• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

End Occupational Licensure

Bamby

New member
In the bad old medieval days there were masters, journeymen and apprentices. This guild system controlled many occupations. If you wanted to enter any of them you had to be approved of by the powers that were.

The same sort of thing took place in bad old India under British rule. There was that scene in the movie “Gandhi” in which numerous of his followers were brutalized as they approached the sea. What was that all about? The colonial powers had reserved salt-making for the crown. Gandhi did not quite buy into this prohibition. His supporters were attempting to violate this stricture and were subjected to ruthless beatings to quell their protest.

In the good old (well, new, modern) US of A we do not engage in such uncivilized practices? Surely not, you say? You are in grave error. Such feudalism is alive and well under present institutional arrangements.

You may not have noticed this, you Rip Van Winkles, but many African – Americans arrange their hair in intricate patterns. (Some white people are now copying them, in a blatant act of cultural appropriation; the horror). Many hair braiders are young black girls.

Modern-day feudalists place all sorts of roadblocks against them. They are required to attend expensive school for several years, where they learn the finer points of scalps, hair and other irrelevancies. These braiders know far more about their business than these erstwhile “professors” of hair. New Orleans, with its large black population, is particularly vulnerable to these legal outrages.

Why do we have these laws on the books in the first place? There are two theories which attempt to explain this phenomenon. The first is the public good argument. Unless the government compels all practitioners to pass a licensing exam, given only after years in “school,” inept braiders will ruin the hair of their clients. These requirements are put in place so as to protect the public. It is easy to give the back of our hand to this “explanation.” It is so blatantly obvious that it is false. Protect the public indeed.

The second is that barbers, hairdressers and their ilk simply do not welcome the competition of these hair braiders. They would like to seize this business for themselves. Under the thin veneer of safeguarding customers, they instead raise the prices they must pay, since they have excluded their competitors from the market. Other callings that require licenses include interior designers, locksmiths, alarm installers, hypnotists, motion picture operators, parking valets, magicians, landscapers, horse-shoers, and furniture upholsterers. Estimated cost? Over $2 billion per year, for the almost 30% of the labor force covered.

It is easy to see the hypocrisy in this case. It takes far greater insight to be able to apply these considerations to medical doctors. They, too, resist entry of competitors into what they consider their turf. But they do so right at the source: the AMA ensures that all too few students are admitted to medical school. If such an establishment accepts more applicants than the AMA deems advisable, it loses its accreditation. Just you try, gentle reader, to set up a new medical school without a by your leave from these powers that be. This is why the salaries of physicians are a healthy multiple of those who might otherwise have become doctors in a freer society, such as those with a Ph.D. in biology.

This AMA practice is particularly egregious when it comes to foreign doctors who are already highly skilled and accredited in their countries of origin. Thousands of professionals emanated from Austria to the U.S. in the 1930s, to escape the Nazis. Physicists, chemists, biologists, engineers, economists, mathematicians, none of them had any particular problem attaining similar position in this country. The exception was physicians. A similar occurrence befell Cubans fleeing communism a few decades later. Barriers to entry were set up only for the doctors.

The barricade set up against them was that in order to be qualified, one had to pass an exam — given in English. The AMA argued that unless there was proficiency in our language, patients would be harmed. (This didn’t apply to physicists, chemists, biologists, engineers?) But some patients are wheeled into the hospital unconscious, rendering communication with them moot.

Second, surely, those foreign doctors could at least treat members of their fellow language community in the US.

Third, what about translators? This would entirely obviate the objection launched by the AMA. True, this would cost more, but that is entirely a separate matter.

Milton Friedman champions instead of licensing, certification for doctors. Here, if you do not take or pass an exam, you can still practice. (Most tasks of the CPA fall into this category). Doing so would greatly ameliorate our present health care difficulties, as labor, in general, accounts for some 75% of the GDP and physicians’ salaries comprise a large share of medical expenditures.

There is nowadays a felt need to do something about our medical mess. The best way to address this problem is not with socialist medicine. It is, rather, to delete the feudalism from health care. Substitute a certification agency industry for licensing (akin to Underwriters Laboratories, Good Housekeeping Seals of Approval, Consumer Reports), watch the number of doctors rise and their salaries fall.

The free enterprise system is the solution, not socialism, for both hair braiding and medicine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

HelenBr

New member
Well, to be honest there is a two face coin story. From one side, you are totally right and it could be easier if the number of businesses would managed by an authority, to create a good number of competitors, as a huge amount of them could create the rise of pricing or lowering of it. Being a locksmith seven sisters, I could say that its ok for me to have some competitors on the market, but I am good enough to face any number of competitors. This is the other side of the coin, if you are good, well obviously you are good and it doesn't matter how many competitors you have, even if they have a shop right on the same road as you have, you are simply better, this means your clients are confident and they know you are doing a great job so they won't try to look for another service
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Well, to be honest there is a two face coin story. From one side, you are totally right and it could be easier if the number of businesses would managed by an authority, to create a good number of competitors, as a huge amount of them could create the rise of pricing or lowering of it. Being a locksmith seven sisters, I could say that its ok for me to have some competitors on the market, but I am good enough to face any number of competitors. This is the other side of the coin, if you are good, well obviously you are good and it doesn't matter how many competitors you have, even if they have a shop right on the same road as you have, you are simply better, this means your clients are confident and they know you are doing a great job so they won't try to look for another service
First, welcome to this forum. Enjoy

I do agree with the meaning of your post. However, I believe it disregards one constitutional command of our governments,"...to provide for the general welfare..."

This is one of my favorite passages in the preamble and critical to describing our government's responsibilities. And yet does place a limit on its scope. Amazingly misunderstood and implemented it's purpose is to provide and environment of fecundity to promote the "... pursuit of happiness,,," which in 1789 terms means "prosperity"

Certification, or licensing, with reviews and follow up assessments, are critical to providing a good and safe environment for the population. IE providing for the general welfare.

As for unions and craftsmen needing to go through apprenticeship to master etal,,,; I support that concept. Sadly unions no longer promote the quality of work as much as the extraction of wealth from the management. As for the medically industry, this article is spot on.

It is hard to disagree with Milton Freidman. And I don't.

Again, Welcome!
 
Last edited:

HelenBr

New member
Well, to be honest there is a two face coin story. From one side, you are totally right and it could be easier if the number of businesses would managed by an authority, to create a good number of competitors, as a huge amount of them could create the rise of pricing or lowering of it. Being a locksmith seven sisters, I could say that its ok for me to have some competitors on the market, but I am good enough to face any number of competitors. This is the other side of the coin, if you are good, well obviously you are good and it doesn't matter how many competitors you have, even if they have a shop right on the same road as you have, you are simply better, this means your clients are confident and they know you are doing a great job so they won't try to look for another service

FrancSevin

I meant the same, I wanted to say mostly the same you have said, but unfortunately my message was misunderstood a little. But thank you for the clarification, always happy to see someone who really know what is he talking about.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Competition breeds better quality and prices for the consumer.

I too welcome it as a challenge to meet and beat the competition. It makes everyone in the industry better at what we do or.....
out of the business.

Again, welcome.;)
 
Top