10 ms·

The Disappearing Right to Earn a Living

109 points by SQL2219 9y ago

MichailP 9y ago
This is so sad. Every time I read something like this a naive question appears in my head: "Why can't people just get along?". Because in the end it comes down to this: "we" against "them", where "we" have the licence or some other bureaucratic nonsense, and "they" don't.
kqr2 9y ago
Good podcast on this topic: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/episode-381-why-its-illegal-to-braid-hair-without-a-license https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/epis... "Why it's illegal to braid hair without a license in Utah. And why that rule — and hundreds of others like it in states all around the country — are a disaster for the U.S. economy."
- bitwize 9y ago
  I never expected NPR to be taking the John Stossel line, but I guess this is where we are.
  - wutbrodo 9y ago
    Yea, turns out if your "line" is an attempt at intellectual honesty, you end up agreeing with all kinds of people. I highly recommend you try it.
- rhizome 9y ago
  I can't find a reference anywhere, probably due to not remembering the exact title, but in the 70s-80s there was a series of books about goofy laws with titles like "You Can't Feed an Elephant Peanuts on a Sunday in Kansas" that I used to get from the library.
  - wutbrodo 9y ago
    That seems pretty different, since those collections of wacky laws are almost universally unenforced. The hair braiding example is an actual policy discussion, not just a historical quirk.
drewcon 9y ago
Incumbent business interests colluding with government under the guise of “public safety” to enact regulation and licensing just to build artificial moats and protect themselves from competition is such fiendish invisible form of corruption. Planet money did a very good and very despressing episode on one woman’s quest to open a hair braiding salon. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/episode-381-why-its-illegal-to-braid-hair-without-a-license https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/epis...
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  It's really shocking how much of "the public" has bought into this "public safety" nonsense too. I recently had a lengthy debate with someone who was arguing that I, as a homeowner, should not be able to hire someone to do such basic plumbing tasks as snake my sewer line unless that person had passed a plumbing certification with the state. This over-regulation is disastrous to the poor.
  - tmm 9y ago
    Where I live, homeowners aren’t allowed to do most plumbing or electrical work on their own homes. Anything beyond replacing an outlet or a faucet and you’re in master tradesman territory. I’ve no issue with getting the work inspected, but there is no reason that I can’t be allowed to do my own work. Of course, I do it anyway (and so do many others) but technicallly it’s illegal. Related to this, it amuses (and saddens) me whenever I hear of a shortage of skilled trades workers. When it takes 7 years of apprenticeship to become a master electrician, plumber or gas fitter is it really any wonder that kids coming out of high school would choose something else?
    - dsharlet 9y ago
      On one hand, I agree with this sentiment, you should be free to do your own work on your own property. On the other hand... my landlord in college. He did a lot of work on his house himself, and did it really badly. One example: he installed a cheap indoor light fixture outside where rain would get into it. It also happened to be on the same circuit as our refrigerator. So, sometimes when it rained, the circuit with our refrigerator on it would trip its circuit breaker. You might be perfectly competent to do your own work on your house. The problem is, everyone that works on their own house thinks they are competent, and many of them are not. I feel like this is one of those issues that is doomed to oscillate. A few generations will exist with these rules complaining of not being allowed to work on their own houses, and maybe these rules will change. Some injuries/deaths/just plain tiring of janky poorly done house modifications by prior owners will see a return of these rules. Repeat...
CydeWeys 9y ago
If anyone is wondering by barbers require licenses in all 50 states, it's for both historical and public health reasons. On the historical front, barbers were previously something akin to doctors, performing a variety of tasks that we would now say are the responsibility of doctors and dentists. On the public health front, barbers deal with dangerous chemicals (hair dying), infectious diseases (lice), and tools that can be deadly if mishandled (razors). Training is necessary to minimize these risks.
- pwnage 9y ago
  Get real
  - aulani 9y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber#History
  - strathmeyer 9y ago
    Ok: unlicensed barber shops are a front for selling drugs
- loeg 9y ago
  Do the laws on the books actually date to that period?
- thaumaturgy 9y ago
  Yeah, the "why" was conspicuously missing from this article. I looked and could not find any official reference to a home theater installation license in Connecticut. I would've expected to find it here: http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?q=461650 http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?q=461650. If the article is referring to licenses required for low voltage work, that's a license that's required in other states too (including California). For the Louisiana florist licensing, the best I could find is that it was enacted in 1939. I couldn't find a reference to the actual law or to whatever its origins were. I found plenty of articles that were critical of it (https://gpnmag.com/news/louisiana-florists-need-license/ https://gpnmag.com/news/louisiana-florists-need-license/, https://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/May-June-2004/scene_joyce_mayjun04.msp https://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/May-June-2004/scene_joyc...), that didn't seem to share a political bias. Given the age of the law and its uniqueness, it does kinda stink of protectionism. Past articles on onerous licensing across the country (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/opinion/why-license-a-florist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/opinion/why-license-a-flo...), have been written by Morris M. Kleiner, who appears to be closely related to the Institute for Justice, which is a libertarian law firm that has been filing lawsuits against states over their licensing laws for years. The IJ is ultimately the source for the submitted article in The Atlantic. So this is a political article, and although that doesn't mean it's wrong, it'd be really nice to get some more objective background information on these licenses.
crdoconnor 9y ago
>These figures are drawn from License to Work, a report released this week by the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm This article appears to have been seeded by a lobby group started by Kochs seemingly dedicated to deregulating... just about everything: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Justice https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Justice The weird obsession with eliminating $185 hairdresser licensing and the like also crops up in their other lobby groups - e.g. CATO - https://www.cato.org/blog/occupational-licensing-bad https://www.cato.org/blog/occupational-licensing-bad
