This time you voted for your tyrants

And now you want to have your cake and eat it.

We’re back in Diktatia today, which has recently become a democracy. The current concern is the overconsumption of sugary treats which is going to affect about 20% of the population. The cabinet agree with Madame Dampsponge that something ought to be done, namely a public campaign against the evils of sugary snacks; information for schools; and the heavy taxation of the profits of the food industry.

But the Minister for Minorities disgreed, believing that there was no absolute connection between sweets and health, and also wondering whether it should be left to individuals to decide.

Which parts of the plan should ministers back?

All of them. The Minister for Minorities probably wasn’t listening. The Health Minister wants to educate the public in general; children (brainwash them while they’re young); and tax sweets and chocolates. And it’s all being done for the benefit of the nation. [Yeah, I think we understood all this this first time. –ed.]

(Of course, for sweets read “tobacco”. [We knew that, too. –ed.])


Full cabinet support.

Once the cabinet is shown all the stats and the chancellor realises how much extra money the proposed Choccy Tax will bring in, the cabinet just can’t vote unanimously enough.

But the campaign rather backfires, with the lardies increasing in size and number, and sweets gaining covert prestige among Diktatia’s young.

Madame Dampsponge is returned to office in the elections and now has some new proposals. The consumption of sweets in public places is banned; they’ll only be sold to adults and be marked with health warnings; and those people who have health problems because of the effects of overconsumption will be made to pay for their treatment.

Is the Reichsführer Secretary of State for Health going too far?

Again, have sweets been banned? No. Although there are restrictions on who can buy sweets, it’s up to the individual.


And support still fills the cabinet.

The cabinet goes along with Madame Dampsponge’s proposals (which do result in a reduction of lardies) and after the next elections, she’s back and fulminating against the sugar addicts. She wants a complete ban on the sale of sweets or even their cooking at home (including chocolate cakes, fudge and pizza).

This time her colleagues are less enthusiastic because this campaign is making the government unpopular.

It’s the old story of a road to a police state being paved with good intentions. There’s a point beyond which measures taken for the good of the public cease to seem good and merely smack of government control. Apart from that, there’s also the consequences of a total ban. The Americans may have had the Prohibition, but it seems to have made alcohol all the more desirable and it made it lucrative for criminals to smuggle the stuff into the country. The continuing war on drugs seems to be ineffectual, and once every so often someone suggests legalising the stuff. The classification of marijuana has bounced around all over the place in the past decade. It seems to have gone from being “Close friend of Public Enemy No. 1” to “Mostly harmless” and back again.

We move on to some number puzzles tomorrow, which probably means that unless you know differential calculus, statistics and logic (all at the same time), you’re probably going to end up scratching your head until you see the answer – and then start scratching your head again.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FH5, Series 37, Week 4

FH5, Series 29, Week 4

FH5, Series 38, preview