I see many many providers and their knights in shining armor say that there are risks in the profession- the uncertainties of a stranger and the threat of being jailed for breaking the law. Thus the cost of service relects these risks. These are valid notions.
Now what you're intimating here is that you would rather have the threat of LE and make more or equivalent money. As long as you're seeing this from a perspective of an individual trying to make a buck, why not try dealing drugs, risks are there but the upside is tremendous and you wouldn't have to abuse your body. Breaking the law is breaking the law.
I would rather have it be legal since it is a social issue that this nation has to address before it becomes mature. Right now we are like a powerful kid with infantile mindsets. Whatever restrictions and intrusions that come with legalization are just steps in dealing with this nation's fear but want of sex. Restrictions are like anything else, they're strict at first but over time, not so bad. It's a small price to pay for alot more freedom.
I got into a debate with a guy about the merits of legal prostitution, and it got me thinking that we all might be better off keeping it illegal. The most obvious downside to it being illegal is that it is, well, illegal; providers and hobbyists alike run the risk of arrest, etc. But careful scrutiny and a level head will reduce that risk substantially, perhaps completely.
On the other hand, legal prostitution would/will end up like the health care industry, with bureaucratic oversight, inspections, regulations, and worst of all - TAXES! Sin taxes are always ridiculously high and the first to get raised when the governing entity needs money. Can you imagine what the Poontang tax would be?
Additionally, if providers had to get licensed, how many part-time independants would stay in the hobby? Personally I like the part-time, mostly-in-it-for-fun providers the best.
I'm probably exhibiting my naivete here, but it just seems better to keep things as is. Maybe someone from Vegas or somewhere else that prostitution is legal can weigh in on the topic. Any of you providers have experience working legal?
Lets, leave it to Beaver.
mind their own business. I would like for LE to have the same interest in the hobby as they would with two 'conventional' people out on a date..none.
My ex boss paid $2600 to become a member of those Singles Dating Find-A-Mate things. After 18 months and some grueling dates, she never found anybody and felt more depressed after each 'failure'. These places rake in lots of money - matching up people..
I don't watch TV, but have caught glimpses of these idiotic dating shows like "Elimidate". Somebody's making money; some are having sex..
I fail to see the interest for LE in very personal, discreet, private alliances between two consenting adults. Now, streetwalking, drugs, eyesore public nuisances..yes...
Sedona, dear, many would say that drugs are no different than sex...that using is a victimless crime, especially with lower end narcotics like cannibas, and that if LE "looked the other way", people could just grown their own, cut out "dealers" or cartels, and no one would notice.
What it comes down to is religion and politics. This society has always been strongly influenced by religion, and religion specifically denounces giving into our "vices", like sexual desire (especially out of wedlock) or consciousness altering substance consumption. As long as there is such a strong block of voters in this country that are influenced by religion (not to mention enough women who disapprove of/are threatened by other women bold enough to sell "it"), the politicians will always have to enforce the will of the majority. This will be done by 1) using media disinformation to paint these things in the worst light possible (i.e. steetwalkers, drug addicts, etc.), and 2) by keeping it illegal.
If religious organizations would have had their way, prohibition would never have ended, but drinking was too popular, and there was already a buisness model and social acceptance for it in this country, so prohibition was repealed. The government granted the will of a committed majority. However, because of this, the zealots that were emboldened by this social experiment went after cannibas instead, played the racial card, ignored the significant benefits of the hemp plant outside of THC, and got it outlawed, even though THC is more natural than mass- produced alcohol and produces a very similar result for a lot less money.
As for "decriminalizing" prostitution, it will not happen in our lifetimes, at the very least... IF EVER! However, you can be absolutely sure that if it ever is decriminalized, it will be regulated and run as a business, with taxes. There is way too much power in regulating peoples vices for government to ever not get involved.