- cgmg 9y ago
  > The weird obsession Your comment is basically an ad hominem. Maybe, just maybe, they genuinely believe these regulations do more harm than good. No need to fetch your tinfoil hat.
  - emj 9y ago
    It is important to know from whom the message comes, or just who has said the same things in the past. It's a good way to get your bearings on where the ideas might lead. Ideas should not be historyless.
    - throwanem 9y ago
      No, but in this instance you (GP, anyway, at least) appear to be evaluating an idea on the basis of an opinion about some people who happen to share it, rather than by its own merits. This does not strike me as a useful rubric.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    I'm not even arguing against it, just pointing out where the money pushing this agenda is coming from. Personally I don't think what they're doing exactly qualifies as a conspiracy - the Kochs are pretty open about their anti-regulatory fervor.
  - orf 9y ago
HarryHirsch 9y ago
Meanwhile no licensing is required for the Internet of Things. Your plastic router runs an outdated version of Linux and participates in a DDOS network. Since no one can assign liability to the manufacturer this means cheaper routers for the consumer and a demand for IT security professionals and DDOS mitigation services. GDP rises! A win for capitalism!
- ckuehne 9y ago
  If licensing was required for computer-related goods and services we would likely neither have Linux today nor a cheap plastic router to run it on.
- CydeWeys 9y ago
  You're confusing professional licensing (applies to people) and product regulations.
cletus 9y ago
I'm actually getting tired of this mantra of "freedom" as a defense any kind of regulation in the US. Gun rights are on obvious one and everyone throws up their hands in the air saying there is no solution for the problems no one else in the world has. Less controversial, AirBnB and many Americans argue "it's my house/apartment, I should be able to do what I want" yet those wanting to basically run illegal hotels are exploting a pretty classic case of the tragedy of the commons (in that their neighbours bear the cost). The UK has a largely unregulated system for trades to the point that after the dot-com crash, many former programmers took up plumbing. In Australia we have a pretty rigid system for licensing of trades to the point that if you call yourself an electrician or a plumber without a license you can go to jail. You're free to subcontract for a licensed contractor but ultimately someone who is licensed needs to be responsible. When I lived in the UK, I had a friend who was an Australian licensed plumber (note that plumber here includes natural gas). He said that him and his Australian tradesmen friends used to call the UK tradesmen "chancers". Maybe they can do it and maybe they can't but they'll give it a go. He gave me the advice that if I ever got any work done in the UK get an Australian tradesman. I don't understand why anyone would argue that you should be able to do what you want when it comes to things like gas and electricity when any shortcuts, negligence or mistakes could kill people. It boggles my mind. Just watch any of the renovation shows on HGTV and you'll see the dodgy things people do. At least a licensed tradesmen is accountable in that there's a record of their work and their license can be yanked. More to the point, any such tradesmen will invoke the permitting and inspection processes that are relevant. It's the same reason there's a building code. Years ago I heard that Australian builders had agreed among themselves to bid on international projects (Asia specifically) and build to Australian rather than local standards. It's more expensive but at least it'll be much safer. Laws and regulations can be onerous, sure. But they're also necessary. Licensing simply makes sure that licensees are aware of those laws.
- michaelt 9y ago
  It's a statutory requirement in the UK that notifiable electrical [1] and gas [2] work can only be performed by certified tradespeople. Of course violations of such laws are hard to detect, so they may get broken sometimes. [1] http://www.electricalcompetentperson.co.uk/ http://www.electricalcompetentperson.co.uk/ [2] https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/ https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/
jrs95 9y ago
Is the issue that the right to earn a living is disappearing, or is the issue that we never really had a right to earn a living?
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  The former.
killjoywashere 9y ago
Have you seen tree-trimming gone wrong? I've seen one death and one TBI (complete with dude hanging from a tree, massive pedunculated scalp lac, neighbor screaming for help from the ladder, holding the trimmer's unconscious body up, both of them covered in blood). As for home entertainment: I've seen lightning strikes where things weren't properly grounded, blew out whole blocks of network equipment and TVs. Maybe if our education system was more robust, we wouldn't have to legally constrain these people. But, as it turns out, society these days requires a bit more technical know-how and knowledge of risk-assessment than back in the glory days of the 1930s when digging ditches could earn you an honest living. People complaining about licensure laws are missing the bigger picture: the licensure laws are a symptom of the poor education system. We've been slowly backsliding into autocracy for a long time, and the education system is a major source of the problem.
- grigjd3 9y ago
  Surely though, a month of training is enough to learn to test a socket to see if it is properly grounded, and thus is enough to install a 5.1 surround sound system.
  - killjoywashere 9y ago
    Knowing what to do makes one a novice. Knowing what not to do makes one competent.
    - cesnja 9y ago
      But surely that's at most a week of training, not 4 years.
thomastjeffery 9y ago
Specifically, the problem is not regulation, but implementation of regulation. If it costs significant time and money to acquire a license, that in itself is an unnecessary hindrance. In my opinion, a better implementation of regulation would be reaction, rather than precaution. Everyone can be free to do work without licensing, but they are liable for causing harm. The only difference being that work is not immediately illegal.
jpindar 9y ago
You can lose your occupational license (as well as your driver's license) for getting behind on your student loan payments. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-licenses.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-li...
Overtonwindow 9y ago
I think occupational licensure is a step too far, and done so often it's creating entrenched monopolies. We should pull back from this and use certification instead.
qbaqbaqba 9y ago
In Europe you have to pay your social security fee. In many countries even if you don't have any income, just for running a business.

