it isn't - both Fiat and Volvo are manufacturers of highly regulated products that have to comply with a basic level of protection to the people that use them. Both manufacturers comply with very high amounts of environmental protection and mandatory fuel requirements and design requirements for potential impact with pedestrians.
In fact, I doubt it is possible to find many consumer product more highly regulated than an automobile. This regulation is worldwide and agree to by the governments, regulators and consumers of all the world.
If you are arguing that scuba training should meet similar exacting and global safety standards, should take into account environmental and third party issues then fair enough we are in agreement but at cross purposes.
I am sure you are not, but if one reads your post without a great deal of care, you appear to be saying that instructors who drown the odd student here and there would soon go out of business due to bad reputation. Those that churn out instabuddy style idiots that blindly follow a DM and cannot clear a mask would somehow find they have to up their game due to super savvy consumers who all read the excellent advice one can find here on Scubaboard.
Whilst I have great sympathy with your views and share your dislike of government interference in my life (even though there is little of it to be fair) I think you have failed to understand the real world. The role of government is to govern. Regulatory frameworks are there to protect those who need protection. We should welcome this and recognise it is a valuable service, it is not the oppression of Stalin or Mao any more than it is the lunacy of Trump. It is the core job. Are there many examples of it being done badly? Yes, of course. Are some government employees over zealous? Yes, undoubtedly. Are some laws badly drafted? Sure are. Are you going to tear down the whole building because you don't like one door? Or do you constantly improve and review?
I expect my Fiat or my Volvo to be safe. I don't expect it to kill me as a wheel falls off on the Interstate.
I expect my instructor to look after me while I pay for my training.
Sorry if you don't like "rules" very much. Neither do I if I am honest. But we need them all the same.
I think you missed the whole purpose of my careful choice of Volvo vs Fiat. Just in case you are unaware, Volvo and Fiat do not share similar safety records - despite the fact that they are both heavily regulated! Volvos are arguably the safest cars on the road, while Fiats are one of the least safe. Their dramatic difference in safety records show how ineffective regulations are at normalizing quality. If regulations were effective in accomplishing what you seem to believe they do, Volvo and Fiat would be equally safe. Volvos are safer because Volvo decided to compete by building a safe car - and Volvos would still be safe in a world free of regulation. BUT in a regulation free world, you would probably see safer Fiats. Because people naively place trust in regulations, there is less incentive to worry about safety when car shopping. Regulations are like the RSTC - they make customers erroneously believe all cars / scuba agencies are equally safe - so customers are less likely to shop based on safety statistics. Without regulations, Fiat would have to increase safety in order to stay competitive. Similarly - without government imposed instructor regulations, or the RSTC, there would be greater incentive for agencies to compete and make scuba diving safer for all.
My wife is a nurse. Consequently, she has to pay the Board of Registered Nursing hundreds of $$$ every year to renew her occupational licenses. And what does she, or the public, get in return? Absolutely nothing! No one from the BRN has EVER met with my wife to make sure her standard of care, or her teaching (she is a professor of nursing) is quality! The market is entirely responsible for her maintenance of quality. If the BRN were dissolved tomorrow, it wouldn't reduce the quality of nursing she practices at all. If anything, it might cause her to improve her quality - because then there would be more competition for quality nurses. The BRN removes competition by making the public think all nurses are the same - just like the RSTC does to scuba - and just like instructor regulation would do to scuba. The only thing a Board of Registered Scuba Instructors would do to scuba is increase costs by several hundred $$$ per year to renew licenses, and further reduce competition - and consequently quality - by increasing the perception that 'all scuba instructors are the same' - because perception would be that they are all held to the same regulatory safety requirements.
You misunderstood - my post was about the advantages of agency competition - not about instructors individually.
There is more government interference in your life than you think. Time magazine did a study not too long ago that concluded that there are so many laws (regulations) on the books, that the average American commits at least one felony a day! But we (you) are so used to the control, you don't even notice it unless you actively pay attention for it.
Regulatory protection is NOT the primary role of government. The primary roles are to protect your individual right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Many regulations impede those roles - just like they impede incentive for Fiat to build a safer car! Another example is the FDA. Even though Americans are supposedly protected by the FDA's 'stringent approval process,' many approved drugs are found to be detrimental. But wait - if the FDA approved it, how is it possible that for an approved drug to be detrimental? Because regulations are mostly ineffective at 'protecting' us from harm. The best person to protect you is yourself - armed with the appropriate information that only free market competition can provide!
Although regulations are sold to the ignorant voting public as necessary for their own protection, the primary purpose of regulation results in something far more sinister - government created monopolies. Again, using the FDA as an example, $600 epi-pens would not exist in an environment of free market competition. Without the FDA, the public would be much safer - because they would have greater access to life saving $6 epi-pens!
It's not that I don't like rules - it's that I find the rules that competition creates to be more effective than the rules legislatures dictate.
Cheers
