Sorry russ, but if you aren't part of the solution then you are part of the problem.
I don't suppose many of you remember when gays were "forcibly outed" by other gays, just to force them to take a stand. Without something of the sort, prostitution is never going to be decriminalized in this country because not enough people either give a fuck or have the courage to stand up for themselves, and russ as much as I like you, you are the living proof of this, You my friend are AFRAID of taking a stand and as such you have ZERO room to complain
An organization representing prostitutes in California has filed a lawsuit in a federal district court in San Francisco, arguing that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process “liberty” decisions–which protect the right of consenting adults to engage in sex in private–also protect the right of consenting adults to pay for sex. If it’s legal to have sex, the plaintiffs argue, how can it be illegal to pay for it? And relatedly they argue: If a person can pay for dinner, wine, roses and other items as a prelude to sex, why not just offer to pay the sexual partner cash instead?
Interesting comments in the linked article.
How is it legal to be filmed and be paid and illegal to not film? Back in the day, there was COYOTE: Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics... 'bout time!!! After gays and pot, we are next to be liberated.
It's never going to happen. If gays didn't come out and risk both prosecution and persecution nothing would have changed, The same with pot smokers. Do you really think anything would have been done without millions of both pot smokers and gays standing up for themselves.
Ask yourself this, how many people do you know willing to admit to being either a hooker or a john? I bet you it's no more than a handful. NOTHING is going to happen until that changes.
Did I miss something? Looks like someone had the balls to FILE A LAWSUIT. Don't know if that qualifies for standing up for yourself in your book, but in mine, it certainly does. Since most of the LE attention is focused on the female side of the equation, ti behooves us to be activists.
..massive public support and coordinated pressure on politcians backed by big money is another thing entirely. That aint happening any time soon. BTW, would you sign up and out yourself.
Your point is EXACTLY what I was trying to convey, and for the record YES I would not only sign up and out myself, but I am already "out" The only people I will lie to about fucking prostitutes are police officers trying to arrest me, and I won't even lie to them, but I won't exactly give them the rope to hang me.
but you won't use it for yourself?
What is wrong with you?
I would have been out with a hooker today if I didn't have so many last minute filings to attend to. You'd have thought today was the tax filing deadline.
and I filed my extension at least a week ago, I have more important things to do today, like get drunk and fuck prostitutes.
FWIW, I hope you charged triple for having to work when you could have been out drinking and fucking hookers like me.
I tend to call it "value added billing" 
I'm classy!
FWIW, I hope you charged triple for having to work when you could have been out drinking and fucking hookers like me.
I would stand up and shout from the rooftops if it weren't for the probable negative press it would bring on my employer. I don't think they'd blink an eye if I was to get caught engaging, but drawing attention to myself and thereby them would be professional suicide and I couldn't blame them.
It's really too bad that the bible thumpers think it's their business to impose their integrity on others, this is a victimless sport, and I think most of us responsible hobbyists don't partake when we suspect a lady is being trafficked, maybe I'm wrong there but I don't think so.
Have you ever seen the women that speak out against our sport? They're members of the OTHFB club, he'll yeah I get their point if they eliminate the threat of us being able to have our fun, then it means that we'd have to settle for them.
Years ago, when there were still AdultBook stores there was a church group picketing out in front, I was going in to get some spank material and this woman starts yelling at me trying to berate me, I asked her " what's the alternative, you? No thank you". They must have copied down my license plate, because the next day I had a church flyer under my wiper blade, I used it to pick up dog shit
Sorry russ, but if you aren't part of the solution then you are part of the problem.
I don't suppose many of you remember when gays were "forcibly outed" by other gays, just to force them to take a stand. Without something of the sort, prostitution is never going to be decriminalized in this country because not enough people either give a fuck or have the courage to stand up for themselves, and russ as much as I like you, you are the living proof of this, You my friend are AFRAID of taking a stand and as such you have ZERO room to complain
prostitution will be made 100% legal.
With no "cash" to support an unregulated/un-taxable cash economy, and EVERY digital monetary transaction carrying a complete paper trail the FED can and WILL overturn every prohibition to what has historically proved an otherwise wide spread as well as lucrative entrepreneurial industry. The God Squad and the moralists will be painted as enemies of the State and driven out of town for their selfish, unpatriotic efforts to deny the FED from the countless potential tax streams.
You should host a one monger march, take your gopro and record it on video, then post a youtube video for the world to see. Don't forget to post a link on this here site
What if gopro's didn't sell?
Would it still be hot in July
What if Johny already came, would JCA cum twice? Is multi popping fair
Would you file a restraining order on Deez Nutz?