109 points by SQL2219 9y ago

This is so sad. Every time I read something like this a naive question appears in my head: "Why can't people just get along?". Because in the end it comes down to this: "we" against "them", where "we" have the licence or some other bureaucratic nonsense, and "they" don't.

kqr2 9y ago

Good podcast on this topic: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/episode-381-why-its-illegal-to-braid-hair-without-a-license https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/epis... "Why it's illegal to braid hair without a license in Utah. And why that rule — and hundreds of others like it in states all around the country — are a disaster for the U.S. economy."

bitwize 9y ago
I never expected NPR to be taking the John Stossel line, but I guess this is where we are.
- wutbrodo 9y ago
  Yea, turns out if your "line" is an attempt at intellectual honesty, you end up agreeing with all kinds of people. I highly recommend you try it.
rhizome 9y ago
I can't find a reference anywhere, probably due to not remembering the exact title, but in the 70s-80s there was a series of books about goofy laws with titles like "You Can't Feed an Elephant Peanuts on a Sunday in Kansas" that I used to get from the library.
- wutbrodo 9y ago
  That seems pretty different, since those collections of wacky laws are almost universally unenforced. The hair braiding example is an actual policy discussion, not just a historical quirk.

drewcon 9y ago

Incumbent business interests colluding with government under the guise of “public safety” to enact regulation and licensing just to build artificial moats and protect themselves from competition is such fiendish invisible form of corruption. Planet money did a very good and very despressing episode on one woman’s quest to open a hair braiding salon. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/episode-381-why-its-illegal-to-braid-hair-without-a-license https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/epis...

