View Single Post
Old 29th Sep 2019, 23:21
  #11 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 347
Originally Posted by De_flieger View Post
From the IPA, a bunch of tobacco-funded free-market fundamentalists convinced that any form of regulation impedes their God-given rights to make a profit. The same people who brought you this, THE CASE FOR ABOLISHING OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING because they truly believe that licensing professionals such as doctors, dentists, pilots and engineers based on their qualifications is a barrier to market forces and their ideal of people working in whatever field they choose, regardless of skill, training or anything else. They literally claim that the requirement for service providers to be licensed unnecessarily increases costs of dental visits by 7%, and health checks for children by 6-16%. If you're happy for such complete deregulation such that any stranger with a Ryobi and a jar of chloroform can call themselves a dentist, or perform health checks on your children, go for your life. Abolishing any licensing requirements for professional pilots? I can't see how that could possibly backfire
Look mate, you clearly have a limited understanding of what licencing and its abolishing could mean. Let me give you an example of why this is just out of control. My wife's a doctor, went through medical training at various universities for her initial medical degree all the way up to her specialisation. Back in Europe, she paid roughly $150/year to the equivalent of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians. For that fee, she gets a quarterly issued journal showcasing nationwide advances in her field, an email address for life and stays in the loop at a public level. It's a state run body and I'm not saying they're superfluous redtape. The fee is proportionate to their services but there's no licence involved. Why should a body get to decide who is to be called doctor, engineer, lawyer or pilot in the first place and not the university from which one graduated?

Here in Australia, she is paying on average $20-$22k/year for a licence that allows her to keep the privilege of practising medicine. That's the bare truth, well north of $20k. Here's another truth: in the last three years, the year on year increase has exceeded 1.) GDP growth in nominal terms and 2.) average wage growth. And that's obviously on top of income taxes. Just how stupid do you think this is? Do you really think that the Royal Australasian College of Physicians makes Australian healthcare safer than e.g. its German, Norwegian or Swedish equivalents? Now don't think for a minute that she's foolish. These costs are borne in turn by her patients and ultimately by medicare and private insurance companies.

This article is very much on point. What piece of regulations is allowing a governing body to charge its stakeholders as much?
Okihara is offline