What if you came once but never returned? Would you come again before coming existed?
I would, although I doubt my efforts would merit social change.
Would gag still march in the street if streets didn't exist?
There are TWO ways to affect wholesale change of this magnitude:
1) Through the ballot box: like you said johns and hookers have to come out, organize and campaign. And like you said since this hobby has a stigma in this society that's difficult to do.
2) Through legal mean: john and hookers working behind the scene not having to show up their faces but contribute money to mount legal battle. Frame the issue in Constitutional terms and pound on that. When we get enough libertarian-minded judges the issue will win. Come to think of it not a bad idea for somebody to start a Gofundme account for this purpose!
Pot and gay marriage got where they are today after many years battling through BOTH of those means above. It is a sign of demographic shift to be more progressive. Hopefully it will eventually happen to prostitution as well
While not a legal expert by any means, I think that porn has been brought up in the appellate courts many times and that it has been defended under the freedom of expression rights (the 1st Amendment)
As for legalizing and decriminalizing prostitution, anything which upsets the applecart so far as the "family values" crowd are concerned, will be vehemently fought and resisted in the religious circles, in particular the zealot and very active evangelical political block of voters.
A comparison between the homosexual movement into the mainstream and "hobby community" is not an accurate comparison, because of of the vast number of the former versus the latter. Homosexuality is not a choice, whereas mongering is!
Good point. However, it is the same "family values" crowd who tries to suppress homosexual equality and marijuana legalization, so there is some hope that if the other two "evils" can be somewhat accepted in society, a person' right to engage in an adult consensual exchange can become acceptable as well.
But really, why are we even talking about it? We see escorts and we are hobbyists 
What if I am heterosexual, but for shits and giggles decide to have a homosexual encounter?
Should that be a crime but a person whose orientation is gay can engage in same and that is legal? That is Alice through the looking glass logic.
The right to engage in whatever consensual activity one chooses should be paramount. Unless someone can show a compelling reason why sex for pay would hurt society (Just making reference to standards of decency, blah, blah, bullshit don't cut it.) then legalized sex for pay (As is allowed in most of the rest of western democracies and a few eastern ones too.) should be a slam dunk if politics didn't enter the equation.
I think a closer parallel to our situation is Roe vs. Wade, but again...
still not a lawyer
if our world was the void of politics these things would not be issues.
Then of course we could not call ourselves civilized either.
No it does NOT matter one bit whether there is a choice involved or not. Nor like somebody said whether johns and hookers are special class of people. Free speech applies all over. Negotiating for sex should be a free speech/freedom of expression issue.
For analogy let say I'm a member of the American Nazi party. The Constitution protects my right to exercise my Nazi practice even though it is a choice AND there is no special class of people called Nazi. And I might add in spite of the fact that most of society is against me and my belief
That's an interesting and important distinction you point out, about the "it's not a choice" argument being used for homosexuality. I think, if people were to look at it charitably, that having no sex or paying for a provider, is still similar to foregoing sex or engaging in socially unacceptable homosexuality. But there is a belief that anyone can have sex unless they are morally bad (creepy, old, beta), in which case they don't deserve to.
Anyway I can't seem to articulate anything coherent and worthwhile at the moment, but this case and discussion interests me. I read a thoughtful article once about how homosexuality could rightly be seen as a choice, and that that shouldn't damage the case for gay rights. The author saw the "it's not a choice" argument a concession to gay rights opponents, and not scientifically established beyond question. I'll leave the link if anyone might be interested to read it.
http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/01/can-you-be-gay-by-choice/
Admittedly, I did not articulate the last part of my last post very well. However, I tried to express that one's sexuality, whether heterosexual or homosexual, for most parts is not a matter of choice. With that said, engaging in any sexual activity is absolutely a matter of choice. There are many instances where these lines get blurred and one should not necessarily equate someone's sexual activities with that person's sexuality! For instance in our prisons, our inmates engage in homosexual sex whereas they may not necessarily be homosexuals. In porn, homosexual men may act as heterosexual actors which goes against their sexuality.
The discussion got somewhat derailed because in my rapid response to the OP, I tried to convey that using the recent societal acceptance of LGBT (well B & T to a much lesser extent) as an example for marshaling the acceptance of prostitution into the mainstream was not the best of examples when "rights" vs "choice" can be used as a for or against argument. Lifting the prohibition on marijuana would be closer to the OP's argument
I'd argue that the prelude to sex - is not sex
Does that mean I'm going to have to register to be a John? That ain't happening.