Consultant32452 9y ago
It's really shocking how much of "the public" has bought into this "public safety" nonsense too. I recently had a lengthy debate with someone who was arguing that I, as a homeowner, should not be able to hire someone to do such basic plumbing tasks as snake my sewer line unless that person had passed a plumbing certification with the state. This over-regulation is disastrous to the poor.
- tmm 9y ago
  Where I live, homeowners aren’t allowed to do most plumbing or electrical work on their own homes. Anything beyond replacing an outlet or a faucet and you’re in master tradesman territory. I’ve no issue with getting the work inspected, but there is no reason that I can’t be allowed to do my own work. Of course, I do it anyway (and so do many others) but technicallly it’s illegal. Related to this, it amuses (and saddens) me whenever I hear of a shortage of skilled trades workers. When it takes 7 years of apprenticeship to become a master electrician, plumber or gas fitter is it really any wonder that kids coming out of high school would choose something else?
  - dsharlet 9y ago
    On one hand, I agree with this sentiment, you should be free to do your own work on your own property. On the other hand... my landlord in college. He did a lot of work on his house himself, and did it really badly. One example: he installed a cheap indoor light fixture outside where rain would get into it. It also happened to be on the same circuit as our refrigerator. So, sometimes when it rained, the circuit with our refrigerator on it would trip its circuit breaker. You might be perfectly competent to do your own work on your house. The problem is, everyone that works on their own house thinks they are competent, and many of them are not. I feel like this is one of those issues that is doomed to oscillate. A few generations will exist with these rules complaining of not being allowed to work on their own houses, and maybe these rules will change. Some injuries/deaths/just plain tiring of janky poorly done house modifications by prior owners will see a return of these rules. Repeat...

CydeWeys 9y ago

If anyone is wondering by barbers require licenses in all 50 states, it's for both historical and public health reasons. On the historical front, barbers were previously something akin to doctors, performing a variety of tasks that we would now say are the responsibility of doctors and dentists. On the public health front, barbers deal with dangerous chemicals (hair dying), infectious diseases (lice), and tools that can be deadly if mishandled (razors). Training is necessary to minimize these risks.

pwnage 9y ago
Get real
- aulani 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber#History
- strathmeyer 9y ago
  Ok: unlicensed barber shops are a front for selling drugs
loeg 9y ago
Do the laws on the books actually date to that period?
thaumaturgy 9y ago
Yeah, the "why" was conspicuously missing from this article. I looked and could not find any official reference to a home theater installation license in Connecticut. I would've expected to find it here: http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?q=461650 http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?q=461650. If the article is referring to licenses required for low voltage work, that's a license that's required in other states too (including California). For the Louisiana florist licensing, the best I could find is that it was enacted in 1939. I couldn't find a reference to the actual law or to whatever its origins were. I found plenty of articles that were critical of it (https://gpnmag.com/news/louisiana-florists-need-license/ https://gpnmag.com/news/louisiana-florists-need-license/, https://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/May-June-2004/scene_joyce_mayjun04.msp https://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/May-June-2004/scene_joyc...), that didn't seem to share a political bias. Given the age of the law and its uniqueness, it does kinda stink of protectionism. Past articles on onerous licensing across the country (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/opinion/why-license-a-florist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/opinion/why-license-a-flo...), have been written by Morris M. Kleiner, who appears to be closely related to the Institute for Justice, which is a libertarian law firm that has been filing lawsuits against states over their licensing laws for years. The IJ is ultimately the source for the submitted article in The Atlantic. So this is a political article, and although that doesn't mean it's wrong, it'd be really nice to get some more objective background information on these licenses.

crdoconnor 9y ago

>These figures are drawn from License to Work, a report released this week by the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm This article appears to have been seeded by a lobby group started by Kochs seemingly dedicated to deregulating... just about everything: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Justice https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Justice The weird obsession with eliminating $185 hairdresser licensing and the like also crops up in their other lobby groups - e.g. CATO - https://www.cato.org/blog/occupational-licensing-bad https://www.cato.org/blog/occupational-licensing-bad

cgmg 9y ago
> The weird obsession Your comment is basically an ad hominem. Maybe, just maybe, they genuinely believe these regulations do more harm than good. No need to fetch your tinfoil hat.
- emj 9y ago
  It is important to know from whom the message comes, or just who has said the same things in the past. It's a good way to get your bearings on where the ideas might lead. Ideas should not be historyless.
  - throwanem 9y ago
    No, but in this instance you (GP, anyway, at least) appear to be evaluating an idea on the basis of an opinion about some people who happen to share it, rather than by its own merits. This does not strike me as a useful rubric.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  I'm not even arguing against it, just pointing out where the money pushing this agenda is coming from. Personally I don't think what they're doing exactly qualifies as a conspiracy - the Kochs are pretty open about their anti-regulatory fervor.
- orf 9y ago

HarryHirsch 9y ago

Meanwhile no licensing is required for the Internet of Things. Your plastic router runs an outdated version of Linux and participates in a DDOS network. Since no one can assign liability to the manufacturer this means cheaper routers for the consumer and a demand for IT security professionals and DDOS mitigation services. GDP rises! A win for capitalism!

