There are those to do with food and drink. The experts predict dire consequences for anybody who regularly eats certain natural substances. This makes sense until other experts, or maybe even the same if their research is being funded by an interested party, come out with the opposite view.
This state of affairs also applies to drink. Most governments in countries where alcohol is allowed derive considerable income from taxing its consumption, both directly and indirectly.
The experts produce a table of consumption levels which if exceeded, by even one drop, will produce hairy palms, extended canine teeth at full moons and general grumpiness.
How can governments maximise the tax yield and look after the health of the populace without contradiction? Easily. New experts can be persuaded to emerge to claim health giving powers for alcohol, particularly red wine.
Thus this paradox may be officially solved. But in reality those who drink tend to pour measures which make a mockery of any consumption levels. In the guise of pursuing improved health, the toper will keep imbibing until insensible. This behaviour of course directly benefits the government, until the toper requires state funded health care.
This recreates the paradox.
A similar state of affairs exists in transport. Everybody knows that motor vehicles emit noxious gases. Everybody knows that to step into ones own vehicle and roar off to a chosen destination is great fun and highly convenient. It is not convenient to any other road user. Their journey would be faster and more pleasant if you had not chosen to roar off at that moment and in that direction.
Motor vehicles in cities not only create hastle for other drivers they destroy the environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
Their vast numbers clog the streets to produce a hell of fumes, noise and gridlock. Their size and smell detract from the open vistas and communication that are the essence of a great city.
The fuel they burn produces revenue for the state but its fumes kill and maim the the citizens.
Even when parked they clog the streets. Scenes from movies of the fifties show empty streets. One only has to attempt to traverse deepest Fulham to see the proliferation. Each house may have four flats, each with four persons/vehicles. Even if they are the minimalist of minis, sixteen vehicles cannot park outside one house.
The problem is to balance the government's revenue from fuel, the vehicles and the parking fines; to say nothing of the tax coming from manufacture and maintenance, with the need to improve the environment and health of the citizens.
One answer is to atack the company car. The UK government is presently pussyfooting around with the tax. Banning all those who have no genuine business need would free up a mass of road space.
Most commutes by car are undertaken by a single person and are under five miles.
How to get these pampered persons to work? By bike.
Accentuate the positive aspects of two wheel travel. Noiseless, health enhancing, speedy, controlled, fun. The workforce arrives bright eyed and bushy tailed, ready to take on any problem with a smile and positive action.
Build a comprehensive network of bike tracks using such high tech methods as white lines on roads and the tarmac paths in parks.
The new breed of healthy workers would be able, without endangering their health, to enjoy more food and drink than the sedentary car drivers.
This redresses the lost revenues from the vehicles.
Your comments will be appreciated. These matters affect us all, and our kids.
Back to the London Mall