To create more jobs...

... get rid of occupational licensure, says the Wall Street Journal.
"Travel and tourist guides, funeral attendants, home-entertainment installers, florists, makeup artists, even interpreters for the deaf are all regulated by various states. Want to work as an alarm installer? In 35 states, you will need to earn the government's permission. Are you skilled in handling animals? You will need more than that skill in the 20 states that require a license for animal training."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576443881925941712.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That ain't gonna happen. If you look at the legislative history of most licenses, you will find that they were passed at the insistence of the people being licensed either because there were so many charlatans that the public no longer trusted the industry or (possibly and) the industry wanted to limit competition by erecting barriers to entry into the field.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/28/2011 4:14 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote: ...

Goes farther back by far than legislative...the origination dates to Middle Ages in Europe for the model in Western civilization (and probably farther than that in China altho I'm not familiar w/ their practices in the area).
Only relatively recently has penchant been applied to such a wide array of activities legislatively and there is some truth in the protectionism argument in some of them but many are really public health and safety origins and quite a number stem from sufficient public harm over the years or a particular significant incident or two that made headlines by its magnitude.
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dpb wrote:

Hair brading? Flower arranging? Interior decorating? Manicurists or Pedicurists? Pet washing? Breast augmentation?
Bah!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576443881925941712.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Hmm, I know somebody that does interpreting for the deaf.
Of the many things she does, she translates for the deaf at trials.
Still think they don't need to be licensed?
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why? This could just as easily be taken care of the same way you get okayed as an expert witness. I had testified many times before I got any kind of certification. They asked about my training and experience, etc.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

My dad was an "expert witness" and many courts will simply eject a witness even with credentials when they start reaching impossible conclusions. I've seen it happen in a case where a forensic expert tried to reconstruct a fire's origin based on blurry 3 by 5 photos that he had not even personally taken. He hadn't visited the fire scene, either. Zoot! Out he went. The outcome might have been different if it has been a jury trial, I'll admit, but smart lawyers make sure the witnesses they hire are credentialed out the wazoo and well-spoken, too, before they take the stand. For engineers, the credentials part usually (not always) means having a PE license.
As for licensed translators being more competent then their unlicensed brethren all I can say is there's no shortage of appellate briefs alleging translation errors during criminal trials and in my limited experience, those allegations often prove true. That's because translation is subject to all sorts of errors.
A brief review of POTUS errors in translation (ostensibly the best translators money can buy) will reveal "I am a donut!" and "my wife is frigid," the two Presidential translation errors most cited in the press. Extra credit if you can tell me what they were really trying to say.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

The first was JFK trying to convince Germans that he was a native of Berlin ("Ich bein ein Berliner").
Don't know about the second. That's not surprising, though. Inasmuch as the phrase has been uttered, at most, once in the last century, it's rare enough to not have been recorded.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He was doing nothing of the sort, as you well know, but maybe you're just descending to your usual level of...
It's obvious that Kennedy was sending a message of solidarity with the Berliners. The amusing part is that German speakers have been arguing ever since about whether he was saying " am a a jelly doughnut" (ein Berliner), or am a Berliner."" Strictly speaking, it should have been the latter, but the message of solidarity got through anyway.
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Translation is more art than science...
All languages have dialects -- not all translators know all the possible dialects of every language they can translate...
Even sign language has several regional dialects within the US...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

NewsCorp took over DowJones (including the WSJ) in late 2007. The WSJ is now the nation's largest circulation newspaper with over 2 million subscribers (USA Today has about 1.2 million and the NY Times about 950,000).
As to the WSJ being a shill for Murdoch, their reporting doesn't seem to bear out that claim:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304567604576454224293626808.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110728-707459.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303365804576429423037684108.html
And many, similar, stories covering the issue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The wall between reporting and editing at WSJ remains in better shape than in most large metropolitan newspapers, where you don't know where the hell what you're reading comes from. If you read just the editorial pages of the WSJ you are back in the 18th century, if not earlier. But other parts of the paper still have good reporting, and most wonderful of all, good writing and editing!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

To create more jobs, create a demand for more stuff. Get money into the hands of people who will spend it.
Nobody is going to hire more workers unless they can sell more goods and services.
Which one do you actually hear? "I'd love to hire more people, but I pay too much in taxes and fees." "I'd love to hire more people, but the orders just aren't coming in to justify it."
Cindy Hamilton
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Cindy Hamilton replied to what "HeyBub" wrote
<stuff snipped>
<Which one do you actually hear? "I'd love to hire more people, but I pay too much in taxes and fees." "I'd love to hire more people, but the orders just aren't coming in to justify it.">
With HeyBub you have to ask whether he heard it on the news, in the street or in his head. (-:
-- Bobby G.
"Any prosecutor can convict a guilty man but it takes a great one to convict an innocent one."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 08:08:34 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton

None of the pols are doing anything about jobs. They ignore this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Trade_Balance_1980_2010.svg Because they are in the pocket of Wall Street. Besides that, most of them are pure yuppie, and never worked in manufacturing. They are plain dumb about how economics works. Look at where the money goes for the products you buy. Since about 1997, when whole factories began being shipped to China, the U.S. has been living on phantom money created by inflated stocks and home prices. That kept the "service" industry humming. That's mostly gone now. Cotton candy money that melted away. Also, the U.S. is incapable now of gearing that manufacturing up quickly. No base of machinists, tool and die makers, manufacturing engineers, etc. No base on the business side willing to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work necessary to get a production plant going. Mostly all gone. They're all pencil pushers, and finance manipulators seeking to pad their wallets only. Smartest thing the pols could do is just admit that they need to import Chinese manufacturing and business skill. They'd also have to level the trade playing field too. But Wall Street is opposed to all that. Probably take about 50,000 Chinamen to get the U.S. back in shape. Businessmen, engineers, tool and die makers, etc. Easily create 5-10 million jobs factory job in a few years if you let them Chinamen loose here. Manufacturing economies create wealth. Trickle up, not trickle down. All this talk about "jobs of the future" is pie in the sky yuppie bullshit. Same as that "trickle down" bullshit. Don't have to be high paying jobs. Most people hate school, but are eager to work in a factory to put food on the table and buy some stuff that pleases them. If you can find "educated" work, fine. Most people aren't cut out for that. Simple as that. We should also import maybe about 100,000 Chinese and Indian doctors and medical techs. Take care of the "health care" problem right there. Now, isn't that all reasonable?
--Vic
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Cindy Hamilton wrote:

Neither. But several congress-critters report they hear "I'd hire more people, but I don't know what the government will require of me next year."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230491110457644388192594 ...
year."
That's what their controllers PAY them to say. It's called astro-turfing. Corporate shills paid to express their handlers opinions as if they were really their own.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

Oh.
I didn't know that.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.