To criticize occupational licensing laws is not to argue that information about the quality of a licensee’s services is not important to consumers. However, it is by no means clear that licensing is the most effective way to provide that information. Indeed, licensing may lower the “received” quality of the service in question. By making entry costs higher, there are fewer practitioners, which, as noted above, increases the cost of the service rendered and leads some consumers to resort to do-it-yourself methods that generally results in a lower-quality end product. For example, even the electrician who failed a licensing examination, scoring 65 when a score of 70 was necessary to pass, is likely to know more about electrical work and safety measures than the average consumer who undertakes a do-it-yourself project because he cannot afford to hire a licensed practitioner.
In addition, higher standards imposed by licensing requirements make consumers as a whole worse off. A spectrum of quality, from high to low, is consistent with the optimal stock of goods and services. Being forced to purchase a higher-quality good or service, when a lower-quality would suffice or is what the customer wants, hurts consumers economically. For example, in the name of safety, a law could be enacted requiring that the only cars that can be sold are those whose occupants would emerge uninjured after a fifty-mile per hour collision. However, such cars would cost so much that most people could not afford to buy them. The existence of less crashworthy cars is clearly part of the optimal stock. People are always better off if they have knowledge about quality and the right to choose quality levels.
There are methods to produce information about quality without having the restrictions imposed by occupational licensing. Certification is one method. A practitioner can take a test and, if he scores in the 90s, have the right to declare himself a Class A practitioner; an 80, a class B practitioner; and so on. Such a method would give consumers information about quality while leaving them free to choose.
– Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., Race and Economics
Blog
How Economic Regulation Hurts the Poor – Walter E. Williams
In the name of protecting public health, California requires that an individual who seeks to perform any kind of hairstyling service must complete nine months (1,600 hours) of classes at a state-approved cosmetology school, at a tuition cost of at least $5,000, before taking the state licensing examination. This regimen is required even though the school curriculum and the exam bear little or no relation to the kind of services rendered by African hairstylists….
Restricted entry through licensing places disadvantaged people at a severe handicap without necessarily improving the quality of services received by the consumer, the ostensible beneficiary of the regulation.
In fact, one study showed that there is a significant relationship between occupational licensing and the number of accidental deaths by electrocution: the more stringent the state’s electrician licensing examination, the fewer the electricians and higher prices for an electrician’s services; therefore, the greater the willingness of amateurs to undertake electrical wiring tasks and risk electrocution in the process…
Occupational licensing also produces what authors Sidney Carroll and Robert Gaston call the “Cadillac effect.” By insisting on stiff requirements for entry, licensing provides high-quality services for high-income people. But people with low incomes, who cannot afford to pay the higher prices, are forced to do without the service, do the work themselves, or rely on lowpriced, unlicensed charlatans.
– Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., Race and Economics
My Body My Choice: Abolish Occupational Licensing
The most immediate effect of licensing is to restrict the number of practitioners because of the higher entry costs involved in meeting the qualifications of the activity. Some licenses, as in the cases of cosmeticians and barbers, require many months of schooling. Others require the installation of costly health and safety equipment. Still others demand the purchase of the license or “certificate of authorization” from an incumbent practitioner that can cost millions of dollars, as was the case when interstate trucking was highly regulated. Further, some jurisdictions issue only a fixed number of licenses or authorizations. All of these requirements raise the cost of entry, which naturally leads to a smaller number of practitioners.
Restricting that number is only the initial effect of licensing. A secondary effect is that the price of the good or service offered is higher than it would otherwise be. The result of restricting entry to a business or occupation, and probably the primary intent of licensing, is to raise the incomes of incumbent practitioners. Evidence supports this self-interested behavior: (1) most licensure laws are the result of intense lobbying by incumbents, not of consumers demanding more protection from incompetent or unscrupulous practitioners; (2) when incumbents in an unlicensed trade lobby for licensing (or when those in one already licensed lobby for higher entry requirements) they virtually always seek a “grandfather” clause that exempts them from meeting the new requirements, leaving the burden of the higher entry costs to be borne mainly by new entrants; (3) practitioner violations of the licensing codes, such as price-cutting and extra hours, are nearly always reported to the licensing board by the incumbents rather than by customers.’
– Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., Race and Economics
Progressives Are Domestic Imperialists
Progressives will fight tooth and nail to make sure every citizen gets a 1 in 100,000,000 vote between two politicians every four years since it allows the political system to reflect the wishes of the population at large.
However, when those very same voters try to make an economic exchange, the Progressive will unapologetically coercively interfere under the guise of “helping the little guy.” Want an internship to get on the job experience? Tough luck says the Progressive, if the internship does not pay $15 an hour with benefits it’s for your own good that you stay unexperienced. Want to sell goods? Not without a business or occupational license! Want to save your money instead of giving it to the IRS? Not a chance. Want to save a persons life by giving them a kidney in exchange for compensation? Help yourself to a $50,000 fine and five years in prison.
