Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Taco Bell Lawsuit - That Ain't Beef


Dan T.

Recommended Posts

Ok, this is what I don't get:

They're saying Taco Bell's "beef" has "less than 35% real beef"...so that apparently means that if it DID have 35% real beef then everyone on this thread would be fine with it? What if TB's beef has 33% real beef...would having 67% "of that stuff" come from something other than a cow be THAT much worse than 65% of it come from elsewhere? lol...

It's still nasty, but come on, if you have about 1/3 of a product that is actually what you claim it is, should you really be able to claim that it's still beef? I don't know what the regulations are, but if it's 35% then it needs to be higher. I'd say 51%+. Maybe they think as long as it's 35% then it's more beef than anything else.

---------- Post added January-25th-2011 at 08:33 PM ----------

Soylent Green is people!

LOL!! :ols: That would explain the guacamole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's still nasty, but come on, if you have about 1/3 of a product that is actually what you claim it is, should you really be able to claim that it's still beef? I don't know what the regulations are, but if it's 35% then it needs to be higher. I'd say 51%+. Maybe they think as long as it's 35% then it's more beef than anything else.

That's why I asked what the actual percentage is supposed to be...because if the US Dept of Agriculture said 35% real beef is needed in order to legally be called "beef", and Taco Bell's "beef" only had 33%, who the eff cares lol :ols:...yes, technically they shouldn't be calling it "beef", but the main complaint seems to be that TB's beef percentage was significantly lower than what the Dept of Agriculture allows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, keep in mind that this report has TB's beef percentage as 36% instead of "less than 35%" like the article in the OP mentions...but I seriously doubt anyone would think that 40% real beef and 36% real beef is some significant difference. It would obviously mean that TB either needs to re-label their ingredient or up the real beef by 4%, but I don't think the quality of the food is going to increase substantially if that 4% is added in. If 35% is too low, then so is 40%.

39% isn't too much lower than 40%

38% isn't too much lower than 39%

37% isn't too much lower than 38%

36% isn't too much lower than 37%

35% isn't too much lower than 36%

34% isn't too much lower than 35%

33% isn't too much lower than 34%

32% isn't too much lower than 33%

31% isn't too much lower than 32%

30% isn't too much lower than 31%

29% isn't too much lower than 30%

28% isn't too much lower than 29%

27% isn't too much lower than 28%

26% isn't too much lower than 27%

25% isn't too much lower than 26%

24% isn't too much lower than 25%

23% isn't too much lower than 24%

......22 more times

1% isn't too much lower than 2%

1% should be able to be called "meat taco filling". Your logic allows for incrimentalism.

Oh, and soy beans would qualify as extenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39% isn't too much lower than 40%

38% isn't too much lower than 39%

37% isn't too much lower than 38%

36% isn't too much lower than 37%

35% isn't too much lower than 36%

34% isn't too much lower than 35%

33% isn't too much lower than 34%

32% isn't too much lower than 33%

31% isn't too much lower than 32%

30% isn't too much lower than 31%

29% isn't too much lower than 30%

28% isn't too much lower than 29%

27% isn't too much lower than 28%

26% isn't too much lower than 27%

25% isn't too much lower than 26%

24% isn't too much lower than 25%

23% isn't too much lower than 24%

......22 more times

1% isn't too much lower than 2%

1% should be able to be called "meat taco filling". Your logic allows for incrimentalism.

Oh, and soy beans would qualify as extenders.

HUH? lol :ols:...At what point did I say that the USDA should lower its standards? My comment was on the people claiming that TB's beef percentage was an unacceptably low amount, then pointing out that if 36% is way too low, then 40% should be as well. If anything, my post promotes the RAISING of the USDA standard, not lowering it.

Try again, but put a little more thought into it next time. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HUH? lol :ols:...At what point did I say that the USDA should lower its standards? My comment was on the people claiming that TB's beef percentage was an unacceptably low amount, then pointing out that if 36% is way too low, then 40% should be as well. If anything, my post promotes the RAISING of the USDA standard, not lowering it.

Try again, but put a little more thought into it next time. :thumbsup:

And yet your argument still allows for incrimentalism, just because you think it should be higher doesn't stop someone from saying..."Meh it's only 4% lower, what's the big deal?"

BTW, being a jerk doesn't help your cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, as for this:

Your logic allows for incrimentalism.

Maybe you completely skipped over where I said the following:

"It would obviously mean that TB either needs to re-label their ingredient or up the real beef by 4%..."

