Video: Oregon demands 80-year-old barber go back to school

posted at 12:55 pm on February 7, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The Institute for Justice will fight another interesting case on business licensing, this time in Oregon, where an 80-year-old barber with 50 years experience has been told he needs to go back to school to qualify for his license.  Just as in the case of Louisiana casket makers and tour guides in Philadelphia and Washington DC, licensing laws that threaten to kill a 50-year small business demonstrates the unholy alliance between Big Business and Big Government at the state level:

The Wall Street Journal has a timely report on the phenomenon:

“Occupations prefer to be licensed because they can restrict competition and obtain higher wages,” said Morris Kleiner, a labor professor at the University of Minnesota. “If you go to any statehouse, you’ll see a line of occupations out the door wanting to be licensed.”

While some states have long required licensing for workers who handle food or touch others—caterers and hair stylists, for example—economists say such regulation is spreading to more states for more industries. The most recent study, from 2008, found 23% of U.S. workers were required to obtain state licenses, up from just 5% in 1950, according to data from Mr. Kleiner. In the mid-1980s, about 800 professions were licensed in at least one state. Today, at least 1,100 are, according to the Council on Licensure, Enforcement and Regulation, a trade group for regulatory bodies. Among the professions licensed by one or more states: florists, interior designers, private detectives, hearing-aid fitters, conveyor-belt operators and retailers of frozen desserts. …

But economists—and workers shut out of fields by educational requirements or difficult exams—say licensing mostly serves as a form of protectionism, allowing veterans of the trade to box out competitors who might undercut them on price or offer new services.

Coincidentally, Rasmussen will have a poll out later today showing that voters have connected the dots on this partnership.  More than two-thirds of voters (68%) believe that Big Business and Big Government work together to stifle competition and carve out as much of the economy for each other as possible.  The issue usually gets framed in terms of “corporate welfare” and tax breaks, but at the state level, licensing is a much more efficient way to handicap small players and start-ups from competing against well-capitalized larger ventures.

That doesn’t just benefit the big players in a market, either.  States strapped for cash have expanded licensing laws and fees to grab more revenue where they can.  It’s no accident that licensing has increased almost fivefold over the last sixty years.  Those laws allow the state to find new sources of revenue as well as create more bureaucratic jobs that give public-sector unions more opportunities for their own revenue enhancements.  It’s win-win all the way around for everyone but taxpayers and small operators in licensed markets.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

See: Greece.

lorien1973 on February 7, 2011 at 12:57 PM

You know how barbers should be licensed? If you get a bad haircut you don’t go back. And soon they find another line of work. The licensing scam is unbelievable . . .

SoRight on February 7, 2011 at 1:00 PM

So, if illegal drugs are legalized, wouldn’t that require oversight and licensure to insure product quality? Seems only right.

a capella on February 7, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Considering this guy’s age, and the fact that being that age, he doesn’t have to put up with certified BS like this, if I were him, I recommend he permanently close shop, announce his retirement with intentions to move out of state, and as he crosses the state line, turn around and issue a great big supersized FU in the general direction of the Oregon state capital, thereby telling Oregon to take its idiotic business licensing law and insert it with extreme prejudice in that special place where the sun shineth not.

pilamaye on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Once again liberals prove without doubt that liberalism is a mental disorder. In seems that this barber’s customers are not smart enough to choose who cuts their hair. Its only going to get worse. In Detroit, a city devastated by liberal leadership, the reader comprehension for half adults is the 6th grade. Sure worked there.

volsense on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

They need to license politicians then, make them take some basic economics and business classes.

reaganaut on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

When you need a license to have a child, call me. Until then, the rest is just crap.

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Once again liberals prove without doubt that liberalism is a mental disorder. In seems that this barber’s customers are not smart enough to choose who cuts their hair. Its only going to get worse. In Detroit, a city devastated by liberal leadership, the reader comprehension for half adults is the 6th grade. Sure worked there.

volsense on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Well, the licensing thing keeps me from having to get a haircut in a dark alley with dull scissors…or something.

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Peoples Republik of Oregon.

portlandon on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

This was the conversation at my local barber shop 10 days ago. Ridiculous but welcome to Oregon. We still have to get emissions tests and you can’t pump your own gas. They’ve run out of people to tax.

ORconservative on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

no ‘grandfather’ clause?

cmsinaz on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

The spokesman in the video talks about the “…constitutional right to earn a living”. Exactly how does that square with a regime that believes “…at some point you’ve earned enough”?

