[gruez]

>I'm rebutting that with "consumers don't have the information to choose between climate and cost, they can only compare costs".

Fair point, I apologize for the accusation.

>Yes, because "strongly worded environmental claims" is meaningless. There's no accountability that products making these claims outperform their competition at all, and even if they do outperform the competition, a consumer can't know by how much (am I paying 50% more for a product that emits half as much carbon, or only 1% less?). There's virtually no regulation here.

But voluntary labeling seem to work fine with "organic"/"non-GMO" products? I agree that being able to compare two conventional products and choose the least bad option has value, but the lack of a pesticide content label didn't prevent the proliferation of organic products on supermarket shelves.

[throwaway894345]

Organic and non-GMO are USDA regulated labels. Corporations will punish them for fraudulent use of the label. https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/labeling