But whenever money changes hands the government wants to regulate it and get a piece of it. We don't really have a free enterprise system. You know, I guess fines are a kind of innefficient Poon-Tax...
As for the cops, I suppose they'd say they're "just doin' their job." They have some discretion in the way they enforce the laws, but they don't make them. It's the moralistic A-holes that want to tell everybody else how to live their lives who create all the pain. It's not enough to follow their own set of (sick) values, they want everyone else to follow them too!
And another thing!... sorry for screaming in your ear.
the next Republican in office will abolish it (since mostly the rich are affected by it anyway)
---
what!? ... why are you looking at me that way? are you suggesting that the POOR can afford to hobby?? well are you????
LOL
By keeping it highly taxed, they will keep it something that the poor cannot afford, thereby saving all the "good stuff" for the elite, and then make it something that they can write off as a business expense.
Legalization is like a lot of other crap that sounds good on the surface, but the ripple effect of all that would inevitibly follow is far from good.
Taxes? You'd better believe it! And super high ones like all the other so-called 'sin taxes.' When's the last time politicians said no to a way to bring in new revenues unless there was a huge public outcry? And you KNOW there wouldn't be any outcry from the public at large!
Sure, license fees for the gals (annually no doubt as well as costly). But how about license fees for the hobbyists too? let's not forget about those 'cuz the politicos won't. Hell, ya gotta buy a license to fish don'cha?
Anyone REALLY want more government intrusion??
BTW prostitution isn't legal in Vegas...gotta go to one of the 'ranches' in a neighboring county for that & you won't likely find any indys working anywhere except Vegas & other places where it's illegal.
Usually when the politicians impose a high tax on vices an underground economy springs up to avoid those taxes. Since shortly after the founding of the country there have been moonshiners who produced alcohol without the state and federal taxes. Long before the recent increases in tobacco taxes there has been an underground business in smuggling cigarettes from the tobacco growing states to the highly taxed states in the Northeast. If the hobby was legalized and the taxes were oppressive you would see ladies operating on both sides of the law. In fact I am quite sure that many of the ladies that work in the Nevada brothels also work elsewhere when not in the brothels. In the brothels it is legal and of course it is not most everywhere else.
Of course there would probably be other things that might change because of legalization.
Have you ever seen the prices at the Bunny Ranch in Navada, and for what you get. We are doing much better on price where we are.
But, if price becomes cheaper due to legalization, I personally feel is not a good thing. I cannot see myself with 5 men in one day trying to make enough to pay my bills, when I can see 1 to 2 gentlemen. To me, it would be more of a factory line type of system providers will have to incorporate into their routine, which means rushing the client, no proper hygiene in between sessions, etc.= Not a good thing. The question is: how many of you men would like to see the average independent gal who was at one time very low volume, become more like a factory worker? 
-- Modified on 8/26/2003 3:15:28 PM
I see many many providers and their knights in shining armor say that there are risks in the profession- the uncertainties of a stranger and the threat of being jailed for breaking the law. Thus the cost of service relects these risks. These are valid notions.
Now what you're intimating here is that you would rather have the threat of LE and make more or equivalent money. As long as you're seeing this from a perspective of an individual trying to make a buck, why not try dealing drugs, risks are there but the upside is tremendous and you wouldn't have to abuse your body. Breaking the law is breaking the law.
I would rather have it be legal since it is a social issue that this nation has to address before it becomes mature. Right now we are like a powerful kid with infantile mindsets. Whatever restrictions and intrusions that come with legalization are just steps in dealing with this nation's fear but want of sex. Restrictions are like anything else, they're strict at first but over time, not so bad. It's a small price to pay for alot more freedom.
It has been a while since I have been to a Nevada Brothel. But I understand from other posters that the prices are higher than independent escorts in Las Vegas or Los Angeles. I am not sure whether they accurately reflect what the situation would be if the hobby was legal in a majority of the states. I think that part of the pricing has to do to with the novelty situation much like the higher prices received by some porn stars.