SKYFOX on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

This barber could be able to teach the course, not have to take the classes.

portlandon on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

You know how barbers should be licensed? If you get a bad haircut you don’t go back. And soon they find another line of work. The licensing scam is unbelievable . . .

SoRight on February 7, 2011 at 1:00 PM

The unionized trades work the same way. It used to be (and still is the case in many fields) that you had to go through a multi-year apprenticeship (with a union master) to be a plumber, electrician, brick layer, pipe fitter, carpenter, etc. That allowed the union to constrict competition and keep wages high.

It’s ridiculous. I don’t mind having attorneys (I’m a lawyer myself), doctors, nurses, engineers, etc. licensed, since to do a decent job at any of those things, you already need to go to school for quite some time. So, the marginal cost of the licensing isn’t that high, and they don’t really limit the number of folks who get the license. But this licensing crap (and corporate welfare generally) have got to stop.

Outlander on February 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM

In Detroit, a city devastated by liberal leadership, the reader comprehension for half adults is the 6th grade. Sure worked there.

volsense on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

But, but, Detroit is coming back and is better and stuff. A rapper on a Super Bowl commercial told me so.

catmman on February 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Look, there are always requirements to have certain jobs. It’s not like you could get a government job without showing various forms, documents, birth certif…

Uhhhh, nevermind.

TiminPhx on February 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM

I wanted to hear about the barber’s story, but all I got in the video is some lawyer talking.

Mark1971 on February 7, 2011 at 1:07 PM

States strapped for cash have expanded licensing laws and fees to grab more revenue where they can

Texas: You have to pass written exams and an eye exam to get your first license. But no road test. No money in road tests?

tomg51 on February 7, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Oh… I thought they were sending him back to school so that he could teach at twice his present salary in order to thank him for the years of serving his community professionally.

princetrumpet on February 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

The ACLU runs to this man’s defense in 5…4….3…2…

Limerick on February 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

They need to license politicians then, make them take some basic economics and business classes.

reaganaut on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

And some civics classes.

Jay Mac on February 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Why don’t they just grandfather him in? And if they don’t have a clause allowing it, they are the ones who need to go back to school.

Blake on February 7, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Let’s hope that at 80 he doesn’t mistake an ear for a ribbon ;)

Richard Romano on February 7, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Well, the licensing thing keeps me from having to get a haircut in a dark alley with dull scissors…or something.
BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 1:04 PM

The safety rationale for hair care professionals is ridiculous. Chefs are unlicensed and food poisoning is probably just as dangerous as getting injured by bacteria transfer or improperly mixed hair dye. Yet, somehow, there aren’t huge rashes of food poisoning all over the place.

Outlander on February 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Why don’t they just grandfather him in? And if they don’t have a clause allowing it, they are the ones who need to go back to school.

Blake on February 7, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Because common sense is taboo in Big Gvt.

RedNewEnglander on February 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM

We still have to get emissions tests and you can’t pump your own gas. They’ve run out of people to tax.

ORconservative on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

You can’t pump your own gas? Anywhere in the state?
Just wondering…did Oregon sign onto the lawsuit against Obamacare?

SKYFOX on February 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM

We can all thank turn-of-the-previous-century progressives, most especially Andrew Carnegie, for licensing laws. Carnegie’s main rationale, if I remember correctly, was that business operators would be more malleable if the government could yank their livelihood away. The promised benefit was that frauds and gougers would be policed, to the benefit of consumers. But this has never been a big feature of licensed specialties, probably because they end up self-policing and a guild-mentality sets in where the real crime lies in doing something innovative that threatens to take away business from others in the guild or requires them to update their operations.

Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 1:17 PM

department of compliance

forest on February 7, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Proof that this country has officially jumped the shark number 800:

Florists are in the list of professions that have a licensing requirement somewhere.

Thank you whoever came up with that; you may have just saved by Valentine’s Day! I am so relieved I have a licensed florist to wrap my flowers in paper and drive them over to me.

kenro85 on February 7, 2011 at 1:22 PM

awww c’mon Ed….a post like this is incomplete unless it has one thing–that is, Rodney Dangerfield!

Back to School!

ted c on February 7, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Yep. In my state you have to have training & a permit to operate a fork lift. No OJT. Ya gotta go to ‘skool’ for it. Same goes for tow truck operators. These are just two I know of.

JimP on February 7, 2011 at 1:23 PM

I want politicians licensed, just like my dog.

