On the Openmarket link, a commenter suggested piggybacking a baby harness to the parent’s harness. If that wouldn’t work, there is a way to avoid forcing young families to drive: have the government, rather than the family, pay for the baby’s extra plane seat. This would be no different conceptually from other government subsidies to children, eg. day care.
If it wished, the government could recoup the cost with a general tax on everyone else’s plane ticket. It might still be decided that the expense is not worth it, but that is a different argument from “unintended consequences” (increased mortality among families forced to drive).
3 Comments
On the Openmarket link, a commenter suggested piggybacking a baby harness to the parent’s harness. If that wouldn’t work, there is a way to avoid forcing young families to drive: have the government, rather than the family, pay for the baby’s extra plane seat. This would be no different conceptually from other government subsidies to children, eg. day care.
If it wished, the government could recoup the cost with a general tax on everyone else’s plane ticket. It might still be decided that the expense is not worth it, but that is a different argument from “unintended consequences” (increased mortality among families forced to drive).
Do they come with a gag?
Hugo,
The FAA report linked to in the Openmarket story notes that there have been zero preventable infant deaths in over 17 years prior to the 2011 report.
http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/2011-12-29-child-restraint-update.pdf