It's For Your Own Good

Seatbelts.  Helmets for motorcycle riders.  Driver's side airbags.  Passenger side airbags.  Infant rear facing car seats.  Toddler forward facing car seats.  Booster seats for children up to 75 pounds.  Side impact airbags.  All these advances made us safer when traveling on the highway.  The government mandated their use for the public safety.  The car companies were forced to make first seatbelts, then an increasing number of airbags, standard equipment on passenger cars and trucks.  Of course this increased the production cost of the vehicles, which is passed on to the buyer.  Most of don't have a problem paying for increased safety for ourselves and our families.  Especially when some of the cost is offset by a decrease in auto insurance rates.  Would the car makers have made these safety improvements without the government mandates?  Yes, they would.  Need an example?  How about antilock brakes.  Most cars today have antilock brakes.  No government was required.   The car companies touted the safety advantages of antilock brakes and the consumers were more than willing to pay the extra cost.  Insurance companies saw the benefits through reduced claims and passed the savings onto the policy holders who had the antilock brake option.  That's the way the free market works.  It might be a little slower than a government requirement, but that's the way our system is supposed to work.

Next example:  motorcycle helmets.  They are required by law in most states.  If they weren't, I believe most riders would wear helmets.  It's just the smart thing to do.  I remember in the early 1990's when the helmet issue was being voted upon in California.  Actor Gary Busey and rock star Billy Idol both did television ads against the law, promoting the freedom of choice.  Ironically, both were involved in serious accidents before the issue came to a vote.  Busey changed sides, but Idol did not.  When asked about why Billy Idol was still against wearing a helmet, Busey said, "he must have suffered more brain damage than I did."  Both could and should have done public service ads on the issue, but the market should be deciding the issue, not government.  And once again, insurance companies give a rate break to riders who wear helmets.  Safety and money are all the incentive needed for most people.  So what was the reasoning for making helmets, airbags, and seatbelts a government issue?  Money, of course.  See, a lot of people involved in accidents don't have health insurance or the means to pay for their own healthcare.  So that puts the burden on all of us.  We have to pay for their treatment.  So, obviously that means the government should require them to act in a responsible manner and wear a seatbelt or a helmet, or buy a car with airbags, and put their children in the appropriate car seat.  And we, the general public, bought the logic.

Next came helmets for bicyclists.  Same logic, adult cyclists aren't smart enough to take precautions, and parents don't care enough about their child's safety to require helments.  So, in many cities, the government steps in to prevent the smart part of the population from paying for the healthcare of the less intelligent. 

Now, with Obamacare, we will be truly paying for the healthcare of everyone.  If your neighbor goes to the hospital, you will be paying for his treatment through government mandated healthcare insurance.  So obviously it is in your best interest to keep your neighbor healthy.  Not just safe from accidents, but healthy.  Some cities are already going through citizen's trash to make sure there are no recyclables in the regular trash.  Is it difficult to take the next step?  City employees checking your trash for KFC bags?  Those double chicken and bacon sandwiches (no bread or lettuce) can't be good for your heart.  The government has to pay if you need a double bypass, so why can't they control your diet?  Again, if you think that's outrageous, just scan the internet for reports on the first lady's campaign against obesity.  No soft drinks in vending machines, first in schools, but now in city buildings.  Fries replaced by carrot sticks in Happy Meals, can the number one combo be far behind?  And do you really need cheese on that quarter pounder?  Does it really need to be a quarter pound?  I know, it's ridiculous.  It'll never happen here.  Or at least in a fiercely independent state like Texas, right?  Can't tell those Texans what to do.  They'll sell deep-fried Dr. Pepper and deep fried Twinkies at the State Fair.  D.C. won't be telling them what they can't eat.  Well, except in third grade, in the Houston area.  And only with really dangerous food like deep fried rat poison, right?   Or Jolly Ranchers.  Yes, I said Jolly Ranchers.  The evil third grader must have brought a truckload of Jolly Ranchers to school and got lectured by her teacher, right?  No, how about a trip to the principal's office and spending recess in detention, writing an essay as punishment for bringing a bag of Jolly Ranchers to school.  Oops, it wasn't a whole bag of Jolly Ranchers.  And the third grader didn't bring the candy to school.  She accepted one, ONE, piece of candy from a friend.

Still feel comfortable about where we are going as a country?  Gotta go, I smell bacon frying.  My neighbors may be calling 911.