I agree with Jeff Jacoby that government licensing of professions can be unnecessary and onerous (“Three libertarians walk into a bar . . . ,’’ Ideas, June 5). It can be a drag on the economy, a burden on consumers, and a barrier to individuals trying to earn a living. The thrust of Jacoby’s column is that appropriate licensing should be the aim.

However, his details reveal the truth at the heart of the joke that he mentions about three libertarians walking into a bar, drinking tainted alcohol, and dying because the bar is not regulated. Jacoby seems to be an overzealous deregulator who does not understand the potential hazards of certain professions and is overconfident in the ability and willingness of professions to regulate themselves. He also overestimates the ability of social media to keep wrongdoers from staying in business.

Jacoby appears naive about the lack of hazards in various professions. For example, unlicensed acupuncturists could stick potentially disease-carrying needles into people, or do harm by not doing good because they do not know what they are doing. Painting contractors need to know about workplace safety and hazardous materials, including old lead paint. Imagine what can go wrong with unlicensed cremationists.

The answer is not overzealous deregulation. The answer is periodically to review licensing requirements to make sure that they are serving their purpose of protecting the public and the practitioners, and not merely serving to exclude people from the profession or to generate unnecessary sources of government revenue.

Michael Biales

Acton