How Many Tax Dollars Do We Give To The Government To Lecture Us On How To Live Our Lives?

Share |

You know what bothers me? All these public service announcements that lecture us about drinking or exercising or smoking or buckling our seat belts and all sorts of other things that are paid for by our tax dollars.
I talked about this a bit toward the end of last night’s radio show (download it here). Does anyone ever get curious about how many tax dollars our government spends on lecturing us on how to live our lives? Check out the Ad Council, for instance, which is a national organization that specializes in Public Service Announcements. Here’s a listing of their current campaigns. Click around a bit and see how many of them are sponsored by one government entity or another. That means your tax dollars are paying for them.
Is that appropriate?
It’s not really politically tenable to criticize this sort of thing. Because if you come out against PSA’s about wearing your seatbelt then obviously you want people to die in car crashes. If you come out against PSA’s against gun violence, then obviously you want people to shoot each other (by the way, that gun violence PSA is sponsored by the Department of Justice).
And it’s more than just a national phenomena. I’m sure most of you have seen PSA’s sponsored by your state at one time or another. Here in North Dakota our Attorney General and chief health department bureaucrat are getting ready to combat underage drinking with a fierce barrage of brochures.
Which makes me wonder if what’s at the heart of all this isn’t some pure (if Orwellian) intent to educate the public on how to live the right way but rather simple rent seeking on the part of big ad agencies that undoubtedly make millions, if not billions, off these ads.

Tags: , , ,

«
»

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

8 Responses to “How Many Tax Dollars Do We Give To The Government To Lecture Us On How To Live Our Lives?”

  1. SHADY on March 11th, 2009 at 5:30 am

    I would say yes I understand that wearing a seat belt is safer than not wearing one!
    I’ve had people close to me killed in crashes, and seen lots of other crashes driving over-road.
    But I would rather make my own decision,if I want to be safe or not to! Not have some stinking government making laws and decisions on what I should do with my own ?? life!!!
    Just like trying to make laws that take guns away from me to make me safer! where does it stop??

  2. jimmypop on March 10th, 2009 at 6:31 am

    It’s kinda stupid to pay some one to tell us what to do!!!

    teachers, cops, lawmakers, judges, etc…..

  3. SHADY on March 10th, 2009 at 5:34 am

    It’s kinda stupid to pay some one to tell us what to do!!!

    The big picture is, although I understand accidents are bad things, when your dead you can’t pay the government TAXES!!!
    From the time you make your first dollar that can be taxed, till you hopefully retire, I wonder how much money we pay in total taxes to the government???

    Sounds like the government wants to keep us alive, for they’re benifit!!!

  4. dragon poker on March 10th, 2009 at 7:32 am

    Because if you come out against PSA’s about wearing your seatbelt then obviously you want people to die in car crashes. If you come out against PSA’s against gun violence, then obviously you want people to shoot each other

    If they would stop all this nanny state crap, I would certainly be willing to accept the nominal number of additional dead and injured.
    So yes, I suppose I support additional death over nanny-statism. We all got it coming at some point anyway.

    Someone somewhere got all this stared. It was probably a temperance crusader in the 1800’s. This lead to prohibition, drug prohibition, zero tolerance poicies, warning labels, anti-smoking, anti-twinkies, anti-meat, anti-fur, anti-hunting, anti-gun, anti-just-about-anything perceived as dangerous or perceived by a narrow band of folks as not moral. Usually the people in favor of such things have experience a loss or witnessed a bad even due to some activity or another. They then reasct in an emotional/controling mindset, prepared to “NEVER LET THIS HAPPEN TO ANYONE ELSE!!” Unrealistic and anti-freedom.

    Everyone has the right to be stupid and get killed. They also have the responsibility to do what they can to avoid death to themselves or others. The rest is personal risk vs. reward managment, nothing more.

    Emotion has a low I.Q.

  5. jimmypop on March 10th, 2009 at 8:06 am

    Education and law enforcement aren’t exactly the same thing as preachy “eat how we tell you to eat” commercials.

    but the government bans legal behavior at an ever increasing rate……

  6. sayanything-42 on March 10th, 2009 at 5:48 am

    A single dollar would be too much. What we currently pay is way too much.

  7. bustoff on March 10th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    Ever lose anyone you know in a car crash because they weren’t wearing a seat belt? Ever see a major accident scene where an occupant wasn’t wearing a seat belt?

    Try not to confuse the legitimate dissemination of public safety information with the nanny-state I-know-what’s-best-for-you crowd.

    If people were all smart enough to pick up wisdom on their own, we could shut down all the schools and turn them into bowling alleys. Or maybe liquor stores.

  8. robport on March 10th, 2009 at 6:48 am

    Education and law enforcement aren’t exactly the same thing as preachy “eat how we tell you to eat” commercials.

Create a SAB Readerblog

Help Recall Kent Conrad

Rob's Articles At:

Events

Have an event you'd like listed? Email rob@sayanythingblog.com.

Recent Comments