It does not occur to the Progressive that they are no different in principle than the European Colonialists/Imperialists which they so often condemn.
Leaked Pentagon Documents: A Thread
What follows are highlights from the trove of leaked US government documents that appeared on the internet sometime last month, including a handful of the documents themselves, reporting on the material, my own observations, as well as official statements and reactions.
Pentagon probing leaked docs on US/NATO war planning in Ukraine, some marked 'Top Secret.'https://t.co/xLGeIuiJnK
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 7, 2023
More here.
I'd take all of this with grains of salt given the apparent fuckery on at least one of the documents. It's interesting nonetheless, and the DoD seems to have confirmed that authentic briefing slides were in fact leaked. pic.twitter.com/q17MkyOrnY
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 7, 2023
Here's one for now – the slide on Bakhmut which was said to have first appeared on 4chan.
That's where I found it, but can't say whether it was posted anywhere else beforehand.
Again, at least one other doc appears to have been altered. I'd take all of this with skepticism. pic.twitter.com/93sugtObyM
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 8, 2023
Corporate media wringing its hands because the government doesn't have the power to scrub the internet of whatever content it wants.
Same rationale invoked by CNN would apply to the Pentagon Papers, the Snowden leaks, anything WikiLeaks has put out, etc.https://t.co/KHygklruPi
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
More leaked documents: pic.twitter.com/Zfe7HBatRN
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
WaPo today cites one "top secret" file highlighting US doubts about Ukraine's upcoming counteroffensive.
Warns of "enduring Ukrainian deficiencies in training and munitions supplies," as well as "force generation and sustainment shortfalls."https://t.co/srG8puX1S2
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
One especially interesting detail on a doc titled “Russia/Ukraine Joint Staff J3/4/5 Daily Update” (see above for full doc) at least *appears* to list the number of US / NATO special operations troops on the ground in Ukraine.
Far as I understand, "pax" = persons or personnel. pic.twitter.com/nf1cDyszlE
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
NBC, NYT, Reuters, et. al. each say they reviewed "more than 50" of the docs. Unclear why they'd all have the same number when the total was said to be 100+.
Few other interesting takeaways noted by Axios related to US spying on its own allies:https://t.co/oJgbTTq90j pic.twitter.com/ZBxC5FE4DZ
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
To get an idea of what the Russian military bloggers are saying about the leaks, here's Rybar's take.
Another Russian channel, 'Military Chronicle,' also has analysis – https://t.co/gYX3NJlLnS
Just presenting multiple viewpoints.https://t.co/TantnNoPrK
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 11, 2023
Two docs seen by NBC detail Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian and Belarusian territory, after Kiev previously said it had no interest in such attacks.https://t.co/aBvAmEj6W1
Asked about that on Tuesday, Sec. Blinken declined to comment.https://t.co/XVg1zp2mTU pic.twitter.com/uKzIUwNCCL
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 12, 2023
^It should be noted that April 6 is the same day the Times published its initial report about the leaks.
The United States 'intelligence community' includes no less than 18 separate agencies. I guess it's a good thing one of them reads the NYT.
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 12, 2023
You can read the Post report with no paywall here: https://t.co/UTb7qB6T5P
The leaker was said to have worked at an unspecified military base. I don't imagine it'd be all that difficult for the government to narrow down which one. pic.twitter.com/JN10VAxtga
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 13, 2023
Thought I was able to add multiple videos to one tweet, but apparently not. Will have to do the three clips separately. pic.twitter.com/bJdG8setYA
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 13, 2023
The Times has ID’d the likely leaker as Jack Teixeira, an airman with the 102nd Intelligence Wing of the Massachusetts Air National Guard.
He’s who the Post referred to as “OG,” the guy who ran the Discord server that initially hosted the docs.https://t.co/UpeUUTjEr9
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 13, 2023
Brief statement on the arrest from AG Merrick Garland.
Says FBI agents took Teixeira into custody “without incident.” https://t.co/k5CwEEFLCP
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 13, 2023
I do find this pretty strange, but I’m keeping an open mind.
Some servicemen might have access to more than you’d think they would, but agree the whole story sounds a bit fishy.
That a low-ranking airman could get his hands on top secret files does demand an explanation. https://t.co/yNIHb0A0lS
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 13, 2023
A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment raises doubts about the potential for a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine this year, suggesting both sides will make only "marginal" gains.
Concludes a stalemate is “the most likely scenario.”https://t.co/gGFXxJrIyu pic.twitter.com/v5Cf1bFaE9
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 14, 2023
National Security Council spox John Kirby recently addressed the doc suggesting a US Special Forces presence in Ukraine.
“There has been no change to the president’s mandate that there will not be American troops in Ukraine fighting in this war.”https://t.co/djmmjeGKaE pic.twitter.com/Z91EbvnKaB
— Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) April 15, 2023
Follow me at @TheWillPorter for more updates.