I'm disappointed.  The Post is leaving out the biggest beneficiary of occupational licensing: politicians.  See, in exchange for writing occupational licensing laws, industry associations write politicians big campaign contribution checks, which inevitably favor the incumbents who write the laws.

Without occupational licensing the opportunity for graft drops, reducing the likelihood that the incumbent politician will be reelected.

So occupational licensing laws have a moral side too: Even if it saves the reelection campaign of just one politician, aren't licensing laws worth it?