Subject: Re: [lpny_manhattan] Would Greg risk his own life? Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 15:32:04 -0500 To: From: Bob Armstrong On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 00:01:47 -0500, Travis Pahl wrote: >=A0In addition, you may ask your insurance company what their= opinion (and >=A0rates) are for people that feel they do not need training. This gets closer to the core "free rider" problem : those who will create risks for others without the financial responsibility to compensate for any damages they cause . I think most if not all states have mandatory insurance or financial responsibility laws aimed at this problem . Such a prerequisite for use of the "commons" of our roadways is an appropriate function of the state . Actuarial considerations would determine training , age , etc requirements and probably produce standards not too different than what we have - altho not necessarily state-monopoly certification agencies . As Gary P. points out , the issue of licensing versus a "banned" list would just be a matter of one free pass . Requirements for use of the commons is , tho , a totally different matter than choosing a surgeon or hairdresser . If you trust a practitioner just because they have a government license , you have a pretty low and meaningless standard . I'll look at free market measures like diplomas and reputation and my direct judgement of them . Forced monopoly inevitably reduces informational value . -- =A0Bob Armstrong -- http://CoSy.com -- 212-285-1864 http://CoSy.com/K/CoSy.htm : =A0Ultimate NoteComputing =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A02002/11/24 2:43:16 PM