Critics of government regulation often disparagingly refer to ‘the nanny state’, particularly in relation to curbs on commodities such as alcohol. Chapman (2013) tackled this head-on with a provocative article about how the nanny state is good for us, for example by mandating smoke alarms and background checks for childcare workers. see Chapman, S. (2013). One hundred and fifty ways the nanny state is good for us. The Conversation. http://theconversation.com/one-hundred-and-fifty-ways-the-nanny-state-is-good-for-us-15587
Not surprisingly, his article triggered a lively and polarised commentary. Think about where you stand on in relation to government regulation and see if you can identify some good arguments that challenge your stance. If advocating for health regulation how would you counter anti-regulation debates?