| I agree with the general idea but there's an important distinction that needs to be made. I have no problem with speed limits or licensing of doctors. If you want a group of people to dictate how does someone qualifies to be a doctor that's fine by me. When one does that in specific situations it's necessary that everybody follows the same rules, like in your example of the speed limit. I find no problem with that too. A group of people should be able to determine rules for their property, the problem is when you start forcing others to do the same. This could be confusing in cases when compliance from everyone is needed like with speed limits, so I'll take my time explaining it. Lets say we want quality control in dentistry. You like the government quality control the government gives and would like your dentists to count with their approval.
I, on the other hand, think it's requirements are excessive. Most of what my dentist does is find black spots in my teeth, drill them out, and then fill the hole.
This does not require 4 years of study. If I ever get to need a root canal I would need someone with more studies but until then I'd me happy with someone with less studies, maybe a certification given by the manufacturer of the equipment, I don't know. This requirement drains the wallets of the poor. It's fine if you want to comply with the state regulation but I don't see the need for imposing it on everyone else. There are different cases, like with speed limits, where everyone needs to comply for you to benefit from the regulation. the Canandian Hockey federation used to lack reglamentation concerning helmets. Players would have benefited from using helmets but didn't because if someone didn't use one they had an advantage over the others. So the federation started demanding helmets and everyone benefited. This is different than speed limits. If it where like speed limits the hockey federation would have made illegal all over Canada to play without helmets. It would be illegal to start a hockey federation without that rule and it would land you in jail to do so. There would be violence involved. Instead in the voluntary system you can participate in games without helmets just next to one with helmets and nobody will throw you in jail. In the speed limits scenario I think you should be able to drive any street you want, but you can't force me to build one with the regulation you want. If I build a street, and someone wants to use it then it's their call. If I want to go to a dentist or doctor without governmental accreditation that's my choice, and I wouldn't like to be imprisoned or fined (which without compliance ends in imprisonment) because of it. I understand it sound chaotic if you are not familiar with the ideas. I don't know if this is the medium to discuss this. |