However my point was that a number of the ladies working in the legalized brothels also work when away from the legalized brothels.
As I stated in my first post if the government in general placed exorbitant taxes on the hobby an underground economy would probably spring up to avoid these exorbitant taxes. In a manner of speaking a number of ladies and hobbyists would be dealing with a legal brothel part of the time and at other times would be working in the underground economy. The higher the taxes the bigger the underground economy would be.
-- Modified on 8/26/2003 1:49:36 PM
STUMPY you've made a couple of good points about the underground economy...moonshiners, cigarette smugglers, etc. I don't disagree, but I do wonder about a couple of things.
Assuming the hobby was legalized along with all the likely government restrictions/interferance, I don't think there's much question the legalized hobby would be more expensive than it is now...in addition to the other factors I previously mentioned there is the probable increased ability of the IRS to track things to be sure they're also getting their fair share of the money.
So the bottom line is that the illegal underground is where the majority would play. If that's the case, the question that in my mind follows is this...would LE enforcement be heavier than it now is, & would the consequences of being busted be more severe? If so, even the cost of playtime in the underground likely increases.
First of all I am not sure whether to favor legalization or not. It depends upon how it is implemented, etc. Legalization is a state issue and would be done on a state by state basis. Some states might do a better job than others.
I took your first post to be alarmist which is why I responded to it. Whatever happens the business will continue to exist. And to some degree you and NOSC have made my points for me. If they make the taxes exorbitant, regulate it to death, create brothels in the middle of nowhere using mobile homes with seedy rooms there is only so many tax dollars they are going to reap.
If you are trying to generate tax revenue then the rates can't be too high. If you are just trying to kill the business then you tax it to death. This is one of the issues the government has with cigarette taxes. If they make the taxes high they tend to discourage the consumption or help to create an underground economy and they don't generate a lot of revenue. In the escort business the underground economy would be huge just like it is now. If the brothels in Nevada were so great then you would not have so many independents and agencies working in Las Vegas. And basically the reason that the hobby is not in Las Vegas is because of a early 1960's deal between the Attorney General Robert Kennedy and the city fathers of Vegas in which they agreed to not let it become legal in Clark County in exchange for the Federal Government not sending a task force to Vegas to root out the mobsters.
If some of the states enacted laws like those that exist in parts of England then the regulation might be more tolerable. My understanding is that independent ladies can legally operate their business out of their flats. However having more than one lady working in the place (brothel) is illegal.
I refuse to get as worked up as some of you are about this issue.
Because if a state did a poor job of legalization probably not much would change. If they did a good job then somethings might be actually improved. And in a lot of respects this discussion may be a moot point. A few states like California might consider it but in many of the bible belt states it will be a long time before it will ever be discussed.
I believe somebody in this thread worried about IRS involvement if the hobby was legalized. They could do a whole lot more currently if they decided to look for unreported income.
This my last post on this subject.
Legalization would imply regulation. Having seen how "legal" prostitution works in Nevada, where the ladies work for 33% of the fee (after serving up half to the house and 1/3 of the remainder to the Feds), I'd much rather just have it decriminalized, like it is (for the most part) in Canada.
There are some good points in this thread. Below is a brief synopsis of why it should be legalized. First though I want to throw out one point. Several people have raised concerns about over regulation of the industry if it is legalized. While that is certainly a valid concern, we need to think it through one additional step. Today a bust for prostitution is a criminal act. If it is legalized, even if over-regulated, you'd be looking at a regulatory infraction - much different scenario. Further, there is far less likelihood of a complaint or any involvement by LE for a regulatory infraction than for a criminal act.
Now, the most obvious reasons for decrim or legalization are:
- Making it illegal is a breach of our civil rights. Many of the worst abuses of law enforcement stem from political wars on vices. Government power must be limited to protecting citizens from other's aggression, not from our own stupidity, weakness, lifestyle, or beliefs. We should all fight diligently and constantly to curb government intrusion in our lives no matter the form.
