Re: LOCKSMITH'S GUILD WANTS L

[Charles Bell <quester@eskimo.com>]

On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Jan 1995, Don Doumakes wrote:
>  
> > But I don't buy your other implication, that it is a Good Thing to
> > unleash the unlicensed.  Licensing serves, or should serve, a public
> > good under the following conditions:  (a) consumers don't have the
> > information necessary to make an informed choice between professionals,
> > and ....
> 
> This assumes that governments have the necessary wisdom
> to tell a bad architect from a good architect.   This does
> not seem very plausible.
> 
> What most people would do is look at the certificate issued by
> various certifying organizations  -- for example the doctores
> university.
> 
> While universities often issue or refrain from issuing certificates
> for corrupt and improper reasons, government supervision on this 
> matter is unlikely to keep them honest --- indeed it is more likely
> to force them to be dishonest, or to force them to deny their own
> sound judgment in favor of arbitrary and foolish criteria imposed
> by some ignorant and arrogant bureaucrat.
> 

So....once we get past what seems to be your utter refusal to consider 
the possibility that government could ever do anything right ....how do 
we ensure that those skyscrapers don't fall down on us?  That the surgeon 
who is going to open me up knows something about surgery?  That my money 
is at least somewhat safe in the bank?

If you are willing to trust your life to Adam Smith's 'invisible hand', 
then good luck to you.  I prefer to see the hand out on the table.

Charles Bell