Nanny state and PR

I read today that the Goverment is going to spend £285M next year to tell us what to do and/or how much we should love their policies

I think this is an abuse of public money. Why should any government spend taxpayers’ money to influence our thinking on party policies?

And then there are the ads for healthy eating, stopping smoking and/or drinking. What business is it of any government to tell its citizens what to eat, drink or smoke? The anti-smoking laws have been ruinous for the pub trade. If you don’t believe me, look at the figures for pub closures from the first winter of the ban onwards. The plain truth is the non-smokers never came out to play. We’ve also lost significant tax revenues from people quitting. For the remaining 20% of smokers the tax take is approximately £11bn per year and costs of treating any diseases are £3.5-5bn pa. Not to mention premature deaths reducing pension and geriatric care bills.

I believe we all have the right to eat what we wish, drink as much as we like and smoke in peace and quiet. Government is about the economy, defence and as few laws as possible. Nanny should be taken out and buried without ceremony.


About ReidIvinsMedia

After working for many years in Higher Education I've decided to drop out and join the real world. Here I blog about my interests which include education, politics, backpacking, poker, photography and real ale.
This entry was posted in Finance, Morals, Philosophy, Politics, Society and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Nanny state and PR

  1. Abandon TV says:

    “…I think this is an abuse of public money….”

    There is no such thing as ‘public money’. There is your money (money which you control) and money belonging to other people (money which they control). If they control a bunch of money it can’t possibly belong to you, even if it once did.

    Is taxation a voluntary transaction?

    No. If you refuse to pay the government will eventually send round men dressed in matching blue costumes to kidnap you and put you in a cage.

    Is there any kind of legally binding two-way contract between you and the government with respect to tax money and how it should be spent?


    Imagine if I stole money off you by force – you’d probably ask for it back, right?

    But WHAT IF I could persuade you that the money still belonged to you, and that I was just ‘helping you to spend it’? This is in fact what governments do. They steal half our wages by force and then say, “it’s OK no theft has taken place, the money still belongs to you really – even though we now control it”

    They also (metaphorically) buy us the occasional ice cream with some of the money which they stole from us.

    “Hey, FREE ice cream – thanks!” is what we say 😉

    So why do we let government get away with such nonsense?

    It’s probably got something to do with the fact that they control ‘education’ and start feeding our brains with propaganda from about age four.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s