It is the beginning of a new day in America. Unfortunately, like a Jewish holiday, we are starting our day with the onset of darkness. While it might be naïve to advocate the workers controlling the means of production, it is suicidal to advocate that control be given to government workers. The logic seems to be that if there is a problem in the land then why not surrender complete control to the people who possess the efficiency to run the post-office and the clarity to write the tax code (but not the honesty to follow it).
When Mayor Bloomberg decided to take on Big (Cooking) Oil and make “trans-fats” illegal, I considered marketing a line of fashionable t-shirts emblazoned with the phrase “Keep Your Laws Off My Snack Food!” Before you dismiss my culinary outrage as the ravings of a lipid-addled man with a six-figure blood cholesterol level, consider: once upon a time a great war began because a certain British monarch would not keep his hands off colonists’ snack food. Then the snack food was tea, but the principle is the same. Just like those heroic Bostonians of old, I want the government out of my face and out of whatever I want to put into my face.
Or, if government wants to be the nanny and tell me what to eat and what car I can drive and who I can and cannot assault with deadly force, then I think that government should take up other household duties. I want a government that will “do windows,” synecdochically speaking.
Yes, my friends, here for the betterment of the community is my multi-step plan for the implementation of nationalized housekeeping.
First, we will need to vote into office a bunch of politicians who are impervious to shame, willing to make outrageous (and verifiably false) statements publicly, and who will respond to any attempt at correction with vituperative (and verifiably false) accusations against the corrector. Hmm… OK. We got that one covered.
Second, we will need a news media whose ignorance and laziness is only surpassed by their pandering bias in favor of leftist government… Two for two.
Last, we will need a scientific community that is more interested in advancing doctrine that secures their funding and prominence than in actually doing scientific research. I mean, these folks will have to be willing to betray every tenet of scientific method and assume the position of thought-police willing to destroy the career of any who question their dogma….
Well that all seems to be in order. So this is my plan for Universal Housekeeping:
Step One: Create the Problem! (aka Blather, Wince, Repeat)
A primetime news show does a scare piece about “toxic” household cleansers that are “destroying the Earth.” Many pictures of cuddly animals dying, and plenty of “experts” advocating the use of “green” substitute cleansers. (Accuracy is, of course, optional, and if any actually occurred that would be newsworthy as far as environmental reportage goes.)
The media picks up on the cleanser scare. Elected officials start talking about the safety of “our” water. The market is flooded with “Green Clean” products: a tenth as effective and only ten times more expensive! (Of course, “Green Clean” cleansers turn out to be several times more toxic than their “non-green” equivalents, but this information is treated like the toxic mercury levels in compact florescent bulbs and is never mentioned.)
Step Two: A Tax is the Best Defense!
Media magnates and Congressmen invest heavily in “Green Clean” products, but sales are sluggish. So in the name of “environmentalism” (AKA the last refuge of a scoundrel), a hefty tax is put on “non-green” household cleaning products.
The revenue from this tax is used to subsidize private “Green Clean” manufacturers who then get huge tax-payer funded bonuses, remodel their corporate bathrooms, and enjoy new corporate jets without fear of being called greedy – since they are “saving the planet.”
The new taxes on traditional household cleansers (i.e., those that work) become so prohibitively expensive that housecleaning services gain popularity to defray the high costs of individual detergent ownership. People join HMOs (Housekeeping Management Organizations) to keep costs of housecleaning down.
The increase of use of housecleaning services invites more taxation and regulation of the “dangerous” and “irresponsible” housecleaning industry. Costs to be a member of an HMO increases accordingly. Soon lower income households can neither afford effective cleansers or HMO memberships.
Step Three: Find a Victim!
To “help” those suffering from the “cleanser gap,” the government unloads excess supply of “Green Clean” products on lower income individuals at further taxpayer expense. These cleansers are so ineffective that people buy grey-market industrial cleansers illegally from HMO workers. These chemicals are sold in inferior packaging and are handled irresponsibly by a handful of the millions of people buying them. Three children drink the pretty colored liquids and die.
Step Four: Now accepting bids for “Housekeeping Czar!”
The story of the three innocent children who were killed by “Big Clean” is picked up by every news outlet. A high-profile Senator with presidential aspirations declares that the only way to save lives and provide affordable housecleaning is to create a National Housecleaning Service (NHS). Anyone who points out the misguided “science” and policy decisions that have led to this ridiculous situation is accused of wanting to kill children and destroy the Earth.
So in order to create jobs, save the Earth and the Children, government housekeepers become the only people who can legally possess or use any type of household cleansers. Each person is scheduled to have their house cleaned once a month by a Federal housekeeper at no costs (except for the $1,000 an hour net cost paid for by “patriotic” taxpayers.)
So once every few months your house gets cleaned and a few DVD’s go missing … and everybody’s happy, right?
Until next time, I’ll be cleaning my house myself …it may take that long.
