Fellow Mainers: Do You Feel That Maine Is Becoming A "Nanny State?" (Augusta: houses, neighborhood)

[sr1234]

Originally Posted by island mermaid

I am from Pa. Our state problem is that Philly and the eastern counties control the state government. If we could just get NY to annex those counties, then life would be great.

[Maine Writer]

Originally Posted by sr1234

If Mainers don't like the Nanny state, then why do you keep voting these types to office? From an outsiders point of view, it seems as though you like high taxes and government telling you what to do.

You've never been here, have you?

[sr1234]

Originally Posted by Maine Writer

You've never been here, have you?

Yes I have. I used to live in New England.

[island mermaid]

Originally Posted by sr1234

Yes I have. I used to live in New England.

Well I guess then THAT certainly make you an authority then.

By the looks of your other posts around CD, there aren't too many place's you're real happy with lately.

Thanks for stopping by.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by sr1234

If Mainers don't like the Nanny state, then why do you keep voting these types to office? From an outsiders point of view, it seems as though you like high taxes and government telling you what to do.

Not all of Maine really has 'high' taxes.

52% of Maine is UT, with much lower taxes and lower municipal services.

[RANGER.101ST]

Originally Posted by sr1234

Yes I have. I used to live in New England.

why do ppl refer maine as newengland.but come to think of it isnt that why people left england to begine with .becouse of high taxes.so i gess it would be new england same tax and same dont do that laws.you cant do that becouse it offends some panzy.and you get from the state(we are passing this law to keep insurence rates down). my dam rates havent gone down have yours.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by sr1234

If Mainers don't like the Nanny state, then why do you keep voting these types to office? From an outsiders point of view, it seems as though you like high taxes and government telling you what to do.

Probably because the "political pool" from which we have to choose is not particularly deep, and could probably use a little chlorine.

Kidding! Well, maybe a little...

IMO not many people want to run for any office where you're "damned if you do and damned if you don't."

As evidenced from the current school consolidation mess, it really doesn't matter how we vote because IMO the collective "they" will choose whatever "they" feel is best for us. I cannot even begin to believe how many Mainers are actually against this plan - not necessarily consolidation - just how this has been handled with the "bum's rush" and "like it or lump it" attitude. Dare I say the "flim-flam" of many of the "rules" that applied to the development of it, border on unconstitutional, but since this thread is about "Nanny-ism" I won't extrapolate further on that one.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by forest beekeeper

On various forums that I habitate, I do see that attitude.

Many folks WANT to be 'taken care of'.

There recently was one poster, who said that she was living in NYC, had been reading and thinking about moving rural and adopting a self-sufficient lifestyle.

So she asked: "what office or service do I need to contact to make that happen for me?" She went on about her need for transportation from NYC to these rural areas, finding housing and job placement.

She fully expected that gubbermint should provide for her transportation, housing, job placement, and to establish her as a self-sufficient farmer.

There are folks who would want for their gubbermint to provide for them all urban services, even while they live rural.

This looks like a good spot to repost my question back a couple pages ago because I think it may apply to this one:

... I see "over-protection" a lot in my own area. It's yet another "societal" thing, but at least in my case with my kids, I find myself saying
"For the love of Pete! Use your common sense!" frequently. I usually follow that up with an explanation as to why whatever the topic is, will or won't work. I consider children a "work in progress" and as such, need some guidance to "stop and think" a minute - especially having to live within this frenetical world.

Here's my query:

Does "sheltering" play a part in the designing of "Nanny Laws"? Have we sheltered our children so much now, that it doesn't "dawn" on them (even when they become adults) that something is not good for them (sort of like the lighting up with a kid in the car comment before)? Perhaps that is another element that drives the "Nanny Laws?" Any thoughts?

[RMoore007]

I haven't lived in Maine long enough to know whether it is becoming a Nanny State but can compare California a little. Maybe I can sum it up in one word, Nannyfornia. You can't smoke unless it's handsfree, you can't talk with a child under six in the car, you can't use a cellphone in restaurants anymore, you must use a seatbelt on your motorcycle and a helmet in your car. I might have gotten those a little mixed up but there's getting to be so darn many.

[sr1234]

Originally Posted by reloop

Probably because the "political pool" from which we have to choose is not particularly deep, and could probably use a little chlorine.

Kidding! Well, maybe a little...

IMO not many people want to run for any office where you're "damned if you do and damned if you don't."

As evidenced from the current school consolidation mess, it really doesn't matter how we vote because IMO the collective "they" will choose whatever "they" feel is best for us. I cannot even begin to believe how many Mainers are actually against this plan - not necessarily consolidation - just how this has been handled with the "bum's rush" and "like it or lump it" attitude. Dare I say the "flim-flam" of many of the "rules" that applied to the development of it, border on unconstitutional, but since this thread is about "Nanny-ism" I won't extrapolate further on that one.

Thank you so much for answering my question with such maturity.