When creating laws, liberty should be a maxim.

The general level of prosperity would be higher if people were free to act in peace without aggression from the state or other people.

Each person can choose what is best. People should have the liberty to smoke, even if it causes cancer. Freedom to consume alcohol results in early deaths and drunk driving accidents.

The consequence of individual liberty is that people’s decisions can be harmful. But as long as they only harm themselves, the action should be permissible.

Many states require occupational licensing for low-income careers, such as eyebrow threading or interior design (Louisiana requires liceneses for 77 out of 102 low-income jobs, such as florists). If that person is awful at their career, the market will end it quickly. One bad set of curtain and carpet combination results in bad reviews.

The government started licensing to protect consumers; for instance, an unlicensed person acting as a doctor or lawyer could bring serious harm. But a lousy haircut won’t kill anyone. There’s no reason to heighten entry barriers that keep the poor from generating a better income.

Often the requirements aren’t proportional to the complexity of the career: on average, it takes 11 times as much training to become a licensed cosmetologist than it does a licensed emergency technician.

            COSTS

Many occupational licensing barriers are created by those already licensed and practicing to keep new workers from entering and lowering the price (increased supply drops prices). This helps those already licensed but hurts consumers who must pay more for the same quality of service.
Occupational Licensing reduces mobility across state lines because each state has different laws

Regulations stifle individual liberty. Excess taxes and complexity for small businesses discourage expanding the business, even when customers are waiting at the door. Craft breweries in Louisiana are denied from hosting private events in breweries because of ancient laws instituted when craft beer wasn’t invented.

When the government waged war on ride-sharing services, it was protecting the taxicab industry. By denying this service, they also rejected all the consumers wanting a cheap ride, as well as supplemental income for drivers.

When the government taxes people at a high enough rate, taxpayers choose to forgo additional income. Business is voluntary, so this hurts the company, the consumer, and the government’s’ tax revenue.

Choosing to trust people’s judgment is strenuous. Allowing for the freedom of speech brings racist rants, horrible opinion articles, and nasty comments. But what’s the alternative? Enforcing standards of what can be said?

Many pilgrims sacrificed their life to journey to North America in search of religious freedom (all religions, not just one). Allowing religious freedom opened Pandora’s box for Satanism and other arguably harmful beliefs.

But throughout history, humanity has always yearned for freedom. Laws should reflect that liberty, even when some harmful effects follow.