We’ve all seen the news about “Joe The Plumber” not being licensed and what an apparent affront this is to humanity. But, just what does it mean to be “licensed?”
Being licensed means that you have paid the government, or some governing body money so they will allow you to do what you would have been able to do in the first place, but now you won’t be fined, locked up, or put out of business.
Does it mean that you are better at doing whatever it is that you do? No, you are still as good, or bad, as you were before. The marketplace (the Free Market, that is) still will work to weed out the inept, crooked, or otherwise unmarketable.
The entire concept of requiring a “license” to do something comes directly from a monarchy (in our case: England) where it is assumed that The King (who is chosen by God to lead his country) owns everything. The King owns all of the animals, and if you want to hunt (i.e.- eat), you must pay The King for the honor of hunting “his” animals.
Why do most state governments insist that we have a “license” to carry a handgun? That’s a good question. Does it make you a better shot? Hardly. Does it demonstrate that you know the laws in regard to self-defense? Not quite. It’s not at all about “gun control.” It’s all about “control.” It’s as simple as that. You pay the government some money, and they “allow” you to carry a handgun. If you haven’t paid them money but carry a handgun anyway, they put you in jail, confiscate your handgun, and make you pay a fine.
If you help a friend with a court case, you will go to jail. Why? Because you didn’t pay someone money so they would “grant” you a license.
If you have a car and plan on driving it, you pay TWO licenses: one for you, and one for your car. Does paying the money make you or your car any safer on the road? Hardly. Driver’s Ed might, but that’s not a requirement to get yourself a license. You can take Driver’s Ed, NOT get a license, and still be a safer driver that someone who gets a license without taking the classes. It’s obviously not about safety. It’s about whether or not you have paid your money to the government. Is it bribery, or just yet another “alternative tax?”
“Joe The Plumber” must be fairly good at plumberdom. Otherwise, he wouldn’t be in high demand (and therefore wouldn’t allegedly owe thousands in taxes to The Government). If he pays the bribe to get his license, will he be any better at what he does?
Of course, if he hadn’t asked a “difficult question” about taxes of a candidate, he probably wouldn’t be in trouble for either his lack of license OR his allegedly owed taxes.
Joe is finding out just how badly The Government (and its vacuous sibling: The Media) wants us all to just unquestioningly accept them as Our Savior and Protector who are looking out for our best interests. And above all – don’t make waves.