen since obviously the dog would be shooed out of the kitchen) or continuous video monitoring by the government. Either, of course, would cost a lot of money which should be paid by the business, not the taxpayer. Just "taking the manufacturer's word for it" is nonsensical.
"It sounds like the voters in most states have chosen some restrictions on commercial kitchens in the home – that’s democracy at work."
Oh pray tell, when did you ever vote on "restrictions on commercial kitchens in the home"? Because I certainly haven't. Those restrictions are created by unelected bureaucrats who spend sleepless hours dreaming of more and more ways they can run our lives for us.
There’s enabling legislation, but it’s often written vaguely, leaving it up to legislators (or voter initiative, where that’s allowed) to specifically enact loopholes. Either that or to get statutes passed that say something too broad to get consensus for, i.e. abolishing the health dept. But it seems they should be able to get some broader deregulation than these nearly trivial cottage exceptions. I mean, how much political effort can you exert to make a specific statute or regulation saying if you’re doing a food business from home, a pet’s allowed to be in the same building? It’s easier just to operate illegally like the person in this example. It’d cost more in bribes to get permission than is lost by being unable to advertise.
Seriously, I want to know from the authors, what's IJ doing about this in North Carolina? Apparently nothing, because they mentioned lawsuits in other states, so that means they probably have no basis for a suit in that state because government is doing everything exactly legally. Which means they can only beg there for forbearance, which would be too risky because they'd have to bring the lady into the open and she'd possibly wind up like a USSR refusenik.
Too bad she's not in someone else's employ, because then she might have a case for reasonable accommodation under the ADA for a service animal, in this case for emotional support. Maybe she can sell her business to someone who'll hire her on those terms. I don't know if the ADA can supersede health code provisions, but it may be worth a shot.
Found it!:
https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-2010-requirements/
It's going to take a little doing. There's going to have to be someone living in the house who's disabled, and the dog has to be trained to do something related to that disability. The house aside from the kitchen I think would be a "public place". Perhaps the disabled person would have to have a room there as a boarder (could be a family member) and that'd qualify as such a place. I'd have the dog trained for as simple a trick as possible (like picking up a dropped object) and find someone with a matching disability, or have a family member develop that disability; it's not hard to become disabled these days. Just need a doctor to sign off on it, and they're good to go.
that
Aha! See if North Carolina or the locality has such a law, and then Fluffy or whoever can be kept in training forever if the disability turns out to be too hard for her to help with.
Perfect! Who's not on medication for something these days?
Well, there ya go! It's like they made this law specifically for the case of this baker lady and her dog. A place for baking goods for sale is exactly a communal food preparation area.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/north-carolina-laws-on-service-dogs-and-emotional-support-animals.html#:~:text=Under%20North%20Carolina%20law%2C%20if,%2C%20amusement%2C%20or%20resort%2C%20and
I had no clue it'd be this good and easy!
Bingo! Training just needs to be under way. Hula can stretch out graduation as long as she likes. And it can be for emotional support!!
See? The law taketh away and the law giveth back.
"anywhere the public is entitled to go" presumably doesn't include the kitchen, though. They'd have to open it up to everyone. Not sure that's worth it.
The extra bakery kitchen this lady built, the dog is kept out of anyway. And I think “anywhere the public is entitled to go” is conditioned on the purpose for their visit. So for instance you’re not entitled to go into a place of business just to shoot the breeze, you have to be there to do business. So she doesn’t have to open the house to passers-by, only to a prospective resident — of which there won’t be any because the vacancy will have been taken up by the disabled person.
One disability I think it'd be easy to "catch" would be "addiction" to cigarets. These days smoking would be considered an impairment to major life functions because there are so many places you're not allowed to smoke, yet you can be considered an addict for life once you've quit. There's precedent in the ADA for that. So she just needs to say she was a smoker, get her doctor to verify she's quit, but she complains she's still addicted. And training the dog to bark to get her to stop if she lights up.
I voted for the legislators - that's the nature of a representative democracy.
Where I live my vote for legislators is meaningless because the more "progressive" candidate will always win. However, I do vote based on how the candidates, if they have held office before, have voted on bills. If "cottage kitchens" was my hot button, I might well vote against a legislator who voted for under or over regulation of such entities (as it is there are much bigger fish to fry in my state).
However, in my state we (fortunately) do have a mechanism for overriding the legislature by popular vote on a particular bill and it's used successfully from time to time.
According to the article the dog *does* stay out of the kitchen (as it should.) The problem, according to the regulators, seems to be that the dog is in the house at all.
Nobody said regulations have to make sense.
In general how would regulators verify that the dog is trained to stay out of the kitchen and verify that it consistently behaved as trained?
A regulation that isn't enforceable shouldn't be made.
Perhaps the no animals in kitchen doesn't make sense (as I said in my post, one option is to just get rid of all food safety laws). But if it does make sense it sounds like it's impossible to enforce in a home kitchen if there is a dog with access to the kitchen. In a commercial kitchen, an inspector can pretty much show up at any time and inspect the place and see if there are dogs in the kitchen. In a "cottage kitchen" shared with a home with shared interior doors that's pretty impractical. I also suspect that there would be a lot of uproar if an inspector was allowed to show up a such a kitchen at any time without notice and demand immediate (I.e., before the dog could scurry out of the kitchen) access.
