A rough rule of thumb was three hours outside of class for every hour in class, meaning that for those three hours credit a student was expected to spend 48 hours in class and another 144 preparing. However, for the purpose of the following discussion we can ignore the out-of-class hours. Bottom line - to get three hours of college credit you generally need to spend 48 hours in class. For convenience's sake, let's round that up to 50.
Remember that number - 50 hours.
Now a slight change of subject:
I have long been a proponent of small government. As Henry David Thoreau said, "That government is best which governs least." This is true when it comes to governing citizens, and equally true when it comes to governing small enterprises. Today, we are stuck with a leviathan that insists on extending its tentacles into the tiniest and most unlikely of places.
For example:
It Takes 300 Hours to Become a Shampooer in Tennessee
Yes, you read that right. In order to engage in an act as simple as shampooing, the state of Tennessee demands that "shampoo technicians" spend approximately 8 weeks learning the intricacies of lather-rinse-repeat.
The Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners defines a shampoo technician as a “person who brushes, combs, shampoos, rinses and conditions upon the hair and scalp,” and the state began requiring shampoo technicians to attain a license in 1996.“practice and theory” of shampooing - really?
To get a license, aspiring technicians must pay a $140 fee to the state, complete at least 300 hours of education in a course on the “practice and theory” of shampooing, and must be at least 16 years old.
Remember that "50 hours" figure discussed above? According to the state of Tennessee, it takes the equivalent of six college courses (300/50) to figure out how to wash someone's hair.
Sigh...
But it's not just shampoo technicians, and it's not just Tennessee.
According to a study released by the Obama administration in July, the percentage of the workforce covered by state licensing laws grew from less than 5 percent in the 1950s to 25 percent in 2008.How did we ever survive the 1950s, when only 5% of the workforce was licensed?
The cherry on top of this regulatory sundae?
... licenses rarely are recognized across state lines, which disproportionately affects military spouses.There are two primary reasons for the creep of licensing requirements: special interest groups, and power-hungry government regulators. The special interest groups - often entrenched businesses - use their influence to convince legislators to pass anti-competitive legislation. Meanwhile, government functionaries follow a basic imperative: expand, or die.
“Once you get a board in place to do something that might have commonsense value, that board has an incentive to keep broadening their power and expanding things under their control...”Sad to say, I don't see the situation improving anytime soon. In fact, I fully expect it to get worse, no matter who gets elected in November. It's the nature of the beast.
I love my country, but I fear its government.
8 comments:
So much for the land of the free.
In Louisiana you have to be licensed to be a florist - "You know, flowers 'n' shit."
MC
Ronnie had it spot on:
The most terrifying words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Now with Obama and his jolly band of SS agents at the helm multiply the "terror" part by 10,000!
Just to be contrary, in Colorado you need to be licensed to sell cars, or to be a car dealer, or a wholesaler. Fees aren't too high. You do need to pass a criminal background check. Dealers must have a high credit score and financial net worth.
I do agree with the main premise of your post.
Just curious - why do you need a license to sell cars - or anything else, for that matter? Do you know when that became a requirement? The net worth requirement makes sense, but other than that, I don't know...
I go back to "the percentage of the workforce covered by state licensing laws grew from less than 5 percent in the 1950s..."
Did car dealers need a license back then, or is it more recent? And was there a huge public outcry for licensing, or was it the brainstorm of already established car moguls?
Again - just curious. I'm not picking on you, and I get that some degree of 'protecting the public' is necessary. But I'm not convinced that a person needs government approval to sell cars - or just about anything else. Buyer beware, and all that good stuff...
The whole regulating the car business started as a way for the players to limit competition. Didn't work out quite like they planned. Consumer groups co-opted the dealer board.Two dealers, two consumers, and one at large. As for salespeople, it is an industry that hires people no one else will hire to do a job no one else will do. Que sarcasm font here. The opportunities for larceny are widespread. An example happened where a salesman collected $2,000 in cash from a customer. Instead of going back to the managers office with the money, he went out the back door and decamped. Passing a criminal background check is probably a good thing for people handling large sums of cash.
WSF - thanks for the reply. That's the way most licensing schemes start; a way for established interests to limit competition.
I didn't realize car sales was such a cash business. Every one I've bought or sold involved a check.
In this case the $2,000 was a down payment. Once sold a 1 ton pickup for $22,000 or so. Customer paid in Benjis. Lots of used sales under $5,000 are cash deals. Eastern Europeans almost always pay in cash.
While not openly displayed, most managers have a firearm handy. I did. Never had to bring it out but have acquaintances in the business who did.
Once had a "customer" pull one on me. Dumb shit had the safety on. He went to jail with broken fingers and severe facial bruises.
Post a Comment