Wear Your Helmet

James Surowiecki makes the best argument I've seen yet for strong regulation of automobiles, i.e. size and fuel economy:

Back in the nineteen-seventies, an economist named Thomas Schelling, who later won the Nobel Prize, noticed something peculiar about the N.H.L. [national hockey league] At the time, players were allowed, but not required, to wear helmets, and most players chose to go helmet-less, despite the risk of severe head trauma. But when they were asked in secret ballots most players also said that the league should require them to wear helmets. The reason for this conflict, Schelling explained, was that not wearing a helmet conferred a slight advantage on the ice; crucially, it gave the player better peripheral vision, and it also made him look fearless. The players wanted to have their heads protected, but as individuals they couldn’t afford to jeopardize their effectiveness on the ice. Making helmets compulsory eliminated the dilemma: the players could protect their heads without suffering a competitive disadvantage. Without the rule, the players’ individually rational decisions added up to a collectively irrational result. With the rule, the outcome was closer to what players really wanted.

Car owners face a similar dilemma whether it be concerns for safety (a bigger car is safer) or whether it's styling. The argument is also similar to the one made regarding uniforms in the schools. If you level the playing field, everything runs smoother.

I'm not sure I'd want to have just one model of car available for everyone. But if you could only buy cars with high fuel efficiency, wouldn't we all find different ways of "stylin"? Given the rules, wouldn't everyone find a way to express their individuality? And wouldn't it be in the public's best interests? Just ask any U.S. soldier in Iraq, they'll tell you.