If the trends continue in some areas, it might be appropriate to inscribe "Because We Know Better" above the entrance of many government agencies.
From light bulbs to toilets, transfats to salt, fast food to motorcycle helmets, we see more and more governmental intrusion into what traditionally has been the decision of the individual. The justification remains the same: If the individual behaves irresponsibly (and that can be loosely defined), then society will have to foot the bill. Government, not markets, should determine the lightbulbs and toilets that are available. If that mindset begins to grow, how far away are we from government-mandated morning exercise programs or weekly phone calls from government nurses to see how our diets are going? If that sounds alarmist, consider how today's restrictions would have sounded over the top to the average citizen in the 1940s.
This is not a plea for anarchy. Each side in the debate needs to consider just where government should jump in and where it should back off, but if individual liberty is valued, the greater burden should rest on those who would restrict it. Unlike churches and corporations, government's ultimate power is the power to physically coerce. That is why it is all the more important to rein it in even in areas where certain forms of behavior may make sense, such as the wearing of motorcycle helmets.
I believe that, along with the restrictions on freedom, these nanny state approaches ultimately produce a passive and wimpish society. The individual defers more and more relatively minor decisions to the regulators and, in doing so, becomes less of a person and more of a pliable object.
Alexis de Tocqueville warned of a soft tyranny where a gentle and well-meaning government took away more and more rights. Read the newspapers and watch the trends. The soft tyranny of the future will not wear jackboots. Its front-line practitioners will be counselors, teachers, environmental inspectors, bureaucrats, and nurses.
"It is coercion, not freedom, which must be justified." -Jeffrey R. Snyder
ReplyDeleteDavid,
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting how often freedom is placed on the defensive.
Michael
When I see that precious term "nanny state" I know what's coming next. Too many hours at the CATO fountain. Of the many possible way we might not agree, Michael, health care and SS reforms may be at the top of the list. "Nanny state" and "entitlements" are buzzwords meaning much the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI submit for your consideration one reading and two soundbites.
The reading is The History and Principles of Managed Competition by Alain Enthoven (1993, 25 pgs pdf)
http://bit.ly/cuNI5W
Two soundbites, original with me:
►Regarding what doctors and other medical professionals earn there is in important difference between profits and professional compensation. Both are accounting terms but they appear on opposite sides of any balance sheet.
Wages and profits are inverse; when compensation increases, corporate profits decline.
►SOCIAL Security is a social safety net for those who for whatever reason do not work. INDIVIDUAL SECURITY arrangements (IRAs, 401k's, Keoughs, and other investment vehicles both tax advantaged and not) are in addition to, not instead of, Social Security.
The reason that at any given time those working are taxed to support those who do not is inflation, the economic enemy of all investment schemes, public or private, tax advantaged or not.
But I still love ya.
I know there is a lot of space between Social Security and PPACA at one end, and toilets and light bulbs at the other, but both emanate from the same place.
ReplyDeleteOn two separate occasions I shopped for a replacement stem for a water faucet and was amazed that there is to this day no industry standard. In both cases the retailer had a cabinet with over a hundred choices, all overpriced.
Working in the food business in the 70's I looked for a standard floor plan for a walk-in cooler that would be acceptable in all locations. In Florida floor drains were mandatory so that in case of flooding they could be cleaned properly, but in New Jersey they were forbidden as "harborage" for vermin such as bugs and/or rodents. Go figure.
Managed competition and standardization would have led to better outcomes in both cases. At what point does government cross the line to become a Nanny State?
John,
ReplyDeleteI think you are painting with a very broad brush and the "too many hours at the CATO fountain" implies that I can't think for myself. I believe the burden should be on those who favor such regulations to state just where they should end. And no, "nanny state" and "entitlements" are not the same thing.
Michael
You're right. And I know you are, if nothing else, a very broad-minded man who thinks for himself. Yours is one of the most balanced websites on the Internet.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure which of us struck a nerve in the other. For my part, I apologize. I'll put away my brush and do better next time.
Thanks, John.
ReplyDeleteI'm honored that you read this site and I always appreciate your comments.
Michael