The Nanny State

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,600
7,090
113
Washington DC
Here's another example of the Nanny State violating the civil and property rights of private enterprise.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Inspectors showed up at a hospice agency here in March 2012, and then issued what amounted to a 161-page catalogue of end-of-life neglect.
A woman dying of liver cancer, battling nausea and breathing difficulties, waited weeks for someone to drain fluid from her swelling abdomen and died still waiting, according to records. Another cancer patient had a feeding tube that oozed pus where it pierced his skin and did not actually reach his stomach. He had received no fluids from it for five days, emergency room doctors said. At the same time, a patient complaining about chest pain waited two days for a recorded visit and eventually was taken to a emergency room and diagnosed with pleurisy.
In all, the state health inspectors found treatment problems in the records for nine of 14 patients from early 2012.
Is that hospice safe? Infrequent inspections mean it may be impossible to know. - The Washington Post

The warrantless invasion and search of these fine facilities violates the Bill of Rights! Corporations are people too!
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I know you're being facetious but many people have an idiotic notion of what actually constitutes a "Nanny State", usually one that is predicated upon whether they are being directly affected by whatever 'intrusion' is being undertaken and just basically not giving a damn about anything or anyone else.

Anyway, inspections only every 6 six years of facilities in which people likely only spend 3 months or less of their final days are grossly inadequate.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Nanny state is a term that I'm sure was rooted in legitimate concern but is now more of a hyperbolic attack.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
I just think it's important to differentiate where we want more top down control and more personal freedom on a case by case basis.

It's sort of the same way I feel about the ongoing discussion of capitalism 'vs' socialism.

There are appropriate situations for both ideologies.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
It's a balancing act to be sure. Where the problems arise is when one 'bent' begins to envelope the other and alter the overall equation.

Society is built around a hybrid of the two, and time has morphed this arrangement into a situation where one relies on the other, yet can not exist without the other.

You can imagine that as the balance deteriorates, the entire system begins to fail and everyone ends up losing
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
We should have the fast-food chains bid on school lunch programs.

Wheat and water to all! Go Michelle!

 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
Yeah, how dare she try to get kids to eat better!

lmao... this is not about making kids eat better. It is about power and control. It is a failed program. AND if you do not comply and submit you will not get cash.

Trying to get kids to eat better... ROFL.
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
Nanny state is a term that I'm sure was rooted in legitimate concern but is now more of a hyperbolic attack.

The logical conlcusion of govcernment intrusion in the US wouldn't be the Nanny State anyway, but the Daddy state, chracterized by things like unlimited surveillance and militarization of domestic police forces. More auhtoritarian.

Canada would be more Nanny State--Everything that is Not Mandatory Is Forbidden!
 

El Barto

les fesses a l'aire
Feb 11, 2007
5,959
66
48
Quebec
nanny state
n. Informal
A government perceived as having excessive interest in or control over the welfare of its citizens, especially in the enforcement of extensive public health and safety regulations.

nanny state
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a government that makes decisions for people that they might otherwise make for themselves, esp those relating to private and personal behaviour.