I think totalitarians just like more rules so they can be used as needed against people they don't like. It seems like advocates for these kind of things are ge

I think totalitarians just like more rules so they can be used as needed against people they don't like. It seems like advocates for these kind of things are generally in a position of privilege where they won't be personally affected. In practice, as another poster pointed out, it just becomes a war on the poor. If the price of steak doubles (and it has already doubled in the last few years) I'll pay it and grumble but it won't materially effect me and I wont change my behavior. Poor people who can't afford $30 per person per meal will just have to eat a substitute, which I guess is what advocates want. This all (I mean basically every "progressive" restriction) just seems like a way to increase inequality and make sure the poor always stay very poor and the wealthy can do whatever they want. I can drive my Posche plug-in hybrid in the carpool lane while the chump his old Corolla has to sit in traffic. Does that really do anything but increase inequality. (I dont really have Porsche, I can't imagine a more ridiculous choice, but I'm surrounded with people that do)