Comments on: on the other hand

By: Thomas O. Meehan

Thomas O. Meehan — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:10:45 +0000

I believe that barbers are licensed because they used to perform minor surgery such as lancing boils. This and the prevalence of conditions like ringworm and lice, gave the state a real interest in seeing to their training and antisepses. As for hairdressers, I suspect that you are right regarding chemicals.

By: That Downward Dog Is Filed Under Regulation 134.2 « Around The Sphere

That Downward Dog Is Filed Under Regulation 134.2 « Around The Sphere — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:08:24 +0000

[...] Freddie: Yoga isn’t exactly the same, and I wouldn’t want the same kind of certification rules for yoga instructors as for personal trainers. In fact I don’t think that regulation of yoga really makes sense at all, although clearly I’m little qualified to say. The point is, though, that regulation of personal training, at least, is worthy of discussion, and as it’s an issue of protecting people from actual physical harm, I don’t think its passage would signal some sort of creep towards a nightmare regulatory state. Incidentally, regulations that protect people from bodily harm are what a lot of people actually want most from government, and expect most from government, save for the police and firefighting. People like being able to walk into a public building and knowing that there is an assurance from government that it won’t fall down on their heads, or that the electricity won’t suddenly cause a wall to burst into flames. [...]

By: quadmoniker

quadmoniker — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:16:57 +0000

Sorry, I meant to comment on the main post.

By: quadmoniker

quadmoniker — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:16:17 +0000

I’m not sure I understand your distinction between yoga, which is a strength and cardio exercise, and personal training. They’re essentially the same thing. You can hurt yourself with yoga, just as easily as if you were working with weights or doing intensive cardio. If you’re going to argue that you should license and regulate personal training, yoga should go with that too.

By: Jason Kuznicki

Jason Kuznicki — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:18:52 +0000

First, I’d challenge the distinction between personal training and yoga. Many yoga regimens can be quite intense and athletic.

But second, I’d suggest that this line of argument may be defending regulation by anecdote. It’s easy to find people who were injured by personal trainers. Liberty interests aside, and speaking strictly about costs and benefits to public health, “some people get injured” isn’t an argument in favor of regulation — we need to know that the regulations will actually prevent the injuries (not always easy), and that the removal of many personal trainers from the market will not adversely affect public health — causing more illness and injury than it prevents.

By: Jason Kuznicki

Jason Kuznicki — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:12:11 +0000

I don’t know about florists, but I believe hairdressers are licensed because they work with toxic substances. It’s a matter of safety, not of assuring you get a nice bob.

But this isn’t actually the case. Virginia Postrel has examined African hair braiders in New York, who do NOT use toxic substances (or really “substances” at all), but who still have to learn how to style caucasian hair. A licensing regime may start out with the best of intentions, but once it’s established, the licensed practitioners are going to do everything they can to prevent others’ entry.

By: North

North — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:00:53 +0000

Freddie, as soon as we create a group of “liscenced personal trainers” who have incurred expense and effort to get the government to certify them as such we have then created an interest group who have strong incentive to lobby for the government to make it increasingly difficult for people outside said group to offer similar services. And government rarely needs much convincing to expand their reach. We’ve seen it in virtually every industry or service that regulation has ever descended upon.

I know that let the buyer beware is tough, but there’s nothing preventing the injured buyer from launching a devastating lawsuit against the malificent trainer and damnit we have to stop somewhere? We can -always- find unfortunates in every group and service to use as a banner for increased regulation. It’s just “Won’t somebody think of the children!?!?” in different words.

By: Nancy Irving

Nancy Irving — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 08:43:08 +0000

“Florists, for instance, need to be certified in most states, as do hair-stylists. This means expensive schooling for people who may not even need it. It is expensive and doesn’t really guarantee a good hair-cut…”

I don’t know about florists, but I believe hairdressers are licensed because they work with toxic substances. It’s a matter of safety, not of assuring you get a nice bob.

Everybody (?) agrees that doctors, nurses and other medical technicians need to be licensed. The issue is the same–safety. The question when it comes to people like trainers is whether the dangers posed by not licensing them are, as with the case of medical personnel, sufficiently serious to merit government involvement.

By: John Schwenkler

John Schwenkler — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:44:00 +0000

What Erik said. In practice, official licensing guidelines mean state-enforced licensure requirements, which is why I’m disallowed from taking money for my services as an amateur interior designer across much of the U.S.

By: E.D. Kain

E.D. Kain — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:39:19 +0000

So you’re in effect saying that there should be no requirements for licensure to work as a personal trainer, but if you want to be a Licensed Personal Trainer, there should be some guide for that? That seems reasonable, though I’d say it should be a state-level license, not federal.

Then again, it seems that once you start moving in this direction you get more and more of a push for requiring burdensome licensing across the board. Florists, for instance, need to be certified in most states, as do hair-stylists. This means expensive schooling for people who may not even need it. It is expensive and doesn’t really guarantee a good hair-cut any more than the markets would. It seems that once you start opening these doors, getting government involved, you really have a hard time turning back the clock.

And quite frankly, I’d rather have my tax dollars going toward cops and schools and fixing pot-holes.