Just like weed, there will be a vibrant black market anyway. I imagine it'll drive prices down as well. Not a bad thing from our side of the equation. The government types will love all those taxes that they can collect...
All the mandatory health screenings, the licensing, the fact that a hooker will no longer be able to pick and choose who she sees, so there might be security at the door....
I'd imagine lots of licensure would be in order, which is fine. I'd also guess that a lot of health reporting would be involved for those operating a "paid sex" business. Which I'd be fine with too. Spot checks to ensure that I'm keeping up my end of that licensure? No problem.
What I wouldn't be fine with is zoning laws that would change my residential apartment incall into a commercial brothel because more than 2 ladies use the space, though not at the same time. This would completely dictate where a lady could and couldn't have her incall, and it would be incredibly hard to adhere to if the laws for brothel zoning were anything like other adult services zoning.
Fun fact: In Chicago, if more than 3 women reside in the same apartment, that space is considered a brothel. It's an old-ass law, but it's still on the books.
I'd also scoff at requirements like 2 weeks in/2 weeks out from a commercial brothel in order to ensure that I don't have any STIs.
The reason I think this will fail from a constitutional/legal standpoint is that Congress has the right to control interstate commerce. Since lots of ladies tour and lots of guys see providers while they're on business trips, it could get messy. Also, because Congress has the right to control interstate commerce, all those Civil Rights laws would apply and ladies wouldn't be able to advertise "No AA" "No Indian" "No whatever ethnicity" because those classes are protected and you can't refuse them service simply because of their ethnic background or origin.
The only legalization I'd be interested in is the kind where the government is as hands-off as possible. Let me run my business, pay my taxes, and get a few pieces of licensure. I'm not too interested in much else other than that.
I appreciate the comments of those that identified the differences between the pot/homosexual movements and the decriminalization of our work. You are right that there is much broader support for and participation in those movements. But indulge me long enough to hear the other point of view.
Martin Luther King once said "No lie can live forever." I honestly believe that is true. I talk to people older than me regularly that never imagined they would see the legalization of gay marriage, or the legalization of pot. But those things happened almost overnight. The emperor has no clothes; the truth is powerful. It speaks to our reason rather than out fears. The truth sounds better.
Within the last ten years, we have become a people that hold the answer to almost every question in the palm of our hands. Literally. In a world where the lies cannot hide, where truth is accessible and ubiquitous, how long can the lies persist? Again, in the words of Martin Luther King, the most powerful, iconic human embodiment of the value of social change, "Not long."
In the Information Age, where the rate of change is not linear, but geometric, the good ideas will win. The good ideas, the ones based on reason and rational thought, are going to win. Indeed, no lie can live forever.
withholding, social security, medicare, insurance, fees, permits, zoning... all the wonderful stuff our government throws at any business person in their ongoing war against small business.
I know you girls file your 1040s complete with your SE income forms declaring all your income....
My guess - if legalization occurs - most providers will stay UTR and keep collecting that money tax free and in cash. Wish I could do the same with my business - it would quadruple my margins...
Who does??
I claim enough so that I could buy a house if I could ever decide where want to stay put for 8 years.
But unfortunately it often comes back to bite many of you gals in the ass for approaching it that way.
Buying a personal residence today is far different than pre-2009. The ratios that any lender looks at today is far more dependent on income than it was back then. And if you want to try and toss unreported cash into the deal...even more *side eyes* LOL
To answer your rhetorical question of "Who does"....many actually report ALL of their income. HOWEVER...many use professionals to assist them in creating their tax returns with the deductions to that self-employment income. Just for grins...ask your buddy at the mortgage lending division of your favorite lender what documents they would need to see. I suspect bank statements will be required...along with tax returns. Sure hope your deposits are actually accounted for LOL
Even more fun to explain that you have a large down payment. Guess what...ask your pal about the investigation into where the money came from. It's a lot of fun
Honestly...proper manipulation of cash and deposits (hence income verification with no docs...hint...no doc loans just aren't happening...even in Vegas) has become a critical issue on how Fannie and Freddie use to calculate eligible loans.
What has 8 years got anything to do with buying a home? Especially in transient world Las Vegas??
I claim enough so that I could buy a house if I could ever decide where want to stay put for 8 years.
So if you are gifted $500 for Christmas from your grandparents, you would report that?
If you'd boss took you on an all expenses paid vacation, you would report that?
If you played scratch offs and won, you would report that?
etc, etc, etc.
Its not illegal to have a sugar daddy. I file my taxes with a tax professional. I have done alright since 2005. No audits when I applied for fasfa. Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones, or maybe I just pay enough to keep the tax people out of my life.