I'm okay with eliminating food safety laws, but if they are to exist they need to be enforceable else they are a waste of resources.
You must work for government at some level. At last, big corporate. You take the worst case scenario and make thatthe daily norm, thus "justifying" the no dogs never no how rule.
If she WERE wanting to game the system, simply farm out the dog for a week, squeakey clean the joint, have the inspector nip round to see the dog gone dog gone, and then leave, "assured" everything is as his anal bent would prefer it. Ince he's gone, go find Fido and ring him back. What is to prevent THAT from happening? For that matter, what is toprevent a bird flying in through the open door and dropping a coule of calling cards on the counter, or a cooling batch of cookies?
I have known dozensm perhaps hundres, of people with pets IN THE HOME even in the kitchen, and not one time have I ever heard the slightest hint of a health problem. Children are hundreds of times more likely to give rise to a health issue" if they are anywhere in the home, than would be a dog. What, da gummit is afraid every dog in the neighbourhood will be invading the kitchen, hopping up on the counters, leaving messes on the floor, snaffling samples. emitting fleas and ticks and bad vibes....
good grief WHY do government have to waste hours of time imagining a worst cse possible everyone is gonna die scenario and using THAT other-galaxy potential happening tto go tyrant knot sea.
All this chatter and nobody proposed the correct solution: the dog shall wear a mask and stay six feet from all people involved in cookie production.
Yeah I've got a dog who is a serial shedder. Winter, spring, summer and fall. I wander about daily with limited visibility in a cloud of canine fur. I'm pretty sure dog hair makes up a measurable portion of my daily diet and I credit my dog for all of the fiber and roughage she provides which of course helps keep me regular. If I were to purchase a home made cookie that was conspicuously free of dog hair I might wonder about what kind of home the proprietor was running. I don't trust people who don't have a dog in the house. I, probably unfairly, suspect their judgement and wonder, without evidence, if they may secretly wish to poison me. Needless to say, I steer clear of these establishments.
A libertarian solution works here, too. People will continue to patronize bakeries that don't have dog hair in their cookies. Those that do will get dwindling repeat orders and thankfully go out of business.
One problem with this take is for the whole "people will go elsewhere if they don't like it" to work ... they have to know that these potentially undesirable conditions exist. Free market can't happen (successfully) without an informed consumer.
when Charlie finds a long white dog hair in his bickies, he will know the dog was in or near the kitchen. If he does NOT find such items so located, he will NOT know if there was a dog in the kitchen.
Should he actually FIND such a treasure he then will have options.
What makes me wonder about the whole gummit dweeb position is this: cookies have to be BAKED. That means high heat over some time. Any pathogens cruising about on a dog hair, which subseqently iinvaded the cookie dough would thus be sterilised. So Charlie gets a few nanogrammes of hard protein and chitin. S what? We who refuse to don the face nappie will inhale all manner of "interesting" things as we wander about in our own spaces.
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info visit on this web Site……………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
She should have put in a she shed.
Well, if the doorway "mostly" stays closed and eliminates all risk that's a dog of a different color.
Next someone will be claiming there are teeny-tiny "creatures" you can't see...
Yup. Dang emanations and penumbras. Daynjrus thangs, them.....
There is one solution: permanently blod=ck off the doorway into the home, leaving the only access being that from outside. It would mean going round outsde to get there, but it would permana=ently and completely prevent the dog ever entering the food kitchen. thus the dog can be anywhere in the yard or the house as isolated. Gummit dweeb should be happy.
Are you wondering how to take your business to the next level? Then turn your attention to Inflact's marketing toolkit https://inflact.com/ . With so many tools and features included, you'll have everything you need to improve your business in one place. From growing your audience to analyzing your performance, Inflact's toolkit has got you covered. With the help of this comprehensive toolkit, you'll be able to create content that resonates with your audience and build a strong online presence that drives traffic to your website.
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:craigslist.org+chevrolet+citation
Theory: Companies that know they're about to go under payola Cramer to bump their stock price so they can get out while the business still has capital.
I have been making $728200101005 ???? per week thanks to this easy make money online get rich quick no effort legal loophole scheme. I am so grateful to God for blessing me with this knowledge. ???? He told me to tell the whole world ???? about this.
Just visit http://legal-loophole.scamrichquick.com and sign up for the free easy priceless important cheap moralegal course.
Edit: For some reason, emojis work properly when the scammers use them but when I, a completely legtimate person informing people about this great scheme, use them, they're replaced with ????.
It's ridiculous.
Also, God put scam in the URL so that non-believers wouldn’t get the money. It’s not a scam.
I didn’t think that would work.
Reason probably doesn't want their comments getting cluttered with images.
There’s so many scammers in the comments section, it distracts people from legitimate easy make money online get rich quick legal loophole big money schemes.
Like this one that God's blessed me with: http://legal-loophole.scamrichquick.com
I confirm this can. I made many moneys here...