Posted on 04/05/2005 10:04:08 PM PDT by goldstategop
Every once in a while, people in Washington have a good idea. A really good idea. An idea that creates jobs and provides a service people like.
Then, the government gets involved.
Some years ago, a married couple, Taalib-Din Uqdah and Pamela Farrell, went into business braiding hair, African-style. They called their shop Cornrows & Co. If politicians' speeches are right, Uqdah and Farrell were heroes: Inner cities need businesses, and the couple had built a booming business in Washington, D.C. They had 20,000 customers, employed 10 people and took in half a million dollars a year. Some women came from as far away as Connecticut, six hours away, to have their hair braided by Cornrows & Co.
Did the politicians honor these entrepreneurs for contributing to the community? Find ways to encourage others to do similar things? Well, the government did respond. But it wasn't with encouragement.
Local bureaucrats ordered Uqdah to cease and desist, or be "subject to criminal prosecution." Why? Because he didn't have a license. "It's a safety issue," said the regulators. Those who run a hair salon must have a cosmetology license. The chemicals they use dyeing or perming hair might hurt someone.
Hair dye is hardly a serious safety threat, but even if it were, Cornrows & Co. didn't dye or perm hair. They only braided it. That didn't matter, said the Cosmetology Board -- they still had to get a license. In order to get one, Uqdah would have to pay about $5,000 to take more than 1,000 hours of courses at a beauty school.
It's unclear what beauty school would have taught him. Beauty schools didn't even teach the service Cornrows & Co. provided. They taught things like pin curls and gelatinized hairstyles that hadn't been popular for 40 years. One rule required students to spend 125 hours studying shampooing . I didn't realize it was that complicated -- have I been doing it wrong all these years?
Uqdah says the braiding he provides can't be taught in schools and shouldn't be licensed. "I've watched little second-grade girls sit down and braid each other's hair." He says there's evidence of hair braiding in Africa going back 5,000 years. "You cannot license a culture." He says the licensing test is weighted heavily toward the needs of straight or chemically straightened hair, not the kinky hair many blacks have. When he argues that different hair requires different skills, he says, licensed cosmetologists "go into denial. They like to think that they know how to do it all. And they don't."
Uqdah thought he understood why the cosmetology board wanted to shut down his salon: "Money -- other salons don't like the competition."
I think he was right. Even if licensing boards intend to protect the public, in time they are captured by the people who care most. Who cares most? Not consumers -- you don't get your hair done that often, and even if you did, you don't care enough about it to want to join a regulatory bureaucracy. Innovators don't join the boards; they're busy innovating. Scientists, economists, doctors, and others with genuine expertise in safety and commerce don't join the boards, either. They're busy doing more important things. So boards are usually captured by the licensees, the established businesses. William Jackson, a former member of the Washington, D.C., Cosmetology Board, admitted, "The board, 90 percent of the time, are salon owners."
Uqdah refused to close his shop. He fought the government instead, ultimately going to federal court with the help of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm, and D.C. changed its law. Now, hair braiders don't have to get training that has nothing to do with what they do. Uqdah says, "I had to spend 10 years fighting the city. And now I've gone out and created a mechanism that other people can do what I've done -- with or without a license."
He and those others are fortunate that the Institute for Justice took his case. Usually, the established businesses get away with using licensing boards and "safety" regulations to crush competitors. That's unfair. And if the question is who's protecting the public, it seems to me Taalib-Din Uqdah has done much more than the bureaucrats who wanted him to spend 125 hours studying shampooing.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I love John Stossel. I told my wife ABC would neuter him when they made him co-anchor of 20/20, and I'm sorry to say I think they succeeded. Admittedly, I never watch 20/20 anymore and I seldom catch even a few minutes of it, but I haven't seen any of the great investigative pieces or hour-long specials Stossel used to do.
I remember this from Stossell's book, "Give Me a Break." Highly recommended reading (even though I don't agree with some of his more libertarian views).
