”. . .until you really show that this is a fundamental impingement on human welfare. . .” I think this is a well done statement of a general principle, and I agree. Further, I expect that it would, at some point, be right for government to pay for avoiding disasters that fit this rule and can’t be dealt with any other way. In such cases, it would be wrong to forget that life is the standard. For example, the gov now tries to find and track large astroids which have the potential of doing serious damage to human life. It may not be long before private businesses have a financial interest in tracking these things, but, still, if it takes gov spending to avoid a collision, I think it would be the right thing to do. Surely, people would rise to a voluntary non-gov emergency effort, but I’m skeptical that it would be enough. I’d be afraid of opening a Pandora’s Box, but I don’t see anything else that would achieve life as a result.
2 Comments to “Nanny State Snack Attack”
”. . .until you really show that this is a fundamental impingement on human welfare. . .” I think this is a well done statement of a general principle, and I agree. Further, I expect that it would, at some point, be right for government to pay for avoiding disasters that fit this rule and can’t be dealt with any other way. In such cases, it would be wrong to forget that life is the standard. For example, the gov now tries to find and track large astroids which have the potential of doing serious damage to human life. It may not be long before private businesses have a financial interest in tracking these things, but, still, if it takes gov spending to avoid a collision, I think it would be the right thing to do. Surely, people would rise to a voluntary non-gov emergency effort, but I’m skeptical that it would be enough. I’d be afraid of opening a Pandora’s Box, but I don’t see anything else that would achieve life as a result.