[H-GEN] Free Trade (was Re: Selections from RISKS DIGEST 19.57)

[Frank Brand]

Raymond Smith wrote:

> I imagine that self-regulation will be the driving force. Much like the
> regulation of solictors through the Law Societies, and Barristers through
> the Barristers Board. The societies will set codes of conduct and
> professional ethics, and government regulation will play a role in so far
> as it will empower the socity(ies) to apply effective penalties for
> breaches of the codes.


Ahh those wonderful free spirited and free-market barristers allowed the
NSW barristers to enter their protected domain. (Sorry an issue not
related to regulation - or is it. Amazing how many legal people end up
in Parliament. Remember that incompetent, unqualified conveyancer who
had conveyanced for years in South Australia. Or maybe you are too young
to remember the battle with dental technicians who were unqualified to
make dentures, unless they were ordered through a dentist of course,
when all of a sudden their work was acceptable).


> Perhaps more importantly, Government will encorage accreditation through
> its purchasing policies and the setting of standards.


I have no objection to this type of positive stroking and if this was
what the government might do go for it. I am against government
regulation not standards. Some of the great strides we have made are
because of the adoption of standards. Voluntary adoption - market power
is the strongest power.

 
> What follows is not meant to dissuade you, Frank, or anyone else from your
> views. Rather it is to present to others on the list the opposing
> arguements.

No thats cool Raymond, diversity of view is a good thing, and should be
encouraged.


 we need to
> define similiar standards to judge skills on offer. Degrees from
> University are a part of this, membership of professional socities is
> another, and formal definition of the profession is even more important.
> IMNSHO.


I am not opposed to education or standards. But don't forget that in the
early days of computing - in the fifties and sixties, before most
computer science courses, most of the development was by "unqualified"
people.

A Medical Doctor is
> expected to have a Medical Degree. Just so, a Tax Account is expected to
> hold the qualifications that show he has mastered the relevant body of
> knowledge. It is a matter of honest trading.


There are good and bad doctors and good and bad tax accountants. In fact
many people are taken down by accountants and solicitors (and in the old
days add in bank managers) because of blind acceptance of the "standard"
- almost government guaranteed.

 
> Of course should you prefer a faith-healer to a medical doctor this is
> your own look-out and you should be allowed to do so.  One can extend this
> arguement to: Good Programmers will get work, Bad ones won't. However,
> this is no consolation to the dead when a mission critical system fails,
> or the poor when their bank collapses under the weight of a computer
> error. In the case of mission critical systems, we desire more than a code
> Monkey or clever hacker. We desire a professional.

No, personsally I prefer a brain surgeon to a faith healer. Further, in
my bank and all others that will last more than 5 minutes we know the
value of standards and adopt them for our own reasons ...not because
some government says so. And we also institute quality assurance
programmes to make sure we get what we want. In my experience a major
cause of the shoddy work stems from buyers not able to properly specify
their needs to the vendor.


Maybe I am just an old cynic (maybe more old than cynical) but as I have
gotten older I have wanted to see more than just evidence of market
failure as a justification for regulation. I want to know that
regulation will make the situation better, not just introduce different
(and perhaps worse) market distortion and failure than market forces
cause. A real case in point is the deregulation of financial markets -
this argument, in principle, has been addressed in the Wallis Report
into Financial Markets.


Anyway thanks for the small debate...maybe others have some strong ideas
on the subject.
-- 
Frank Brand
E-mail: fbrand at uq.net.au
Homepage: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzfbrand
----------------------- HUMBUG General List --------------------------------
echo "unsubscribe general" | mail majordomo at humbug.org.au # To Unsubscribe