And 8 years was just a "throwing it out there." I kinda like to move every 8 or so months. It's the free spirit in me. My lease in Vegas is 9 months and it has me itching. Let's say, I file enough and have a credit score that I could buy a new car if I knew I wouldn't abuse it and take off to the beach every weekend.
1) Nope...gifts from Gramps aren't income. Unless you're V.Stiviano...although she's now appealing the courts decision..and will lose on that LOL
2) Vacations are taxable to employees often times...it's added to their gross income (and included in box 1 of the W-2). You do know what a W-2 is? Right?
3) Scratch off wins in excess of $ 600 are reported to the various taxing agencies using Form 1099 to report your winnings
4) It IS illegal to have a sugar daddy and not claim the income "he" gives you. IT is prostitution. Check with your local attorney for clarification. Clearly you've been talking to drunk pals at the bar!
5) IRS is NOT FAFSA!! However, should there have been a FAFSA audit you would be charged with fraud had FAFSA found material misstatements. Perhaps you missed the fine print...."under penalty of perjury" when you signed the FAFSA applications. Just for grins...go online and read the "fine print" on Form 1040 Page 2 under YOUR signature line...ironically the same language is there LOL
I guess your idea of financial plans is luck. I hope it continues...from your post here you're surely going to need lots of it!!
If you'd boss took you on an all expenses paid vacation, you would report that?
If you played scratch offs and won, you would report that?
etc, etc, etc.
Its not illegal to have a sugar daddy. I file my taxes with a tax professional. I have done alright since 2005. No audits when I applied for fasfa. Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones, or maybe I just pay enough to keep the tax people out of my life.
And 8 years was just a "throwing it out there." I kinda like to move every 8 or so months. It's the free spirit in me. My lease in Vegas is 9 months and it has me itching. Let's say, I file enough and have a credit score that I could buy a new car if I knew I wouldn't abuse it and take off to the beach every weekend.
I'm not sure why you have to talk to me like I am a child, "you do know what a w-2 is, right?" when I am a 36 year old adult, but if it makes you feel some type of fuzziness at the end of the day, go ahead. It doesn't make me lose any of mine. I guess there is a reason that I have you on ignore and I signed out of TER to see why someone who I have on ignore felt the need to reply to a post of mine. Won't happen again. I come here and choose this lifestlye to not have stress, not to look for someone who thinks they are my dad.
Final thoughts;
I actually have the same person who does my parents taxes do mine. While I like to believe that my parents do not know what I do, I'm pretty sure they don't, he does know.
While I appreciate your (genuine?) interest, I'll continue to do what works for me and has kept me out of trouble so far and you can do what works for you
And if you're going to make remarks that are false and/or inaccurate...be prepared to hear why they are.
Also..when you put someone on ignore..don't reply to them. It defeats the purpose of putting a handle on ignore.
BTW....I thought only the 12 year old's use ignore. Most adults have the capacity to simply not read/reply to something they don't want to.
Now..maybe you should/could go and ask your parents tax preparer about vacations included as income...or how much is allowable for 2015 as gifts from Mommy/Daddy without the need for a gift tax return (hint...it's 14k per donor...so if both parents are alive they can gift YOU $ 28k in 2015). Toss out why you/I would get a 1099 for gambling winnings in excess of $ 600.
Maybe Mommy/Daddy knows an attorney as well...and ask about fraud and perjury.
Stop pretending you're actually a 12 y/o woman in a 36+ y/o body!
Final thoughts;
I actually have the same person who does my parents taxes do mine. While I like to believe that my parents do not know what I do, I'm pretty sure they don't, he does know.
While I appreciate your (genuine?) interest, I'll continue to do what works for me and has kept me out of trouble so far and you can do what works for you.
The court will assess this under a strict scrutiny standard and find states have a compelling governmental interest in prohibiting prostitution. I would venture to say the state will cite to the plethora of studies demonizing prostitution, and purportedly showing how it victimizes and abases women. I'll leave it to GaG to set the odds, but I don't see this case having a snowball's chance in hell. I think we'll continue the need to play underground.
Actually, strict scrutiny works the opposite way. It is used by courts to assess state actions when a fundamental freedom or a suspect class in affected by the state action. Unless the plaintiffs can convince the courts that the ability to pay or receive payment for sexual services is a fundamental right - a stretch in my opinion - the court will apply the far less onerous "rational relation" test. The state would only have to show a legitimate purpose for anti prostitution laws and the means employed are rationally related thereto. Btw, laws tested under strict scrutiny almost always are struck down, laws tested under rational relation almost always survive.