Sen. Thom Tillis (Republican, North Carolina):
“I don’t have any problem with Starbucks if they choose to opt out of this policy as long as they post a sign that says we don’t require our employees to wash their hands after leaving the restroom. The market will take care of that.”
As we said earlier, if consumers want safe milk they can test it themselves. Why should the government seek to help citizens be safe when we don’t want a nanny protecting us.
If we want to know if where our baby is safe from unvaccinated people, we can just ask every person if they are vaccinated before we bring our baby into the airplane or shopping mall or theme park. This isn’t tricky stuff. We don’t need a nanny state making things safe for society. If we want to protect ourselves, we can do the research and testing ourselves.
It is odd to think some people believe safety rules and regulations are needed when ancestors 20,000 years ago didn’t have any such things and we descended from them. They must have gotten along fine, otherwise we would be here.
I suppose some people might argue a social contract makes sense when we form urban societies where some might want expectations of safety and protection: from thieves, fraudsters, other criminals, unsafe products, unsafe medical practices, abuse by those with authority, unsafe roads, etc.. But that seems crazy. If we need safety we can just do the testing and research ourselves and avoid anything where we haven’t been able to independently access the safety of. Thinking we are society of people interacting with each other and with obligations to society is reckless.
It is much better to live in a nanny free state and view ourselves as individuals with freedom to behave however we want with the understanding we are on our own to protect ourselves from all the others that may not feel like providing safe services or products. It may seem a little daunting at first but I am sure we can figure it out without nannies.
Statue of Chairman Mao, Shanghai, China. Do people that believe in safety regulations want us to model our government on Chairman Mao’s policies?
Of course the Senator’s desire that the freedom of Starbucks be limited and they give notice of what safe practices they avoid is reverting to the nanny state ideas. He is a freshman senator so it isn’t surprising he hasn’t figured out the logical extension of his belief. Over time he should be able to be more logically consistent.
Related: Citizens Don’t Need Nanny State Deciding What Food is Safe to Eat – Nanny Staters Think the Government Should Protect People From Fraud – Nanny State Recalls Beef Shipped from Kansas