Life in America

Blech. If I was reading this blog, I probably wouldn't read this post. But when I clicked on a yahoo news link by accident, I found an article which demonstrates my thoughts so well that I can't pass up the opportunity to succinctly state them. [And I did put a LOT of effort into writing this post well.]

It would be best to read this yourself first. But if you hate clicking links of any sort as I do, I'll sum it up:
"Microwave ovens pose a serious safety hazard to young children, a new study of scald burn injuries demonstrates."
"Hot foods or liquids from microwave ovens were the fourth leading cause of scald injuries in children under 5 years old, a review of records from the University of Chicago Burn Center shows."
Studied 140 cases. Now they're calling manufacturers to make a way to prevent little kids from opening microwaves.

My thought is that America is chasing a million improvements like this, and I feel like they all end up with the same fundamental action point: a new requirement for everyone to prevent harm to a few. Bluntly, we're trying to make life dummy-proof and risk-proof.

Many of these improvements, like alcohol thermometers instead of mercury ones, and forklifts that won't move until someone is sitting in the driver's seat, make a lot of sense, and it's a blessing that we have been able to address the accidents that brought about their development. Almost all of these improvements, like getting manufacturers to make microwaves that infants can't open, are valid and right in and of themselves.

But your average joe can't work on his own car anymore because of all the emissions and efficiency and safety systems, and how many cars have been classified as totaled because the airbags went off in a fender bender and it's too expensive to replace them? How many manufacturing jobs are no longer in America due in part to the cost of meeting the extensive and voluminous requirements for environmental and occupational safety? What is the effect on our sense of personal responsibility when "Caution, the beverage you are about to enjoy may be hot" is on every coffee cup lid? What I see from a zoomed-out perspective is a burgeoning structure of abridging the freedom and taxing the resources of the majority to prevent harm to a few. To prevent risk.

I am in an impossible situation here: these improvements, these requirements, do worthy things. It would be evil to stop putting airbags in cars just so they're easier to fix. What?? I would have workers die in accidents so companies can save some money on their Responsible Care departments? What if it was MY kid that got scalded? But along with all the good they do, there is a sum effect of these advances--the good ones, the nit-picky ones, the life-saving ones, the far-fetched ones, all of them--that is to me wearisome, sad, and damaging at a deep and subtle level.

So which would you rather have? More freedom and a healthier nation (in ways you probably don't even realize)?
Or the two (or twenty) friends that would have died by now 100 years ago?

I am content to be where and when I am. But I thought I would express this view I have--this conundrum that vexes me--since it is a frequent presence in my thoughts, and undergirds my view of everything around me.

Personally [and that's an important qualifier], I wouldn't mind trading #2 for #1. Bring on the risk and pain: let's LIVE!

--JPB