- The risk of being arrested. For some this is not a huge issue, but for others it is. For providers there is the arrest/conviction record that will follow them potentially for the rest of their life creating difficulties in employment, credit, and obtaining an apartment or home. For the clients there's the double-wammy of the everlasting arrest record and the exposure of what they're doing to a potentially non-understanding spouse.
The less obvious reasons are:
- Reduce incidents of violence and theft against providers. LE will exist to protect them, not to arrest them. Those who commit crimes against providers will know this.
- Reduce real crimes such as child prostitution and rape. By making the industry more open, eliminating the fear that those in the industry have of going to LE, and by providing a legal alternative.
- Reduce pimping and enslaved prostitution.
- Reduce the spread of STI's. To the extent that clients will use providers instead of picking someone up in a bar. Providers have a lower incidence of STI's than people of similar ages in the general public.
- Reduce gang and drug activity that currently surrounds some elements of the industry.
- Make LE the compatriots of, rather than the enemies of, a significant percent of the population. An estimated 72% of US males will visit a provider at least once, 30% more than 25 times, and an estimated 7% of US females will work as a provider at some point.
- Allow LE to focus on crimes where a victim exists rather than on victimless crimes. Last year there were 104,000 arrests for prostitution in the US consuming an estimated 340,000 person hours of LE resources and costing over $300m.
- Reduce incidents of divorce. Two recent surveys indicated that women are less likely to seek a divorce from their husband for his visiting a prostitute than if he'd had an affair. In many societies, such as Italy, it is commonly accepted for spouses to have a 'paramour', often paid, to meet their physical needs for sex.
- Improve the ability for providers to successfully leave the industry by eliminating the arrest records that currently follow them.
Financial
- Reduce taxpayer costs of investigation, prosecution, defense, judication, incarceration, and rehab. Annual estimates range from $300m to $1.9b
- Allow LE to focus on victim-based crimes without the distraction of non-victim crimes.
- Religious and morals based organizations such as the Union Gospel Missions are both more effective and more cost effective in reducing incidents of vice including prostitution and casual drug use.
- The US law enforcement system was intended and designed to combat crimes, not personal vices. Using the system to enforce moral issues is inefficient, ineffective, and expensive.
- Does the average taxpayer really want their taxes used finding out what's going on in someone's bedroom.
Civil Liberties
- Current laws unreasonably impose some individual's moral beliefs on others.
- Current laws make criminals out of people who have victimized nobody.
- Provide for a safer and better environment for providers including allowing them to obtain medical insurance and other typical employment benefits.
- Government has no compelling reason to control prostitution other than where it becomes a public nuisance or where a victim exists. An estimated 90% of instances of prostitution do not meet these criteria.
Regarding the cons.
- Legalization will have no impact on it's relationship to the IRS. The IRS doesn't care if what you're doing is legal or illegal, they just want their money.
- The impact on pricing will likely be a broadening of the market, not an increase or decrease. We'll likely see more providers in general with a broader range of pricing, particularly at the low end. Many of the top-level providers in the industry today will likely continue at their current rates.
- As pointed out already, decrim will not happen. Legalization likely will in the coming years. I know of 2 state legislatures that are discussing legalization and have heard rumors that several others will take up the issue next year. Legalization will have the benefit of making prostitution itself legal and will reduce violations to licensing and regulatory violations, not criminal.
- Most states will likely legalize independents rather than brothels and street soliciting will continue to be illegal.
- The 'sin tax' will likely be 12% of fees.
Just some thoughts
very rarely or never enforced. A "look the other way" approach by LE.
filter out the undesireables and ROB's. hell we pay taxes on everything else, what's one more. I have heard in European countries that the girls are regularly checked for STD's and the like by the government. what's wrong with having clean healthy providers in the great us of a?