To spell it out in crayon, that means I was suggesting that TB should NOT be allowed to call its product "meat filling" or "beef" if it keeps its percentages as-is. So how that logic "allows" for incrimentalism is beyond me. I just think that claiming 36% real beef is disgustingly low but 40% is A-OK is asinine.

---------- Post added January-25th-2011 at 05:57 PM ----------

And yet your argument still allows for incrimentalism, just because you think it should be higher doesn't stop someone from saying..."Meh it's only 4% lower, what's the big deal?"

BTW, being a jerk doesn't help your cause.

Read above. And I tend to be a "jerk" towards those who don't really bother to process my posts in an intelligent fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he was being a jerk but I kinda agree with him. Standards are too slow.

He even admitted he was being a jerk.

I also believe that the standards are too low, but this leads to incrimentalism. That's the part I was objecting to, but maybe someone just needs a nap.

but I seriously doubt anyone would think that 40% real beef and 36% real beef is some significant difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He even admitted he was being a jerk.

I put the word "jerk" in quotation marks for a reason...mainly, that it's YOUR word for how I was, not mine.

I also believe that the standards are too low, but this leads to incrimentalism. That's the part I was objecting to, but maybe someone just needs a nap.

WHAT leads to incrimentalism? lol :ols:...I said the standards are too low...you said the standards are too low...the other guy said the standards are too low...but apparently it's only when I say it that it leads to incrimentalism? Wtf? lol...Maybe it's because I pointed out the stupidity of being up in arms about 36% real beef while being OK with 40% real beef? I'm thinkin' that confused you more than a little...

---------- Post added January-25th-2011 at 06:14 PM ----------

He even admitted he was being a jerk.

I also believe that the standards are too low, but this leads to incrimentalism. That's the part I was objecting to, but maybe someone just needs a nap.

By the way, try and keep my words in context when you quote from my post. Here's the quote you just gave from me within context of what I was saying:

".but I seriously doubt anyone would think that 40% real beef and 36% real beef is some significant difference. It would obviously mean that TB either needs to re-label their ingredient or up the real beef by 4%, but I don't think the quality of the food is going to increase substantially if that 4% is added in. If 35% is too low, then so is 40%."

If quoting out of context is the only thing you have left in your debating arsenal, then you've already lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you both have a point. 36% is close to 40%, but, to asburys point, the standards are there for a reason.

yes, 40% is a disgustingly low standard, but asburys point is, standards must be followed, or it all goes to hell (via incrementallism). if they cant even adhere to that low standard, they need to find another business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you both have a point. 36% is close to 40%, but, to asburys point, the standards are there for a reason.

Exactly, the standard is there, it's not open for someone to say, "oh well shoot 36% isn't that far off so let's just call it even." I'm for raising the standard to 51%, and if someone says, "well you know 47% isn't that far off" then I'll yell about that too. You don't get to blur the standard by saying "close enough so people shouldn't get upset" and then claim something other than incrimentalism.

yes, 40% is a disgustingly low standard, but asburys point is, standards must be followed, or it all goes to hell (via incrementallism). if they cant even adhere to that low standard, they need to find another business.

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First Google hit on "Taco Bell ingredients" = http://www.tacobell.com/nutrition/ingredientstatement

Scroll down for a complete ingredient list for their seasoned ground beef. It wasn't hard to find.

They fill a niche. Cheap food fast. It's very simple...if they used all real ground beef, they could not charge $.99 for all those menu items.

I want to know what ingredients are in "Spices"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cheesy gordita crunch ftw!

but I'm spoiled because there's a legit taqueria right down the road from me, exactly like the tacos in Mexico, so I don't go the bell often

What have the tacos you've had in Mexico been like?

The one's I've had are just flour or corn tortillas, chopped up steak/beef, and spicy brown chipotle sauce. I told my friend down there about Taco Bell and he said "Sour cream on tacos? Yuck!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ambulance chasers are getting high tech these days, testing "meat" and all. I wonder how their meetings go...I hope TB crushes them in court and countersues.

Not a legal expert, but if the product contains beef, and it does, on what grounds are they claiming that TB is misleading the public?

I was commenting about how class action lawsuits really don't benefit the victims of said infraction, but post away on your love of big business essentially committing some type of fraud. Class action lawsuits no matter how ass backwards they are at least produce some sort of result in bringing things like this to light, but fall short of actually providing the victims with a winning that is significant in any form. My grandfather got taken advantage of by a business and was part of a class action. He didnt get anywhere near what he lost, but at least the problems were brought to light and the company call no longer conduct their dealings in similar fashion. However please go ahead and continue to make black and white conclusions about how the world works. BUT THE AMBULANCE CHASERS!!11!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...