Veyron wrote:"Does the book propose that psuedo government organizations decide to artificially fix how many people can enter certain trades in order to inflate income?"
In spite of your sarcasm (or because of it) this is a good critique. However, I would argue that the book proposes that private organizations should be able to do whatever the fuck they want. Remember, we are not talking about restricting entry to the legal profession, only to ABA accredited law schools. One of the best litigators in CA never went to law school. He is a Randian hero. Since he was an amazing lawyer, he managed to rise to the top without the ABA's seal of approval. I merely proposed that the ABA not extend that approval to other TTT grads who would still be able to rise if they were truly exceptional. I guess for this to work, every state would have to adopt CA's licensing standards.
If you strip the government of enough powers, such as the power to break up monopolies, private organizations become psuedo governments, infringing on the very same freedoms the libertarian minded are constantly afraid of the government infringing on.
There seems to be some silly childish notion that is long as an organization isn't the government, its okay for it to infringe on people's rights because it should have the freedom to restrict the freedom of others. As far as I'm concerned, any huge organization can turn into a government-like entity.