Fur will fly. Truth will be turned upside down. Over-reactions by deputy mayors and councillors will be the order of the day.
And, if you’re like me, willing to carry your own water in a thermos and squeeze your own oranges if you prefer juice, your blood will boil at some of the things people say.
For example, Councillor Paul Van Meerbergen declared [see entire newspaper article]:
“It’s one more brick in the construction of a nanny state.”
As I said yesterday, the derogatory term generally refers to excessive state controls.
Here’s more:
It can refer to “consumer protectionism that removes or controls otherwise free choices such as helmet laws, anti-smoking laws and other laws regarding personal choices (some of which include a social cost, as in increased health-care costs to society at large)” [Wikipedia online]
In my opinion, many would agree that some restrictions save lives and untold personal and economic costs (seat-belt, helmet, anti-smoking, highway speed laws etc.) and we’re still hundreds of years away from becoming a nanny state.
We’ll need an excessive number of bricks put in place before present and future generations are adequately protected from the social and environmental costs related to excessive lifestyle choices - made possible by an unsustainable economy fueled by petroleum.
Van Meerbergen also predicted Londoners won’t let their kids drink from public fountains that are exposed to things as vile as urine and added, “Most families are not going to encourage their children to lap up water from public fountains.”
His words made me wonder, what’s more excessive?
The controls or the councillor?
In conclusion, though there will be many more statements made in support of bottled water that will make me feel more like a geezer, give me fever or make my blood boil I will hold my tongue (in this space) until we’ve lived with the ban for one year.
Hold my tongue?
You heard it here first.
[Read post below for more context]
.
No comments:
Post a Comment