Bruno Strozek on February 7, 2011 at 1:24 PM

O.M.G. you mean to tell me Obama has no instituted Barber panels?? The indignity of it all…

Bradky on February 7, 2011 at 1:24 PM

AND big farming…./USDA

I read an amazing thing todat:
that there are more people in our prisons than are on our farms, here in the bread basket of the world.

That’s disturbing in some very soul depth way to me.

golfmann on February 7, 2011 at 1:24 PM

About the only licensing hair cutters should need is about sanitation and the spread of lice.
You are just being obnoxious if you require that they attend some kind of hair cutting school.

Count to 10 on February 7, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Big business and big government are not the only players. I think that big education benefits the most from this.

What better way to pump money into liberal universities than to require workers to take classes?

Amphipolis on February 7, 2011 at 1:27 PM

I really hate this BS.

WisCon on February 7, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Texas: You have to pass written exams and an eye exam to get your first license. But no road test. No money in road tests?

tomg51 on February 7, 2011 at 1:07 PM

I got my TX DL in 1977, and I had to take a driving test, with a uniformed DPS trooper riding along. Back then, the schools ran all the driver instruction programs (classroom, simulator, behind the wheel). Now it’s been privatized to mainly mom-and-pop-owned driving schools.

BTW, here in TX, barbers and cosmetologists have been licensed for as long as I can remember.

Ward Cleaver on February 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Peoples Republik of Oregon.

portlandon on February 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

God help you!

upinak on February 7, 2011 at 1:35 PM

As a licensed provider for 14 yrs, I believe that state licensing for most profession is as Ed asserts—a farce. It makes sense to license the medical professions and such. Beyond that, it is merely a revenue stream. Licensing begets fees, requires educations and more fees, certification etc…it’s a circle jerk built on the presumption that the state is protecting the public from ‘something.’ With the medical professions that’s true, with most others it is not.

ted c on February 7, 2011 at 1:36 PM

I don’t mind having attorneys (I’m a lawyer myself), doctors, nurses, engineers, etc. licensed, since to do a decent job at any of those things, you already need to go to school for quite some time. So, the marginal cost of the licensing isn’t that high, and they don’t really limit the number of folks who get the license.

Outlander on February 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM

One thing that is restricting the number of nurses is the insistance on a college degree. My mom and wife were both trained in Nursing Schools, that were part of a hospital. They took the classes and did work in the different wards from day one. Both became RNs in 3 years.

There are very few Nursing Schools left that operate this way. The “requirement” for a BSN degree is pretty much just a cash generator for colleges. Many new RNs show up for work and have to be “trained” to work the floors.

My wife, who had held previous supervisory jobs, is now ineligible to apply because she doesn’t have a degree to go with her 30 years of experience. She’s ok with that, as she really likes her current position. But a RN with less than 2 years on the job, with very little experience in actual nursing can walk in as a department head.

TugboatPhil on February 7, 2011 at 1:41 PM

You want to build something for commercial use? Better have your license, and your planning board recommendation, and your zoning approval, and your land development plan approval, and your conservation district erosion and sedimentation plan approval and your state historic preservation office approval, and your tribal historic office approvals, and your environmental approvals, and your forestry office review/stamp. Get all of that stuff, and you can pay for your zoning permit and pay a third party company that specializes in red tape to review your plans again and issue a building permit. Then you go back and get a certificate of occupancy. Oh and don’t forget to pay handsomely to get your full-sized and duly stamped and signed and notarized (by Twp, County, owner etc) land development plans recorded at the county, but only go if you are absolutely sure all the notary blocks have been filled out perfectly.

Did I forget anything?

forest on February 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM

da wun should make james carville his “Barber Czar”

RealMc on February 7, 2011 at 1:44 PM

They need to license politicians then, make them take some basic economics and business classes.

reaganaut on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

And some civics classes.

Jay Mac on February 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

And history, geography, science, biology…

I tell you… That is complete education. 90% of politicians will just quit. If they did all that right they won’t be politicians.

antisocial on February 7, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Simple solution: turn his barber shop into the Scissors and Trimmers Rental Store. You rent the scissors for your haircut and decide whether you want to cut your hair yourself or have him demonstrate. He no longer is cutting hair, he is demonstrating his products.

