One of my first introductions to Massachusetts busybodyism came from talk-radio host Jerry Williams, who destroyed his vocal chords railing against a mandatory seat-belt law for the Bay State. Williams killed the Dukakoid measure, but as with so many do-gooder initiatives it returned like Jason. Now comes word from John Adams, professor emeritus at University College in London, that seat belts save some lives but make life on the road riskier for others. As Time.com puts it, the "reality" with safety belts is "messier and more complicated than" you might think. "Adams first began to look at the numbers more than 25 years ago. What he found was that contrary to conventional wisdom, mandating the use of seat belts in 18 countries resulted in either no change or actually a net increase in road accident deaths."

Yeah, its true. I used to never wear a seat belt when I was drinking and driving with my buddies. I felt like it kept me honest and I wouldn't drive as recklessly. Plus, if I got in an accident I figured I wouldn't wanna live anyway ;)... but what did I know I was only 16.

r.c.

This is the result of a full on assault initiative by the insurance companies to finally push the legislature to enact the 'mandatory' component of this law. Strictly a revenue generator for the State and for the Insurance industry in the Republic.

Certainly not getting any easier to live here. Pretty soon, state will be filled with two classes: wealthy tax payers and poor (read: lazy) tax sponges.

And we're just a wee bit south of the "Live Free or Die" state. Go figure?!

Asdf, your intimation that poor people are lazy makes me sick. You're a bigot. My girldfriend had to assume custody of her three adolescent brothers when she was 21. She depended on welfare and charity to feed them while she finished her last year of college. The situation was rectified when she graduated and could work. She's a hero. I hope we meet in a bar someday so that I can ask you to step outside. Actually, I hope I never meet you.

He didn't say poor people were lazy. That your sister is no longer reliant on welfare illustrates that she is not, in fact a "tax sponge", thus disqualifying her from his categorization.

Poor people don't stay poor for very long, if they choose not to be.

Hey Chuckles, the real life situation you explain is the exception to the rule and I certainly wouldn't begrudge anybody who's in a legitimate financial bind for taking advantage of our way generous system. But, for every one person who’s caught in the social scenario you mention, there are ten who are people who are perfectly able to work but instead get on the system and stay on the system and are who are just lazy b’stards.

Really don’t need to explain myself but I’ll say that I don't have disdain for the legitimately destitute. I do disdain people who revel in being poor and who don't do anything to help themselves out of it and who would rather live by depending on the public programs pushed upon us by our political class.

I wasn’t always the rich, handsome socialite that I now am and have known some poor times in my life. But, I’ve worked to rise above and have the greatest respect for people who do the same. However, as we live in a victim rich society, there are fewer and fewer who choose to not blame somebody else and want to make it on their own.

By the way, that bar thing was really scary.

asdf, I am sure you weren't pointing the figners at everyone who is on aid. Some really need it. While many, many abuse these systems, I assure you that most of us in the disabled community LOATHE being disabled. I hate what disability has brought me in my life, financially. This is why this is my fourth time on this crappy system. I keep trying to go back and be productive, but the last time the doc said, "retire or die." I am still trying to make money by bowling professionally, but with my body, that is not easy. I long for the day I can mail back the whopping $700 per month I am allotted for shelter, medicine, etc. and stand on my own.

I invite you to go to my website, and under the "SpongeOsophy" tab read the "hand out" essay, explaining why government programs are a bad thing.

I submitted to our leaders that they return the disability system to the states, where eventually people might learn to buy disability insurance, etc.

Be well,

Sponge

"But, for every one person who’s caught in the social scenario you mention, there are ten who are people who are perfectly able to work but instead get on the system and stay on the system and are who are just lazy b’stards." -asdf

where did you get these numbers? cite your source.

r.c.

Did you know that over 75% of statistics that people cite in conversation are made up?

Its true.

Charles Stotler I see your pasion, however could you win a fight with asdf? And asdf are you tough at all? You seem to be intelligent, but can you fight, have you won fights in the past?
P.S. rich or poor Sponge Daddy is one of the best
this site has to offer.

My point was really that more nanny government programs legislated in Massachusetts, such as the mandatory seat belt law, are less about public safety and more about extracting more money from our wallets. The state uses the money to support a top heavy, self perpetuating government with expensive cradle to grave benefits and those lifetime benefits (for everybody but the people paying for them) are making it very financially difficult to live here in the Republic.

As a result of the social largess, many people live their whole lives utilizing those easy to attain benefits and many more come here to take advantage (whether they belong in our country or not).

I suppose this should be expected when you have a state government run by socialist Democrats.

I like to consider myself a compassionate conservative, Sponge.

Good job!