You raise a valid point there, in that they are able to pay the workers lower wages, but it seems like that'd go against your assertion that it'd be cheaper to produce it locally. The thing is, it's cheaper to do it abroad, that's why a lot of industries are moving to other countries. Agricultural is no different.

Came here only to have fun reading posts against capitalism...
...wasn't disappointed.

Huh okay... Fun as in you hate capitalism and you are glad that some people criticize it and take a swing at it?

Or Fun as in, capitalism is your religion and you think it's perfect and therefore you are having fun at people trying to criticize this beautiful perfection and in your opinion those poor little critics are failing miserably?

Cause your post is ambiguous and could be interpreted one way or the other.

Health code violations, probably.

Not American but I had this similar discussion with a lawyer friend who is and he stated the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Act doesn't override state law, it actually explicitly states you need to be compliant with state laws as well. It also has exceptions for gross negligence which he says knowingly providing goods passed their expiry date would be a very strong argument to take to court to invalidate the protection of Good Samaritan Food Act as that could easily be argued as gross negligence.

Here in Australia many of the large retailers already donate excess food to local charities.

From my experience working at a supermarket, all the stuff (emphasis on all) that was thrown was already inedible. Eggs, dairy products, perishable food, etc., had to be stored back and then the distributors would come for them later. Nothing went away without ever being offered first. Also, as pokoko states, it's reasonable to think a few chains might send some supplies as donatios, it's all part of social responsability, and enterprises clearly benefit from this.

I remember reading it's a FDA regulations thing. Still seems wrong, if you ask me.