(Yes, it’s insane; but what else works against government?)

michaelo on February 7, 2011 at 1:48 PM

We can all thank turn-of-the-previous-century progressives, most especially Andrew Carnegie, for licensing laws. Carnegie’s main rationale, if I remember correctly, was that business operators would be more malleable if the government could yank their livelihood away…
Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Funny. I’ve read the Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie, as well as the works of Napoleon Hill, and I sure don’t recall Carnegie holding to a philosophy like this, much less being a progressive. Did I miss something?

pilamaye on February 7, 2011 at 1:51 PM

He should consider being president. I hear the experience requirements are less strict.

rogerb on February 7, 2011 at 1:57 PM

I wonder how long we’ll be able to operate this comment box without a license.

stevezilla on February 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Don’t forget, my fellow Texans, if you work on computers, you must have a Private Investigator’s License.

Stegall Tx on February 7, 2011 at 2:00 PM

@pilamaye: “I sure don’t recall Carnegie holding to a philosophy like this, much less being a progressive. Did I miss something?”

Yes, you did. You can easily confirm if you have internet search skills.

Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 2:00 PM

He should consider being president. I hear the experience requirements are less strict.

rogerb on February 7, 2011 at 1:57 PM

the residency requirements certainly are…

said it.

ted c on February 7, 2011 at 2:01 PM

@pilamaye: “I sure don’t recall Carnegie holding to a philosophy like this, much less being a progressive. Did I miss something?”

Yes, you did. You can easily confirm if you have internet search skills.

Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Actually, part of my job is searching the internet, so I am more than familiar with the search process. But I also do this other thing that some out there would consider to be kind of out of touch with modern technology, almost anachronistic these days, known as “reading books”.

And in the books I have read by Napoleon Hill, W.Clement Stone, and Carnegie himself, I don’t recall seeing anything that would show Carnegie as being a progressive.

Unless you considered the concept of a full day’s work for a full day’s pay, or striving to be successful in everything you do being progressive.

Oh, and that includes the stuff that I did happen to search the web on, just like I have done since like around 1998.

pilamaye on February 7, 2011 at 2:09 PM

My barber has complained for years about his strict licensing requirements and regulations.

Paul-Cincy on February 7, 2011 at 2:10 PM

They need to license politicians then, make them take some basic economics and business classes.

reaganaut on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Better yet, require they operate a business and figure their own taxes (accurately) for a certain length of time before they qualify to be a politician.

Stegall Tx on February 7, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Oh, and chaz, I think that Nightingale-Conant would also sort of dispute the Carnegie-As-Progressive idea as well.

pilamaye on February 7, 2011 at 2:15 PM

liberalism is so cool.

moonbatkiller on February 7, 2011 at 2:17 PM

The promised benefit was that frauds and gougers would be policed, to the benefit of consumers. But this has never been a big feature of licensed specialties, probably because they end up self-policing and a guild-mentality sets in where the real crime lies in doing something innovative that threatens to take away business from others in the guild or requires them to update their operations.
Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 1:17 PM

You make a good case for getting rid of the FDA & the USDA.
They do not protect you from anything.
For instance, USDA ‘Inspected’ meat is a LIE.
They don’t have inspectors much anymore at the big places.
They let the big slaughter houses police themselves for stuff like E. coli.

What better way to pump money into liberal universities than to require workers to take classes?
Amphipolis on February 7, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Teacher licenses are a big frigging JOKE.
Aside from making a teacher take a test & complete student teaching, why make them take all of the ‘continuing education’ classes AKA FRAUDULENT graduate credit.
The continuing education classes teachers have to take for license renewal are nothing but usually going to some seminar & listening to some bozo’s powerpoint presentation about the new fads in education or about bullying or some such garbage & paying to get a grad credit for doing it all day.
This is a huge SHAM.
I do not need to waste my $$ this way when I am continuially educating myself on the subjects I teach bcs science teacher cont ed classes are nothing but learn some stupid cookbook lab & you’re done.
I want real information & I have to go find it myself.
And it doesn’t count for cont ed.

TugboatPhil on February 7, 2011 at 1:41 PM

There are nurses in the local hospital I will not let touch me.
I ask for some of the LPNs or CNAs bcs they know what they are doing.
Many nurses do not even know how to draw blood for God’s sake.

Badger40 on February 7, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Interestingly, it’s much more difficult to get a license to cut hair than to get license to carry a gun.
A stylist has to actually physically prove that they are capable of properly executing a variety of basic styles to become licensed.
To get an LTC (at least in MA) one simply has to attend a 3-hour safety course and pass a 20 question multiple choice test. Proving the ability to actually shoot a gun is not required but one has to be literate enough to write and essay explaining to the sheriff the reasons why they want and need said license.

racecar05 on February 7, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Shear lunacy. I hope he laughs all the way to the bank due to all the new customers.

