Originally Posted by
henk4
I think the general government strategy to enforce safety is that those who act in a way that is considered against safety, can be best hit in the place where it hurts most, being the money department.
On the surface it is logical, but when the foundation of government is also 'money' this creates a very clear conflict of interest of the government's motives.
Are they creating/changing laws to promote safety, or are they trying to raise additional revenue. I guess in most cases it is both, so in that case is there a difference between, increasing safety where the side effect is additional revenue, or increasing revenue where the side effect is additional safety. I would say either way the real motive can always be claimed to be 'safety'.
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."