>What’s missed in these discussions is these regulations had a point to them And what point would that be? Satisfying some legislator's desire to show Karen t

>What’s missed in these discussions is these regulations had a point to them And what point would that be? Satisfying some legislator's desire to show Karen they're "doing something"? Raising the barrier to entry for new entrants? Protecting people? Everyone who has a poorly thought out regulatory knee-jerk reaction likes to imagine that it's all the 3rd option but there's a heck of a lot of the first and second sailing under the flag of the third and a heck of a lot of people who would rather just use some heuristic like "more laws, more paperwork, more license fees, more better" than actually think critically about all three options. A critical mass of the general public assuming that every regulation's primary purpose was to protect people when created and that said purpose has stood the test of time is how you get crap like the taxi medallion system in the first place.