 |
| I am shocked, shocked that petty bureaucrats use health and safety regulations as a smoke screen to further their own agendas! |
Wednesday, 24 August 2011
The nanny state isn't so altruistic after all.
4 comments:
Rules for submitting comments:
1. No profanity. I maintain the pretense that this is a family-friendly site.
2. Stay on topic. A bit of straying and off-hand commenting is okay, but hijacking the discussion is right out.
3. No ad hominem attacks. Attack the subject, not the other person on the thread and keep the discussion civil.
4. No spamming or commercial endorsements. These get deleted immediately.
Tip: Beware of putting hyperlinks in your comments–especially at the end. For some reason, Blogger interprets these as spam.
Note: Due to the recent spate of anonymous spamming, registration for comments is now required.
By its very nature, government attracts people who like to boss other people around.
ReplyDeleteIt is the twisted genius of "progressivism" that its dogmas are ones that allow its adherents to behave like Captain Queeg while feeling good about themselves- because everything they do is intended to "make the world a better place".
Some of the more honest ones admit to themselves that this argument is a load of fetid dingo's kidneys, but then they're generally the ones who are perfectly willing to hurt people for the fun of it, too. As seen here.
cheers
eon
Or as a convenient excuse for doing something inconvenient to others. Round about these-'ere parts it's environmentally friendliness. Need to pack your fattysnacks in cheap and flimsy packaging? call it environmentally green. Want to make back the R&D costs on your ridiculous, mercury-filled spiral light bulb... things? declare all others Bad for Polar Bears. Last time I moved I couldn't find any non-green boxes. They lasted slightly less than one full move.
ReplyDeleteNever explain anything malice when stupidity is the more obvious explanation. Good intentions have a nasty tendency to go awry. That is why we need the tripartite division of governance. To prevent overshoots like these.
ReplyDeleteIn Finland, we assume that a consumer knows what s/he is doing and is able to do so responsibly. It is okay to ban smoking on public buildings (smoking is harmful to others) but nobody could here even think about banning flying kite or playing football at school.
It is far more sensible to go after real than imaginary risks.
Ironmistress,
ReplyDeleteYou miss the up side of going after imaginary risks; when those risks don't materialize, you can claim success. Dealing with reals risks is just too darn hard.