Comments on: Rent-Seeking Potheads

By: The Shrubbloggers » Rent-Seeking Potheads

The Shrubbloggers » Rent-Seeking Potheads — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:24:49 +0000

[...] at The Lesson Applied.] — Justin M. StoddardComments (0) [...]

By: Vroman

Vroman — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:40:23 +0000

I want to see Phillip Morris advertising packs of joints on billboards.

By: Greg Kaczorowski

Greg Kaczorowski — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:48:58 +0000

You don’t have to look any further than IT to see how an industry setting its own standards works remarkably well without any intervention from government. If you want to advertise yourself as a competent Microsoft Windows technician, then you can take the relevant tests and use that certification to prove to a potential employer that you possess the skills you claim to possess. There’s nothing stopping me from trying to sell myself as skilled in those areas but at the the end of the day, I have to work harder to convince a potential employer to trust me.

By: Brian McCall

Brian McCall — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:04:46 +0000

Edit:

…cooperation between Baptists and bootleggers to restrict…

By: Brian McCall

Brian McCall — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:03:08 +0000

Bruce Yandle spoke of the phenomenon of cooperation between to restrict alcohol sales. Perhaps we could term this Potheads and Presbyterians?

By: Justin M. Stoddard

Justin M. Stoddard — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 19:54:38 +0000

Claire,
While I may sympathize with the general thrust of your argument (“to protect people from unqualified individuals who may use unsafe practices”), I believe there may be a better way to approach the problem than mandatory, government licensure. Voluntary industry standards is almost assuredly the correct way to look at this problem.

For example, if builders (or people who are paying the builders) want only interior decorators who are trained to a particular standard, they could turn to one or several competing businesses that make it their business to certify those standards.

Therefore, interior decorators with X certification (agreed upon as the industry standard) would be hired.

This would still price some people out of some markets, but not all. People without the certification could still find employment by those who don’t particularly care if he/she has said certification. (If I were a home owner searching for an interior decorator, for example, I would probably care less about certification than, say, a good portfolio or a sense of taste).

The needs of nursing home administrators are admittedly much different than mine. In that sense, certification might well be desired.

By: Claire Gillis

Claire Gillis — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:55:48 +0000

As an interior designer and architecture student, I see the need for licensure laws, if only to protect people from unqualified individuals who may use unsafe practices. For example, let’s say you want to build a nursing home for people with alzheimers. An unlicensed architect or interior designer may not know that all doors must be self locking, so that patients cannot wander off and get lost, or the proper turning radius for a wheelchair. When this building is built, a patient could escape, leaving the owner liable to a lawsuit. The building could also not work as a nursing home, since wheelchairs cannot go where they need to go since they cannot turn around. A licensed interior designer or architect will have taked exams to prove that they know these things, and therefore these mistakes can be avoided. This is especially important when it comes to fire code and the safety of inhabitants.

One could argue that the owner should know what they are getting into if they hire an unlicensed architect or designer, but if they are building a business where they expect guests/customers to enter their building, the customer cannot always be aware of the hazards of entering the building, for example if it isn’t built to fire code. They risk real danger if they building were to catch fire.