Again, I disagree. I don't think the license should be expensive, but having making it a test to get a license is a good idea. I'm pretty sure you don't need to take any training as long as you can pass the tests. If licensing is removed, anyone can claim they can perform those tasks without the knowledge and if they don't know how the consumer gets harmed. Without regulations how does one know to learn what is needed and what isn't needed for their equipment? There are plenty of people that do hair and nails from their house without licenses, but I'm not going there.

Hard disagree. Barbers/hair dressers and nail techs need to learn about and be able to demonstrate sanitation between customers. Also you can hurt people if you don't know how use clippers or a straight razer correctly. You could hurt customers if you don't know how to properly mix or use hair dyes and bleaches. You can hurt customers if the nail tech doesn't know how to properly apply nails.

In addition regulations on business buildings for salons is necessary as they usually have equipment that have high voltage needs/water needs. If you don't have the proper outlets and water hookups you could hurt customers by short circuits and/or cause fires.

The freakonomics book is BS and not filled with much or any factual evidence. Check out the podcast "If books could kill" where they do a deep drive episode on it debunking the claims.

You absolutely do not need to have a manual in neutral to slow down and stop. The best thing to do is down shift which will slow your car without using brakes. As far as driving in regular conditions you can break in neutral it's just not necessary.

This is behind a paywall so I can't read the actual study. Are they saying that those they count as obese ARE physically active? I would assume a large portion of those who are obese would also be physically inactive and therefore physically activity would still be higher.

You sift eggs and it doesn't break up the yolk? That sounds like sorcery.