"Licensing boards are usually a way for established businesses to make sure no one invades their turf. "
Exactly. The cities with limited cab licenses are one of hte best examples. The ones already in place get the government to set up an arbitrary limit on licenses, which keeps out new competition and gives them a near monopily in their field.
He does them every few months or so. They're still very good and the last major one on mythbusting tried to slay several major PC and liberal dragons.
The format of the show now is pretty weird. Sometimes they'll do the usual 2 or 3 stories + his 'gimme a break' segment, and all of a sudden one week it will be an hour long special on some issue I don't give a damn about.
The gimme a break segments were usually all I ever watched before, but when he went to co-anchor I thought those dropped off. I also didn't know he was still doing specials. Thanks for the info - I'll try to watch out for them because I really enjoyed them before.
Calling Sigmund Freud! Calling Sigmund Freud!
I think my state required 1200 hours & trust me, it was not 125 hours of shampoo instruction. The course included basic physiology of the head, face, neck & hand. Needed to know muscles, nerves, blood vessels & bones. Also studied how to identify most of the common diseases of hair, scalp & nails, along with proper implement cleaning procedure, so something contagious wasn't transferred from one patron to another.
Maybe you wouldn't mind going in to get something done to your hair & getting lice...
My mother went through the same training, and you're right. I remember her learning all those important things, too.
But, after the class ended, she never went all the way for a license. Instead, she cut women's hair at our home in the basement. I knew other women who did the same thing at their homes. It doesn't seem to become an issue until the business gets big enough to compete with others...
Imho, the best option is: licensing should be "offered", and customers can choose between the licensed and the unlicensed.
"Competition is something that should be decided by the market - not a matter in which the government should be involved."
But what it one of those unlicensed braids hurts someone? People should only be hurt by licensed braids!
/sarcasm
It's even worse than you think. In Las Vegas, for example, established taxicab companies have actual legally-defined veto power over the creation of new companies. If a licensed cab company determines that a new competitor would adversely affect its own profitability, it has the legal right to shut the new guy down.
Of course, this kind of rent-seeking behavior is the hallmark of big-city Democratic Party machines. Businesses regulated by corrupt Democratic politicians can be counted on for fat donations to the Democratic Party coffers. Therefore, we should do all we can to destroy this kind of cartel, and bleed the Democrats of much of their financial backing.
Joining hands with black entrepreneurs who want to open new businesses under these unjust conditions is a great way to divide and impoverish the Dems. Kudos to the Institute for Justice.
Two other things to keep in mind on this topic:
-ccm
My mother didn't go for her license because she didn't want to work in a salon and do everyone's hair. She just wanted to pick and choose her customers... lol. She was very careful, though.
I know what you mean - I was burned by a perm once by another hairdresser - and I heard that, back in the day, hairdressers were like nurses - they had to dress in a white uniform and abide by strict guidelines. There's much more to the trade than people realize.
This is clearly a case where established businesses use the government to reduce competition. So big bad government as an abstract entity should not be blamed. The government is just doing what businesses want, which is behavior that normally finds plenty of defenders on FR.
An universal symptom of oppressive, socialist government is basic elements of the economy are forced underground.
I'm self employed, on the books. The federales get me quarterly and for 15% for Medicare and SS besides. Both state and county get me for income and property. There's a $300 business property filing fee for the "privilege of maintaining a legal entity in Maryland". Working out of a basement for cash - even if it's half of the cash I'm getting now - seems real tempting sometimes.
We didn't beat communism, they came here and called themselves liberals.
My uniforms were pink and white, had the white shoes to go with them & it wasn't *that* long ago. LOL Street clothes were just starting to become common in shops, though most operators still wore uniforms & most of them were the kind of polyester that was built like iron.
Think finger waves are gonna come back into style anytime soon? If you don't know what they are, ask your Mom.
>even though I don't agree with some of his more libertarian views
How can one be "more" libetarian??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.