Senate votes 47-3 to establish State Board of Massage Therapy, require licenses…
Senate votes 47-3 to establish State Board of Massage Therapy, require licenses…
|
Comment Commandments:
1) No Personal Attacks. (Debating is encouraged, but be respectful). 2) No Sexual Discussion (unless it specifically pertains to a cited story). 3) No Profanity (Let’s all behave like adults). |
GOLDEN RULE:
Be civil and statesmanlike. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Annoying trolls who break these rules will be blocked from commenting. ***Please don't disable anonymous commenting for everyone else*** |
NOTE TO COMMENTERS: CREATE AN INTENSE DEBATE ACCOUNT
|
-vote comments up or down
-email notifications when someone replies |
-pick a profile picture
-promote your website or blog |
***TOPIC FORUM: 50 STORIES LAST COMMENTED ON***
***LIST OF TOP 50 COMMENTERS***
***LIST OF 50 MOST COMMENTED ON STORIES***
***LIST OF 50 LAST COMMENTS***
.
7 Comments
More nanny state BS.
Does this mean that no one will ever get a bad massage now?
Has licensing doctors stopped malpractice?
Has licensing drivers stopped accidents?
Has licensing hair stylists eliminated bad hair days?
Massage therapists are just the latest group that has come to the attention of the nanny state as a source of revenue.
Yay! Another office that has to be jam-packed with bureaucrats! Where do I send my check for the new taxes?
At least they could have mandated happy endings.
I agree with most of what you said… but I think licensing for drivers is a good idea
Please tell me Mike & Eich were two of the three who voted against this nonsense.
Mike and Eich were both YES votes. Voting against were Mary Jo White and Gib Armstrong Sr.
Source: PA Senate web site. The vote was actually 48-2, not 47-3.
Most accidents are caused by licenced drivers. Most traffic deaths are caused by licensed drivers.
All of the licencing fees go to the State.
Sure, licencing sounds like a good idea. We pass the test when we are 16 and then are never again tested to see if our skills are good enough to stay on the road, but the state cheerfully sends us a renewal bill for the rest of our lives without doing anything to ensure safety.
Most people want to get home at night and do their best to have skills to get them their safely. Most parents don’t want their children killed while behind the wheel. People, in their own self interest, will acquire the skills to drive safely and pass those skills on to their children.
Why have the state involved? Could it be for the money?
Would you oppose a change to insurance rates based on being a skillful driver (No, I am not in the insurance business)? If your skills go down, your rate goes up or you are dropped.
I think a system like that would do to enhance safety than the present system does.
(This is not something that I have fully considered. I just throw it out as an alternative to what we have now in response to your comment. There may be ten or a 100 other better plans but I don’t think that our current system is anything to brag about.