🚀 go-pugleaf

msimon@tefbbs.com wrote:
: In my opinion licensing is merely an effort to restrain trade. 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however I put it to you that:
1. Engineering licensing is not _merely_ an effort to restrain trade.
It is, at least, an effort to protect the public from charlatan Engineers,
and also an effort to establish a Code of Ethics. 
I concede that the efficacy of the present licensing system in achieving
these noble aims may be questionably, but the fact that there is an
effort is not in doubt.
2. Efforts to restrain trade are not entirely bad. To the extent that
licensing protects Engineers from unfair competition from those who
have no license to lose should they care to follow the needs of the
business where these conflict with Ethics, then mandatory licensing is
good.  Licensing would be better and more effective if it were more
encompassing and indeed if the laws that provide for protection today
were honored less in the breach and more in the observance.

: Simon

: BTW I qualified as a Naval Nuclear Reactor operator with the highest
: orals in three years. (They put a special team on me with twice as
: many board members as usual. And three hours of questions instead of
: the usual one to one and a half hours) I have no degree.

I too was an undegreed Engineer for about ten years and created some
of my best designs in those days.  Eventually I finished my degree
by correspondence and became licensed a few years later.  Certainly
the degree is not essential to be a competent practioner, but you can't
complain that folks tend to be wary and require that you prove yourself
in ways not required of the degreed and/or licensed Engineer.

Henry Black P.E.
of my