ckuehne 9y ago
If licensing was required for computer-related goods and services we would likely neither have Linux today nor a cheap plastic router to run it on.
CydeWeys 9y ago
You're confusing professional licensing (applies to people) and product regulations.

cletus 9y ago

I'm actually getting tired of this mantra of "freedom" as a defense any kind of regulation in the US. Gun rights are on obvious one and everyone throws up their hands in the air saying there is no solution for the problems no one else in the world has. Less controversial, AirBnB and many Americans argue "it's my house/apartment, I should be able to do what I want" yet those wanting to basically run illegal hotels are exploting a pretty classic case of the tragedy of the commons (in that their neighbours bear the cost). The UK has a largely unregulated system for trades to the point that after the dot-com crash, many former programmers took up plumbing. In Australia we have a pretty rigid system for licensing of trades to the point that if you call yourself an electrician or a plumber without a license you can go to jail. You're free to subcontract for a licensed contractor but ultimately someone who is licensed needs to be responsible. When I lived in the UK, I had a friend who was an Australian licensed plumber (note that plumber here includes natural gas). He said that him and his Australian tradesmen friends used to call the UK tradesmen "chancers". Maybe they can do it and maybe they can't but they'll give it a go. He gave me the advice that if I ever got any work done in the UK get an Australian tradesman. I don't understand why anyone would argue that you should be able to do what you want when it comes to things like gas and electricity when any shortcuts, negligence or mistakes could kill people. It boggles my mind. Just watch any of the renovation shows on HGTV and you'll see the dodgy things people do. At least a licensed tradesmen is accountable in that there's a record of their work and their license can be yanked. More to the point, any such tradesmen will invoke the permitting and inspection processes that are relevant. It's the same reason there's a building code. Years ago I heard that Australian builders had agreed among themselves to bid on international projects (Asia specifically) and build to Australian rather than local standards. It's more expensive but at least it'll be much safer. Laws and regulations can be onerous, sure. But they're also necessary. Licensing simply makes sure that licensees are aware of those laws.

michaelt 9y ago
It's a statutory requirement in the UK that notifiable electrical [1] and gas [2] work can only be performed by certified tradespeople. Of course violations of such laws are hard to detect, so they may get broken sometimes. [1] http://www.electricalcompetentperson.co.uk/ http://www.electricalcompetentperson.co.uk/ [2] https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/ https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/

jrs95 9y ago

Is the issue that the right to earn a living is disappearing, or is the issue that we never really had a right to earn a living?

thomastjeffery 9y ago
The former.

killjoywashere 9y ago

Have you seen tree-trimming gone wrong? I've seen one death and one TBI (complete with dude hanging from a tree, massive pedunculated scalp lac, neighbor screaming for help from the ladder, holding the trimmer's unconscious body up, both of them covered in blood). As for home entertainment: I've seen lightning strikes where things weren't properly grounded, blew out whole blocks of network equipment and TVs. Maybe if our education system was more robust, we wouldn't have to legally constrain these people. But, as it turns out, society these days requires a bit more technical know-how and knowledge of risk-assessment than back in the glory days of the 1930s when digging ditches could earn you an honest living. People complaining about licensure laws are missing the bigger picture: the licensure laws are a symptom of the poor education system. We've been slowly backsliding into autocracy for a long time, and the education system is a major source of the problem.

grigjd3 9y ago
Surely though, a month of training is enough to learn to test a socket to see if it is properly grounded, and thus is enough to install a 5.1 surround sound system.
- killjoywashere 9y ago
  Knowing what to do makes one a novice. Knowing what not to do makes one competent.
  - cesnja 9y ago
    But surely that's at most a week of training, not 4 years.

thomastjeffery 9y ago

Specifically, the problem is not regulation, but implementation of regulation. If it costs significant time and money to acquire a license, that in itself is an unnecessary hindrance. In my opinion, a better implementation of regulation would be reaction, rather than precaution. Everyone can be free to do work without licensing, but they are liable for causing harm. The only difference being that work is not immediately illegal.

jpindar 9y ago

You can lose your occupational license (as well as your driver's license) for getting behind on your student loan payments. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-licenses.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-li...

Overtonwindow 9y ago

I think occupational licensure is a step too far, and done so often it's creating entrenched monopolies. We should pull back from this and use certification instead.

qbaqbaqba 9y ago

In Europe you have to pay your social security fee. In many countries even if you don't have any income, just for running a business.