Christien on February 7, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Meanwhile, next door in Idaho, the National Ski Patrol is trying to pass an exemption for their members to PRACTICE MEDICINE without a licence simply because they don’t consider their free ski passes “payment” for services. While volunteer EMTs and such have to have such horrible requirements as a background check, continuing education and an unbiased test to verify that they know what they are doing. There will be no limits on what ski patrollers are allowed to do (give shots, perform surgery, deliver babies) on or off the slopes if this passes.

spudmom on February 7, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Actually, pilamaye, Carnegie, working largely in conjunction with Rockefeller, was a leading progressive (the George Soroses of their day).

But I sympathize with you. You see, I write books, academic ones, and you must be diligent to ferret out the real story. This was, after all, the era of the British Fabians who counseled all socialists and progressives to dissemble about purposes and motives, the better to make progress without arousing the suspicion of the rubes. You will have a very difficult time, if relying on popular works, to discover for example that eugenics, Prohibition and the revival of the KKK were progressive causes, but they were.

The last book I wrote included an account of Carnegie’s Flexner Report that shut down the majority of medical schools in the country and ended most medical modes other than so-called allopathic medicine. All schools had to model themselves on Harvard and, especially, Johns Hopkins, the bastion schools of progressivism.

Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

That is LIBERALISM for ya….

hawkman on February 7, 2011 at 2:41 PM

My father always cut my hair when I was a boy.
Once I got married he taught my wife how to cut hair in one single lesson.
My wife has done an excellent job of cutting my hair for 31 years now.
We have six daughters. The three married daughters learned to cut their husband’s hair from their mother.

Licensing keeps the hair cutting schools in business and limits competition in the industry.

YouTube should (and probably already has) have a set of excellent instructional videos on how to cut a mans hair.

Our family is a barber free zone.

The Rock on February 7, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Our family is a barber free zone.

The Rock on February 7, 2011 at 2:50 PM

It won’t be long before someone is knocking on your door demanding back business licenses.

right2bright on February 7, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Licensing requirements are a bit like taxes. If they are onerous, then businesses are hampered and the economy suffers. On the other hand, if there are none, modern society doesn’t funciton very well. We want law enforcement, fire protection, well-maintained roads, etc. Similarly, we want certain minimum standards of sanitation and competence on the part of businesses that have the potential to cause injury and sickness if they don’t know (or don’t care) how to exercise proper care.

In the case of both taxes and licensure, the tension is over what is “too little” or “too much.” Neither “zero” nor “100%” will work, obviously. There is much room for much debate in between those extremes.

acasilaco on February 7, 2011 at 3:03 PM

Same deal with building permits. They are first a source of revenue directly, and second a way to gather intel on your property so they can raise your taxes.

slickwillie2001 on February 7, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Actually, pilamaye, Carnegie, working largely in conjunction with Rockefeller, was a leading progressive (the George Soroses of their day).

But not until after they had become gazillionaires, and were no longer “building” their enterprises.

If the Carnegie’s, Rockefellers, and the other “robber barons” were progressive, why did unions come into existence? Why did Congress have to pass labor laws?

Your argument destroys itself. The origin of the progressive movement in the US was in direct response to the capitalism practiced by the robber barons, who in your argument, were “progressive”.

Sheesh.

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM

I suspect there will be an underground network of shavers.

What about those that give haircuts at home to their family? Will there be invasions?

seven on February 7, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Our family is a barber free zone.

The Rock on February 7, 2011 at 2:50 PM

FlowBee Baby!

I hear they’re updating the commercial to include “No license required”.

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Years ago, I spent a week, paid for by the hospital, to train to be a nurses aid. I learned to take temps, blood pressure levels, pulse. How to give baths, and turn, feed, and generally care for patients. I gave great back rubs. LOL All of this, under the supervision of an RN. In one week. Then I went to work on the floor. What I didn’t know, or wasn’t sure of, there were nurses there to help or answer questions. I could do almost anything a nurse did, except for give meds, or shots.

Now days, you have to spend 6 months to become a nurses aid, because states found a way to make money there. Then they stripped LPN’s and LVN’s, depending on where you live, of a lot of their abilities, as nurses. They could no longer tend to IV’s, (Not set up an IV) but tend to one. In some if not most cases, they can’t even give a shot anymore.

Does this shock me? Nope. I’ve been seeing this go on for years, and don’t like it. It’s just another way to cripple the little guys. It has absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of patients, and everything to do, to create bigger more intrusive govts.

