Living under the "Nanny State"

When we fail to live responsibly it only makes sense that the government must become more involved in directing and possibly restricting citizen freedoms. Some people bristle when the government takes an active role in the "regulating" the lives of citizens and corporations, calling it the “Nanny State.”

Consider the recent financial irresponsibility evidenced just a few years back here in the United States by many bank managers and Wall Street investors. Their reckless behavior helped to trigger a collapse of the economy. Seems they could have used a nanny to regulate their financial decisions. 

When it comes to our nation’s public health and safety, we must be concerned about our national obesity epidemic, and the corresponding health related complications of diabetes, etc.  No wonder the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, decided it would be helpful to have a ban on large soft drinks.  First Lady Michelle Obama has created a “Let’s Move” campaign to help educate young people and their families about the benefits of exercise and proper nutrition. 

Strong government controls have been essential to protect our natural environment. If we are simply to rely on education and self-restraint reduce carbon emissions, it might never happen to any meaningful extent.  Consider DDT, and the benefit the environment has had since it was banned by the government.

Freedom must be equally yoked with responsibility.  When it is not, we must learn to accept living under a “Nanny State”.