3 ms·
Your interpretation do not explain why license should be compulsory. You could have a voluntary license, hang it on the door and let customer decide where to go
by monort 11y ago
Your interpretation do not explain why license should be compulsory. You could have a voluntary license, hang it on the door and let customer decide where to go?
- DanBC 11y agoPeople are hopeless at assessing risk. They'd go for lower cost every time, thus regulation is needed to protect them from themselves. (But I'd agree that a $12,000 cosmetician course is too much for people who only want to braid hair.)
- mhaymo 11y agoThey'd go for the cheaper option until someone is actually injured by that place, then they'd abandon it immediately. This seems like a fine system.
- mtviewdave 11y agoNot for the person who is injured.
- DanBC 11y agoThe popularity of uninsured unlicensed taxi cabs, even though people get injured and can't pay for the medical treatment, argues against you. It's weird that HN thinks humans are rational - there are so many examples of irrational behaviour.
- mnglkhn2 11y agoValue is relative and it is in the eye of the beholder, much like beauty. Where I want to get is that 12k might sound much but in US the same people would pay almost double sometimes for a car.
- galago 11y agoThe real alternative to regulation is tort--I say this over and over. A pretty functional alternative to licensing, voluntary or not is proof of insurance. Its a way of stating to the customer "someone trusts me enough that they can play you if something goes horribly wrong and you sue." This partially solves the above-mentioned problem of humans who are, depending on how you look at it, poor at assessing risk.