What I do find amazing though are…the states that buck and kick at the Federal level of interference in their states, are the same states that have been participating in this kind of crap for years!!!

capejasmine on February 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM

I’m starting to wonder is there is anyone left in this country, that isn’t either a welfare recipient, rent seeker, or aspires to be one of the two?

“If you go to any statehouse, you’ll see a line of occupations out the door wanting to be licensed.”

How much did that barber college have to bribe the Poli Sci retards, to get a requirement that all barbers in California attend that particular school?!

MNHawk on February 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM

Better yet, require they operate a business and figure their own taxes (accurately) for a certain length of time before they qualify to be a politician.

Stegall Tx on February 7, 2011 at 2:12 PM

I’ve been advocating a constitutional amendment for years. It would require every elected official and every person appointed to any job by any elected official to prepare and file their own taxes without any outside help including family members. Anyone who couldn’t do this would immediately be removed from office and/or precluded for ever running for office or holding a politically appointed job. This would serve two purposes it would limit the number of people who could hold office and would immediately result in the complete overhaul of our tax systems.

Oldnuke on February 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM

@BobMbx

Can’t you even trouble yourself to complete a basic search before spouting off your pet ignorances? Try Wikipedia on Progressive Era, for a basic update.

Chaz on February 7, 2011 at 3:45 PM

They need to license politicians then, make them take some basic economics and business classes.

reaganaut on February 7, 2011 at 1:02 PM

And spay, and neuter, and de-worm.

nico on February 7, 2011 at 3:51 PM

OMG! The Oregon Barber Police are soon targeting my house, I just know it! I’ve cut my own hair for years, and now they are sure to be demanding I go to barber school, get a special category of license (you know, that one for cutting your own hair), requiring that I pay retroactive fees for barbering myself without a license, and tacking on penalties and interest as well! I’m gonna’ be ruined!

What do I do when they find out I shave myself, too… and use a straight razor for that!

/sarc

DaveK on February 7, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Oh Noes! I’m a hair criminal … I use a FlowBee on my hair … I also use it on the kid’s hair … and I’m not a licensed hair professional!!!

I guess we’re all supposed to be wearing pony tails from now on.

PoliTech on February 7, 2011 at 4:24 PM

This guy doesn’t bother me…what does is that people actually have bought and used a Flowbee, and they are allowed to vote.

right2bright on February 7, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Texas: You have to pass written exams and an eye exam to get your first license. But no road test. No money in road tests?

tomg51 on February 7, 2011 at 1:07 PM

The year I got my license, the driving test requirement had been removed for minors who had passed an approved driving course. Now that my kid is about to get her license, the driving test is required again (for those under 18, at least).

VerbumSap on February 7, 2011 at 5:08 PM

I know its not popular to say but……

We no longer live in a free country. Its more free than most but far from truly free.

The criminalization of America has come to a point where we can no longer possibly know or understand the ridiculous amount of laws and requirements placed on living a normal life.

Add this barber’s instance and the increasing regulation on every aspect of living, (light bulbs, toilets, refrigerators, cars, etc) and you have a soft tyranny.

When i was a kid we had 1/100th of the laws created to “save us from ourselves, or the earth from us” and we were just fine. Its about nothing but control. The nudging is quickly becoming pushing in this generation.

I feel like the founders would not recognize the country we live in today, in fact, we may not recognize the nation we grew up in if we dont turn this ship around very soon.

alecj on February 7, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Actually, pilamaye, Carnegie, working largely in conjunction with Rockefeller, was a leading progressive (the George Soroses of their day).

But not until after they had become gazillionaires, and were no longer “building” their enterprises.

If the Carnegie’s, Rockefellers, and the other “robber barons” were progressive, why did unions come into existence? Why did Congress have to pass labor laws?

Your argument destroys itself. The origin of the progressive movement in the US was in direct response to the capitalism practiced by the robber barons, who in your argument, were “progressive”.

Sheesh.

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM

If you study the outcome of progressive policies, you will see what they really want is a slave state, in which the workers life is not notably different from the factory workers of the 1890s.

Slowburn on February 7, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Licensing is a nice racket for “Big Education”, too. Licensing almost always is accompanied by “continuing education” requirements. Cui bono….

{^_^}

herself on February 8, 2011 at 3:09 AM

Wow, yer getting linked on FARK….I haven’t read the comments there yet but they’re usually teeth grindingly stupid.

BigWyo on February 9, 2011 at 7:41 PM