The Disappearing Right to Earn a Living

On the other hand... my landlord in college. He did a lot of work on his house himself, and did it really badly. One example: he installed a cheap indoor light fixture outside where rain would get into it. It also happened to be on the same circuit as our refrigerator. So, sometimes when it rained, the circuit with our refrigerator on it would trip its circuit breaker.

You might be perfectly competent to do your own work on your house. The problem is, everyone that works on their own house thinks they are competent, and many of them are not.

I feel like this is one of those issues that is doomed to oscillate. A few generations will exist with these rules complaining of not being allowed to work on their own houses, and maybe these rules will change. Some injuries/deaths/just plain tiring of janky poorly done house modifications by prior owners will see a return of these rules. Repeat...

Where can we find such evidence, as opposed to anecdotes?

Regulation certainly doesn't happen all by itself. An incident happens, like 9/11, and then suddenly Dropout Joe down at the TSA is groping my barefoot grandma in front of hundreds of looky-loos.

I'm not completely anti-regulation, but I think people are perfectly capable of assessing the amount of risk they want to take for day to day maintenance on their house. I can literally drive 15 mins down the road to the local Home Depot and rent a plumbing snake for the day and do it myself. The fact that some people screwed up their own sewer lines almost certainly does not justify raising the costs for millions of other homes who need basic handy-man type services done in their homes. If I really feel like I want added protection, there's lots of options available. I can make sure my plumber is bonded, check references, for larger jobs I may want to make sure my plumber is certified by some form of trade union, etc.

My father worked as a drain cleaning specialist for many decades without a plumbing certificate. When he started his business drain cleaning was not regulated under the local plumbing trade. He knew vastly more about how to locate sewerage pipes, clean difficult lines (tight corners), which trees/shrubs were likely to be causing problems through invasive roots or causing movement of the pipes than any of the certified plumbers. He had knowledge of the types of pipes that a house within a suburb was likely to have (terra cotta, cast iron, PVC etc) and the right way to deal with blockages in each type.

He did work for many plumbers who knew they didn't have the right equipment or knowledge required for some of the larger jobs (sewerage lines vs sinks for example). Many plumbers were not interested in drain cleaning as it often involved dealing with unpleasant waste, jobs were typically only an hour or two in length while construction plumbing or gas fitting was cleaner work with more billable time. He also coordinated with the local water authority when a blockage was suspected to be in the sewer main.

My father would not do any pipe repair or fittings replacement. As he was not a licensed plumber he was not even permitted to change a tap washer.

The Plumbers Association eventually lobbied to have drain cleaning included under their certification. This came in when my father was about 50 years old. He did not want to do an apprenticeship to become a licensed plumber. An apprenticeship would have taken quite a few years at low pay to learn plumbing construction, gas fitting and a bunch of other stuff that he was not interested in doing.

So my father had to then be "supervised" by a licensed plumber. Luckily "supervised" was interpreted quite loosely for a long time.

My fathers rates for drain cleaning were substantially less per hour than a licensed plumber charged. By capturing drain cleaning under the plumbing certification - prices for drain cleaning did go up for most people.

From my perspective my father was not an "uncertified person taking advantage of the poor". An organised group (the Plumbers Association) instead lobbied to capture exclusive access to work via regulation. None of my father's associates who held plumbing licences thought it was a good change - so they helped him through "supervision" to keep working.

Generally, I see certification and regulation as a good thing. I am skeptical, however, of organised groups lobbying to increase their power/exclusive access etc through more regulation. Any such regulatory capture should be backed by solid risk analysis.

As you pointed out, the risk in drain cleaning includes damaged pipework. This could be mitigated by professional insurance, which my father carried - it does not require regulation and licensing.

I agree this is common especially in such settings, yet you are here on a tech forum arguing for the necessity of professional certification. Assuming I'm not confusing your username with another, I usually agree with your comments here on HN, but not this one.

Do you think there are differences in your background that might explain why you hold the less common view here? For example, are you involved in the legislative process? Do you hold some certifications that you feel are societally beneficial? Have you personally been hurt by the lack of regulation?

those regulations are usually in place as a result of uncertified people taking advantage of the poor

While I'm sure this is often the case, I assume you'd agree that there can be an incentive for established players to want to lock in their positions by excluding competitors? Since few consumers care enough about any particular issue to get legislation passed, the impetus for new laws often comes from industry. How do you distinguish legitimate public safety issues from protectionism by entrenched businesses?

while we're surrounded by mountains of evidence exactly to the contrary

Are there some particularly strong pieces of evidence that you can offer, especially those that might compare the situation between otherwise comparable countries with higher or lower degrees of professional certification requirements?

Do you think the US benefit from greater certification for professionals? I was surprised to learn that Switzerland requires apprenticeship and training for almost all jobs, including retail cashiers. This strikes me as overkill, but apparently has the benefit of keeping very low unemployment rates: https://www.e-tas.ch/swiss-apprentices-get-new-futures.

I think $185 is just the licensing fee from the state and does not include the cost of the training or the missed revenue/income while you're doing that training instead of running your business. So the true cost is likely much higher.