4 ms·
> If anything, the fact that you think he's a doctor with magic cures suggests the need for ever more regulation, and thus bureaucracy. Why? Why should the sta
by LyndsySimon 8y ago
> If anything, the fact that you think he's a doctor with magic cures suggests the need for ever more regulation, and thus bureaucracy.
Why? Why should the state assume the burden of protecting someone from themselves?
I might see it differently if knowledgeable, well-researched care were difficult to find... but it's not. If someone decides they want to go to a homeopath to treat their terminal illness, why should we stop them?
- tathougies 8y agoThe government shouldn't protect people from themselves. It should however prevent people who are not doctors from falsely advertising they are.
- aninhumer 8y agoBecause working out if someone is a competent doctor is hard and expecting every single person in society to work it out for themselves, regardless of their level of free time, education, or access to information, is a massive burden.
- taeric 8y agoTo rephrase this. As wasteful as it may seem to "protect people from themselves" there is a good reason to believe not having some of those protections is actually more expensive. Consider the costs of seatbelt enforcement. They are real and exist. More, for most people and most rides, the seatbelt truly did nothing for you. To the point that if you got a ticket, it almost certainly cost you more than you are projected to save from having a seatbelt in the short term. However, for society at large, we tremendously benefit by having everyone use seatbelts. From less time lost on the job, to fewer ER trips from lower collision wrecks.