The post is from England where taxes and costs are extremely high now and for awhile. I have met people from there on my holidays and one family traveled from England to Mexico to get dental work done, the cost of their holiday ( for 4 ) plus dental was cheaper that the dental work alone in England. The costs are the same as ours here but instead of for example a beer for $5 it is 5 pounds there and the unemployment rate is very high and wages low. If an escort keeps her prices competitive and service good there should be no issue in making a decent living here.
I enjoy a glass of wine each day for it's health benifits. The other glasses are for my witty comebacks and flawless dance moves.
Why does the media, even a respected magazine such as the Economist, make everything so sensationalized and difficult to read without gathering facts outside the article.
England is the most expensive middle and upper-class sex market in the world, even more expensive than the U.S.
They note that the upper-end sex market workers have had to drop their prices by many Euros and customers are asking for discounts. Not surprising since the original price was absurd and the economy is in the toilet and lower-priced markets for girls with similar looks and services are a short distance away in Germany and Spain.
And then the article jumps to low-end girls who live give 20 Euro BJs and live on the streets. This is not a valid comparable for analysis to the independent escort who is displeased that her former business charging let's say 250 - 400 Euros an hour is not going so well.
Why the hell can't anyone in the media write an article that properly differentiates the players in a market. There are 5 star restaurants, sit-down eateries with no drive-throughs, fast food places, street food, and all types of grocery stores too numerous to mention. A good economic analysis would not label it the "food" market if he were trying to understand changes in pricing, demand, and profit. Why does the media do this with the sex market. Do they really think a 20 Euro BJ in the back of a car at the end of a dimly-lit street from a chick who uses drugs is the same as an hour with a model-quality girl who plays three holes? If not, why do they write these worthless articles?
Regardless, it is quite amusing to read this somewhat silly article, and then read the comments from a reader such as Bob Hall who has some understanding of statistical analysis and the different prostitution "sub-markets". The quality of journalism today is truly atrocious. I noticed on a recent MERB thread that one of those "save the girls from the pimps" posters referenced a documentary on prostitution in the States that I remembered seeing. It of course focused on three areas - the very low priced street hookers who were addicted to drugs and lived short, sad lives, the very high-end thousands of dollars per hour market that is very much the rarity, and the "legal" houses in Nevada and Amsterdam where they could show actual working girls in the Amsterdam windows. It was all about sensationalism. If they showed escorts in Canada or the U.S. going up an elevator in a moderately priced hotel, charging the typical price per hour of $180 - $230 Canadian or $350 - $500 U.S. per hour, and using those funds to pay for college and/or support her family/friends, everyone watching would yawn. In my opinion, that is the largest prostitution market, and the U.S. media completely ignores it in order to perpetuate stereotypes and offer sensationalism.
Having just returned from Scotland for a family visit. Certain commodities are expensive. The Economist was quoting London Prices, for SP(s) In superMarkets beer and wine are Cheaper than Canada. 3 bottles for 10 uk pounds. ( 15$ ) Basic foods were cheaper Glasgow SP were competitive 100 uk pnd full service one hour (160 $) ( Not that I had time to indulge ) Gigarettes were more expensive. The uk is part of Europe and nearly Everything is taxed at 20% VAT to support the European Parliament who have entirely screwed up the Economy. PS there are some items taxed at higher rates, so called Luxury items.
100 pounds for 1h with a SP in Glasgow... Wow... Very surprising but good to know...
Find what you love, and let it kill you...
I am surprised that the Economist does not talk about something pretty obvious to me: migrant sex workers are more and more working in the high end et middle range markets. UK is not part of the Schengen Area but still is Europe's biggest magnet for migrant workers. According to many serious sources, migrant sex workers account for more than half the sex workers' population.
High end clients, except maybe for the few rich narcissists, are not stupid. The girls get to some very nice hotels to work for 15-20 days, they have a cultural level comparable to the high end british escorts and they provide often better service.
Simple market law: an increase of the supply for a constant demand.
One would expect that a lowering of prices would help recruit new clients. I am not so sure, however, that it does so. Who among us would claim that the price had anything to do with having a first experience with a sex worker? I guess that, at best, existing clients could increase their number of visits. So, at the end of the line, the equilibrium price drops vertically.
It's an easy article for the Economist: the methodology is exclusively based on the quality of the informants. And I trust them for that. They talk to maybe 10 or 20. They use 4 or 5 of them in the article. The problem is with the very limited scope of the article.
Gugu, One of my biggest dissapointments with the article was that years ago The Economist's print edition did in fact do such a piece with a humorous photo of a prostitute flat that has a sign with an arrow stating "Olga, Upstairs" above a caption that said "The Competition". That article was well written and reiterated The Economist magazine's editorial position that prostitution should be legalized or decriminalized everywhere. Now this online article comes out indicating that a recession may exist in the sex industry based partially on the evidence that a middle aged hooker now fucks three guys a day instead of nine. Perhaps she has gained a bit of weight and the customers gave gone elsewhere. And perhaps a little more effort is put into the print edition.
I had a subsciption to The Economist and although they pretend to be a weighty, well-put-together publication they are not. Mostly fluff I found. Unfortunately that is the trend with the internet weakening respectable journals.
The biz has reached a point of saturation. Supply is going up because there are a lot of students working in the massage parlors and escort agencies. The supply is going down because of the demographic shift of less baby boomers hitting the scene, and the job market is changing.