The Dangers of Licensing

Posted by freedomforall 1 month, 3 weeks ago to Politics
6 comments | Share | Flag

"Many people think that licensing professions – medicine, for instance – is a sound idea because it reduces quackery.

Well, so much for that, eh?

Consider the contrary alternative – as applied to the practice of another profession. That of journalism. Anyone is free to write, without having to beg the state or a state-enforced guild of some kind (that’s you American Medical Association) for permission to do so. Permission that is conditional. Permission that can be rescinded – and for more than what is styled “malpractice,” as regards the practice of medicine.

The latter having become synonymous with obedience.

The state of California, as a for-instance, along with the medical guild that holds a sword of Damcoles over the heads of physicians in California via the threat of taking away their permission to practice, has been trying to do just that to any doctor who tells the truth about the inefficacy of “masks,” alternatives to the “vaccines” or questions anything the state/guild state as absolute truths that may not be questioned.

And the truth is no defense."

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by LibertyBelle 1 month, 3 weeks ago
    If we did away with licensing, there could still be non-governmental associations (Such as the BBB), and if these organizations behaved in a manner that gained the confidence of the public, it might look better for a company to belong to one of them; but still, if a license were not required, people would still be free to judge for themselves. And if a reputable Association began to get sloppy over time, someone else might expose it, and then maybe new associations would spring up to take its place. Of course, it would be necessary to be careful whom one trusted. But isn't that always necessary in a free country?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Ben_C 1 month, 3 weeks ago
    In this day and age the courts have more regulatory powers than the states. At least in a malpractice case a jury of your peers will decide if you screwed up. I have been an expert witness in a malpractice case and I know how it works. The problem with the state is there isn't any recourse for wrongfully charged and the accusers are immune from counter-suit. No risk for them - "just doing my job." .Its insane the amount of money I pay to the federal and state bureaucracies in order to make a living and practice my profession. Come the revolution........
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo