ITT Technical Institute? Really?

[MGX]

Yeah, you've said it all before... but I have yet to read how you can reconcile two rather large problems: 1) How to ensure poor people get the benefit of competent services (particularly important with the medical profession)? and 2) How to ensure the public that's exposed to the hazards created by cheap "customers" is properly protected.
And it's also been written often here: while we don't have the perfect system, there are no working examples of any *better* system.

Are you certain the European system isn't better?

 

[Fluvial]

As I was musing about this topic, a couple of other things occured to me ....

The registration laws originated from the engineering community, not the lawmakers themselves. We are the ones who update them and ensure that they stay reasonable. So really it isn't "government" regulating us so much as it is us regulating ourselves.

One area in which I think the registration law protects us (as engineers) is in expert witnessing. What kind of world would it be where any layperson could come into a courtroom and testify as if he or she had engineering knowledge? Let's say you designed a parking lot for a major casino. Later some of the windows in the building leak when it rains. The casino sues everyone including you. They bring in some rent-an-expert to testify that your parking lot design caused the windows to leak. Would you rather that the state law demand this witness be a licensed design professional, or not?

MGX: I lol'd.

 

[Chucktown PE]

Yeah, you've said it all before... but I have yet to read how you can reconcile two rather large problems: 1) How to ensure poor people get the benefit of competent services (particularly important with the medical profession)? and 2) How to ensure the public that's exposed to the hazards created by cheap "customers" is properly protected.
And it's also been written often here: while we don't have the perfect system, there are no working examples of any *better* system.

So poor people aren't capable of seeing if a doctor went to medical school? Many poor people go to free clinics. Do you know that free clinics employ many medical students meaning they aren't doctors. You better call the licensing police and make sure you protect them.

And I guess that "cheap" customers are going to go out and make sure that they get the best price even if, in the case of an office building, the building is going to fall down in 2 years. I mean, they don't have any interest in making it last as long as possible, they only own the building. And they don't want to prevent anything that would cause lawsuits or anything like that. They just want the best price possible. And without a doubt, the "engineer" has no incentive to make sure the thing doesn't fall down in two years, lawsuits for malpractice aren't a big deal or anything.

 

[Chucktown PE]

As I was musing about this topic, a couple of other things occured to me ....
The registration laws originated from the engineering community, not the lawmakers themselves. We are the ones who update them and ensure that they stay reasonable. So really it isn't "government" regulating us so much as it is us regulating ourselves.

One area in which I think the registration law protects us (as engineers) is in expert witnessing. What kind of world would it be where any layperson could come into a courtroom and testify as if he or she had engineering knowledge? Let's say you designed a parking lot for a major casino. Later some of the windows in the building leak when it rains. The casino sues everyone including you. They bring in some rent-an-expert to testify that your parking lot design caused the windows to leak. Would you rather that the state law demand this witness be a licensed design professional, or not?

MGX: I lol'd.

Actually, I would rather the jury decide what is accurate and what isn't. Seems like that's the way our judicial system is supposed to work. And the state law doesn't prevent someone that may not be a PE from testifying in court to the contrary. Do you really think that the jury is going to say 'well he has a PE, he must be correct because PEs don't lie and they never make mistakes, they took a test that says so.'

 

[IlPadrino]

So poor people aren't capable of seeing if a doctor went to medical school? Many poor people go to free clinics. Do you know that free clinics employ many medical students meaning they aren't doctors. You better call the licensing police and make sure you protect them.

I haven't spent much time in free clinics, but I'm guessing everyone providing medical care is under the supervision of licensed physicians. And, please, tear down that Straw Man! Many (but not all!) poor people are capable of seeing if a doctor went to medical school (at least they could, if sufficiently motivated). But if given the choice between services they can't afford (not everything is available in a free clinic) and services from someone less than qualified, many will also choose to pay a cut-rate and roll the dice.

And I guess that "cheap" customers are going to go out and make sure that they get the best price even if, in the case of an office building, the building is going to fall down in 2 years. I mean, they don't have any interest in making it last as long as possible, they only own the building. And they don't want to prevent anything that would cause lawsuits or anything like that. They just want the best price possible. And without a doubt, the "engineer" has no incentive to make sure the thing doesn't fall down in two years, lawsuits for malpractice aren't a big deal or anything.

It's hard to respond to all that sarcasm... but stop guessing! There are many customers who would save some money by hiring someone incompetent (even though well-intentioned). There are lots of transactional services where the buyer is long-gone down the road. Lawsuits don't save lives.

 

[Chucktown PE]

I haven't spent much time in free clinics, but I'm guessing everyone providing medical care is under the supervision of licensed physicians. And, please, tear down that Straw Man! Many (but not all!) poor people are capable of seeing if a doctor went to medical school (at least they could, if sufficiently motivated). But if given the choice between services they can't afford (not everything is available in a free clinic) and services from someone less than qualified, many will also choose to pay a cut-rate and roll the dice.

So now we are protecting everyone in this country from what you perceive as a bad decision? I think we're going to need some more laws. What about cheap massage therapists? And do you really think a great unwashed poor person is going to let some ***** cut them open with a scalpel? If so maybe it's Darwinism at work.

It's hard to respond to all that sarcasm... but stop guessing! There are many customers who would save some money by hiring someone incompetent (even though well-intentioned). There are lots of transactional services where the buyer is long-gone down the road. Lawsuits don't save lives.

No it isn't. Well I can say without a doubt that if it weren't for my PE license I'd be designing cut rate structures, skimping on rebar, and using cheap concrete. Here's the funny thing IlPadrino, I have to have a license to show something on a drawing, but the guy that's forming the rebar can come in off the street half drunk. Arguably, his job is just as important as mine. And the building inspector doesn't have to have a license. The guy that designs the elevator doesn't have to have a license, nor does the guy that installs the fire sprinkler. So do all these people need licenses now?

My point in all of this is to say that yes, there are bad people out there that will do unscrupulous things, however, it's impossible to pass enough laws to protect all people from all things. I understand that sucks, but what makes us do the right thing, act ethically, and do good work could be a combination of things 1) our customers (if we do **** work they aren't going to be asking us to do any more) 2) making sure people aren't harmed by our work (call it self preservation, fear of a lawsuit, whatever) 3) personal pride in our work. There may be other factors but I have not once in my career made an engineering judgement because I have a PE or because I passed some test, nor do I think those things make me any better of an engineer. Ask those that failed the test what their opinion is.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

I thought building inspectors WERE licensed.

 

[benbo]

The guy that designs the elevator doesn't have to have a license, nor does the guy that installs the fire sprinkler. So do all these people need licenses now?

First of all, we are talking about state licenses, not federal licenses. As far as I know, the Constitution allows the states to make laws about many things. I take it you are against state driver's licenses, state building codes, and any state laws for that matter?

Also, if you are so gung ho opposed to this intrusion, why not be a patriot and relinquish your license and the comfy existence it provides you in order to make a statement and sacrifice for your beliefs?

 

[Chucktown PE]

First of all, we are talking about state licenses, not federal licenses. As far as I know, the Constitution allows the states to make laws about many things. I take it you are against state driver's licenses, state building codes, and any state laws for that matter?
Also, if you are so gung ho opposed to this intrusion, why not be a patriot and relinquish your license and the comfy existence it provides you in order to make a statement and sacrifice for your beliefs?

I don't see anywhere in the South Carolina Constitution or the US Constitution establishing government authority so say who can and cannot sign their business cards with Engineer or Doctor. If you do see this please let me know. And yes, I am against many of the laws you refer to above.

Okay, so if I disagree with a law then I should break it? How is that patriotic? I am resigned to the fact that some things aren't going to change, such as people who defend the power of the state no matter what. My first duty in life is to provide for my wife and kids. I don't have the luxury of relinquishing my license. But that brings up another point, my company encouraged me to get the PE, not the government. I could have kept on doing what I was doing whether I had license or not, but my company compensates me slightly better with a license.

 

[benbo]

I don't see anywhere in the South Carolina Constitution or the US Constitution establishing government authority so say who can and cannot sign their business cards with Engineer or Doctor. If you do see this please let me know. And yes, I am against many of the laws you refer to above.
Okay, so if I disagree with a law then I should break it? How is that patriotic?

I didn't say break the law. I said sacrifice for your belief. Find a profession which doesn't require licensing. Apparently you don't find it too bad being under the oppressive thumb of the state, as long as they compensate you for it.

Which laws are you against? Building codes? Please be specific. And you know as well as I do that the Constitution does not dictate every jot and tittle of the law.

There is a continuum of belief in regulations, from the anarchist point of view, to the fascist. Everybody falls somewhere on that continuum, including me and you. I am totally against these non-smoking regulations, but favor building codes.

If you are an anarchist, fine, you are intellectually honest at least. But I don't know why you're not on a farm in Idaho.

 

[Chucktown PE]

I didn't say break the law. I said sacrifice for your belief. Find a profession which doesn't require licensing. Apparently you don't find it too bad being under the oppressive thumb of the state, as long as they compensate you for it.
Which laws are you against? Building codes? Please be specific. And you know as well as I do that the Constitution does not dictate every jot and tittle of the law.

There is a continuum of belief in regulations, from the anarchist point of view, to the fascist. Everybody falls somewhere on that continuum, including me and you. I am totally against these non-smoking regulations, but favor building codes.

If you are an anarchist, fine, you are intellectually honest at least. But I don't know why you're not on a farm in Idaho.

Typical tactic of leftist, assume that because I don't believe in everything the all powerful leviathin state does then I must be some right wing nut job. Actually, I am currently in the process of studying for the GMAT. If I get into a good MBA program and it looks like the grass in greener in the business world, I may do just that. And who is they? The utility I do consulting work for doesn't pay us any more because I'm a PE.

I was specific, any law which infringes on my right to life, liberty, or property I am against. So if I want to modify my house and only include on electrical receptacle in the room, I don't think I should need approval from the state for such a thing. I am not an anarchist. I do believe that laws and government are necessary, however, I believe they should be restricted to their constitutional roles (mainly the federal government). But given the choice I would choose to have more state laws that federal laws, at least then I could move if I found the laws too opressive.

And by the way, not one person has noted a single instance where the PE exam saved someone's life or prevented some building from falling down.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

The guy that designs the elevator doesn't have to have a license, nor does the guy that installs the fire sprinkler.

Actually, the guy who installs the sprinkler DOES have to have a license. See SC 40-10-41

 

[Chucktown PE]

Actually, the guy who installs the sprinkler DOES have to have a license. See SC 40-10-41

Okay, so I stand corrected on that one issue. What about the guy that builds the elevator, or the 4160V electrical panels? I'm simply trying to say that all this stuff is ambiguous at best and I don't think it does anything for the citizen.

 

[benbo]

I was specific, any law which infringes on my right to life, liberty, or property I am against.

I am not an anarchist. I do believe that laws and government are necessary, however, I believe they should be restricted to their constitutional roles (mainly the federal government).

Huh? Please name any law which doesn't infringe, to some degree, on your right to life, liberty, or property. It's a question of degree.

By the way, I'm not a leftist and I didn't say you were a right wing nut job. I suspect I'm just a little to the left of you.

 

[Chucktown PE]

I was specific, any law which infringes on my right to life, liberty, or property I am against.
I am not an anarchist. I do believe that laws and government are necessary, however, I believe they should be restricted to their constitutional roles (mainly the federal government).

Huh? Please name any law which doesn't infringe, to some degree, on your right to life, liberty, or property. It's a question of degree.

By the way, I'm not a leftist and I didn't say you were a right wing nut job. I suspect I'm just a little to the left of you.

No, you just said I should go out to some farm in Idaho. Okay, laws which don't infringe on anyone's right to life, liberty, or property:

99% of contract law i.e. laws enforcing contracts, 99% of criminal laws, i.e. laws against murder, battery, armed robbery, ****, etc. 99% of civil law, i.e. I can sue someone if they wrong me.

welfare, nationalized health care, confiscatory "progressive" income taxes, social security, building codes, nationalized automotive industry, most environmental laws, etc. are not constitutional.

 

[jmbeck]

By the way, I'm not a leftist and I didn't say you were a right wing nut job. I suspect I'm just a little to the left of you.

I'd suspect that Alan Keyes would find himself a little to the right of Chuck.

But that's okay, cause it takes a village. That's what I hear anyway.

:unitedstates:

 

[benbo]

No, you just said I should go out to some farm in Idaho. Okay, laws which don't infringe on anyone's right to life, liberty, or property:
99% of contract law i.e. laws enforcing contracts, 99% of criminal laws, i.e. laws against murder, battery, armed robbery, ****, etc. 99% of civil law, i.e. I can sue someone if they wrong me.

welfare, nationalized health care, confiscatory "progressive" income taxes, social security, building codes, nationalized automotive industry, most environmental laws, etc. are not constitutional.

Contract law tells me how I am required to compose contracts, and how they are supposed to be enforced. This constrains my liberty on how I am to establish businesses and make deals. It also constrains how I am to transfer property. And there are also laws for civil proceedings which regulate how the courts operate.

Criminal law certainly constrains my liberty. Traffic laws do as well. I can't do whatever I want, therefore I am not fully free.

 

[Fluvial]

Actually, I would rather the jury decide what is accurate and what isn't. Seems like that's the way our judicial system is supposed to work.

I don't think it's okay for a non-engineer to pull the wool over a jury's eyes and convince them of something which can't be possible. There are many technical matters of which the standard juror has no knowledge, or at the most a very limited understanding.

And the state law doesn't prevent someone that may not be a PE from testifying in court to the contrary.

Our state law does - as an expert witness. You must be registered in MS to testify in a MS court as an expert engineer.

Do you really think that the jury is going to say 'well he has a PE, he must be correct because PEs don't lie and they never make mistakes, they took a test that says so.'

Thank you for making my point for me.

What about the guy that builds the elevator, or the 4160V electrical panels?

Here, that electrician has to have a Master Electrician license.

not one person has noted a single instance where the PE exam saved someone's life or prevented some building from falling down.

How would one go about proving that? Sounds like proving a negative. We can probably find cites for a failure when the design professional was unlicensed.

Okay, so if I disagree with a law then I should break it?

No, you should work to change it.

 

[benbo]

welfare, nationalized health care, confiscatory "progressive" income taxes, social security, building codes, nationalized automotive industry, most environmental laws, etc. are not constitutional.

I might add that I would agree that a lot of these things are unconstitutional and certainly not the province of the federal government. Unfortunately, every since Marbury v Madison the country has recognized the notion of judicial review and I don't think that is likely to change.

However, with building codes and PE licenses these are state functions. I would much rather have these things decided by state legislatures or referendum than by some court system.

 

[Sschell]

the majority of "engineers" at my work have only 2 year degrees.