It really is an awful model. I'd guess that pockets were lined when that was being hammered out, or at least campaign donations implicitly promised. As for the ladies, and to a lesser extent the clients, the old saying comes to mind, “If you don't have a seat at the table, you're probably on the menu.”
Not to be cynical or anything, but I guess I should have known that if the biz is legalized in the U.S., it would be in some such idiotic way as this. :-/There was that madam in NYC who ran for office a while back, and the Nevada businesses probably donate a fair share to their representatives, but there doesn't seem to be any real political group or organization, at all, that has this on their agenda.
Is there any such legitimate group or organization? Google comes up empty on the matter for me.
(One that hopefully realizes the Nevada model is garbage)
Thanks!
GaGambler said much the same thing about the Nevada model a few days ago. I know very little about it. Can you, or anyone else who is knowledgeable, expand on why you think it's so bad?
Well let me see... It costs 100-3,000% more than what you find elsewhere. And most or all of that goes only to the house. And the house tries very, very hard to make the provider feel trapped/stuck with them, resulting in, let's say, "less than ideal" working conditions.
Ymmv depending on the specific place but you get the idea.
If providing is legalized it should be heavily weighted to favor the independent provider above all else.
The biggest is it literally requires the ladies to have a pimp like person in their life. Forcing them to work in a brothel that charges them for everything then takes half. Brothels require the lady to live at the brothel while working, generally a three week span making it impossible for single mothers. Because of costs of the brothel and licensing and pressure from the brothel ladies must work long shifts and high volume. Note she can make bank but it will literally take over her life while there. Note they have all the downside of a boss but none of the perks. No heath insurance, no sick leave no nothing.
As for us guys the law requires everything be covered. No BBBJ. Costs are higher do to the brothel costs. Negotiations are common and things can be priced individually so negotiating everything up front is necessary.
In short it it is better then being completely illegal but not by much. Please note it is illegal in the two most populace counties so it isn't legal in Vagas or Reno.
-- Modified on 1/30/2017 2:55:47 PM
It really is an awful model. I'd guess that pockets were lined when that was being hammered out, or at least campaign donations implicitly promised. As for the ladies, and to a lesser extent the clients, the old saying comes to mind, “If you don't have a seat at the table, you're probably on the menu.”
Not to be cynical or anything, but I guess I should have known that if the biz is legalized in the U.S., it would be in some such idiotic way as this. :-/
you can hardly say "it"
let alone "legalize" "it"
about a current court case that seeks to end legal bans on pay for play:
I have talked multiple State Representatives.
Is there any such legitimate group or organization? Google comes up empty on the matter for me.
(One that hopefully realizes the Nevada model is garbage)
Thanks!
And while they are somewhat inclined to agree with me, they don't want to go too far on controversial issues, for fear that the "moderates" will vote against them come election time. This is why politics is such a snake pit, and the reason that the public is generally far ahead of the politicians on issues like consenting adults, smoking weed, and letting transegender people use the bathroom of their choice.