4898

Except that I said this:

4899

And??

4900

I don’t think anyone else was having trouble following the conversation.

4901

I don’t think I’m the first one who has asked why / pointed out that people keep conflating licensing for painting contractors with licensing for painters.

4902

Yeah, for what it’s worth, I’m with Scott on this one…

4903

I have substantive things to say on the issue of painting and painting contractors, since my dad was a painting contractor and I personally spent 10 summers (ages 11-19 and 24) as a painter, all in CA. So I have a lot to say.

But you know what? Timex has shit all over this thread so deeply, conflating occupational and business licensing amongst other rhetorical sins, and all you folks who can’t ignore his digressive, superficial, and cherry-picking posts have facilitated this, that I’m just gonna NOPE out here.

4904

I am not going to blame anyone but many people in this conversation have used “painters” as some generic. Individuals working for a company in construction are rarely licensed, the company is.

We should not be comparing construction workers with hair stylists. If you believe licensing of individuals is overkill I can see your point. I guess we should all just “do our own research”.

How much of licensing is revenue based?

By the way, no one inspects individual construction workers or companies, they inspect job sites. Companies are inspected by OSHA or state agencies, but they are few. Just not enough manpower.

4905

Just catching up on the thread and…

200

4906

I think this thread has delivered on its promise of stupid shit.

4907

Objectivity allows researchers, intentions aside, to define themselves as experts without learning from people with lived experience.

Objectivity, the Real Enemy.

4908

This is gonna be good.

4909

Yeah, there’s a bit of an echo chamber as regards writing about that kind of thing in liberal academia. And it makes me cringe every time I hear it. I think her point isn’t terrible: to use an extreme example Charles Murray’s work on racial intelligence is wholly irresponsible without considering the historical and cultural context for it, regardless of how objective it is. (“Hey, I’m just asking questions here!”) That said, the framing and language she uses are dead on arrival for anyone she hopes to reach with it. That may be an unfortunate result of propaganda, or (ironically) a bit of ivory tower disengagement with how non-academics talk about shit, or some combination. But I think the minute anyone says “check your bias”, the vast majority of people say “check you later.”

4910

Did anyone read the article? Reading the article sometimes helps.

4911

“Occupational licensing regulations sometimes have a blanket prohibition on individuals with any criminal convictions, or ‘good moral character’ clauses that allow a licensing board to deny a license for an arrest without conviction,” the Council of State Governments objected early this year. “This contributes to a large segment of the population being unable to work, even if their arrest or conviction occurred years prior to their application.”

“The higher the rate of licensure of low-income occupations, the lower the rate of low-income entrepreneurship,” found a 2015 report from the Goldwater Institute. “The states that license more than 50 percent of the low-income occupations had an average entrepreneurship rate that was 11 percent lower than the average for all states, and the states the licensed less than a third had an average entrepreneurship rate that was about 11 percent higher.”

Occupational licensing reduces economic and physical mobility, blocks opportunity, and limits competition for those already admitted to a field, thereby reducing choice and raising prices. And now, licenses are being used as a means to punish people who exercise their right to criticize official conduct. We knew that licensing was a threat to prosperity and now we know that it endangers liberty. It needs to go.

4912

If we’re restarting this “arguement”, what is the argument exactly?

Is it that all occupational licensing of any kind is bad? Or that licensing, like pretty much everything else in law and society, can be onerous or counterproductive or even downright abusive by those in control and needs to be carefully considered and often reformed?

4913

Haven’t you been paying attention? I’ve been banging the drum that government size and intervention is by itself a positive, regardless of the outcome, because I’m a big ol’ freedom-hating liberal.

4914

reads the article

But not, I think, in this case.

4915

Probably something along those lines.

I’m not sure why keeping poor people and minorities under the boot of the State is suddenly a great idea, but some libertarians said it might not be, so apparently that’s good enough.

Also maybe someone will do something poorly, so the solution is to have the State come in with armed men and make sure that they have an expensive piece of paper that shows that… they have that paper. Crack down extra hard on the minority ones.

Also remember when this? Good times.

4916

I think that the issue we may have here, is that there are likely many liberals here who are not willing to defend things like occupational licensing for many cases. Similarly, all by the most rabid libertarians will not oppose occupational licensing in all cases.

So, the mere idea of occupational licensing is not necessarily a “liberal” notion, although there are likely more liberals who support more aggressive use of such licensing practices.

Personally, I’m more interested in seeing the folks who want to defend the article saying that things like “objectivity” and “rigor” are bad… because that seems like a way more clear cut example of stupid shit.

4919

That doesn’t directly answer the question. Should I take it then that your position is to take the simple (potential) solution to a complex problem and just abolish across the board? Based on a study that shows a potential correlation between licensing and lower entrepreneurship? And that not wanting to remove all licensing is an exclusively liberal position that is stupid?

Honestly with the original post comparing the somewhat excessive California requirements to be able to contract for jobs over $500 that involve the contractor performing or overseeing a job where one…

prepares by scraping, sandblasting or other means and applies any of the following: paints, papers, textures, fabrics, pigments, oils, turpentines, japans, driers, thinners, varnishes, shellacs, stains, fillers, waxes, adhesives, water and any other vehicles, mediums and materials which adhere by evaporation and may be mixed, used and applied to the surfaces of structures and the appurtenances thereto for purposes of decorating, protecting, fireproofing and waterproofing.

almost all of which involve toxic and/or highly flammable chemicals, to Texas where you need zero training or testing at all for doing jobs like that, I honestly though the zero requirement thing was the stupid lib part. That someone was saying Texas was doing it right by just letting anyone with a brush blast the lead paint off your house.