Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40

Thread: How Sugar Daddies Are Financing College Education

  1. #1
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,128

    How Sugar Daddies Are Financing College Education


  2. #2
    "Amanda has met more than 50 men through the site.".... I'm sorry, that IS prostitution, no matter how they try to put it...nothing wrong with that, but I hate the hypocrisy when these girls pretend its not and even look down on prostitution..

  3. #3
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,128
    I think elsewhere in the article it says that.

  4. #4
    they try to put some twist on it and say its not just physical and that is just ONE aspect of it (bullshit..its one aspect that counts for 90%),that is more socially acceptable and they end by saying it can't be prostitution....which I dont buy.
    Its their attitude that I find dishonest..dont you dare call them SPs, but then they see 50 guys in their 60s..give me a break

  5. #5
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,128
    Who is the they you are talking about? The owners of the site or the authors of the article? The article cites an expert who says the sugar babies are escorts and the site is marketing prostitution which in case you forgot, is illegal in the USA with a few limited exceptions.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver View Post
    Who is the they you are talking about? The owners of the site or the authors of the article?
    The girls..they dont see themselves as prostitutes. They think its just dating with benefits..because they dont want to be included in that category..which I find dishonest and hypocritical

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Aka View Post
    The girls..they dont see themselves as prostitutes. They think its just dating with benefits..because they dont want to be included in that category..which I find dishonest and hypocritical
    In the US we're also living in a country where a large amount of the younger population doesn't think that oral sex is sex, or at least define it differently, so you can have somebody go down on you a hundred times, but you're still a virgin. People like to have a certain view of themselves and they'll stretch reality all out of proportion to maintain that image.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    NY State
    Posts
    2,808
    Quote Originally Posted by Aka View Post
    The girls..they dont see themselves as prostitutes. They think its just dating with benefits..because they dont want to be included in that category..which I find dishonest and hypocritical
    It's a different form of prostitution than the traditional by the hour prostitution. These girls are only selecting or in competition for johns or guys who pay them extremely well, but they are providing more than the traditional one to a few hours companionship and sex that most SP's provide.

    By making it look like a relationship, which it is not, they are as you said dishonestly covering up that they are prostituting themselves.

    As you say:

    Quote Originally Posted by Aka View Post
    Its their attitude that I find dishonest..dont you dare call them SPs, but then they see 50 guys in their 60s..give me a break
    So when will Hillary go to Prison?

    Only the Democrats would have a potential CONVICT as their Top Presidential Candidate. Simply Pathetic

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Visiting Planet Earth
    Posts
    4,160
    Gents,

    I wouldn't say it's a different form of prostitution, I'd say it's just a slightly different cover story. It's still testing out contact, meeting, performance and payment. The clients have far more at stake and their overall behavior would be more guarded to avoid complication of every kind, but it's the same game.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aka View Post
    The girls..they dont see themselves as prostitutes. They think its just dating with benefits..because they dont want to be included in that category..which I find dishonest and hypocritical
    No doubt each side wants to see themselves as something different than the run of the mill client/john and sex provider. If that helps them get enjoy the association then so be it. The real purpose says what it is.

    If I were either party I'd wonder how much of this activity can be tracked. I would guess that using this "dating game" approach means they would not be covering up as much as we do since doing since being too devious would add suspicion, not that anyone is being fooled. But if anyone one of the ladies gets nailed, well, I remember the story of the very high class and very exclusive Mayflower Madam whose enterprise got exposed and touched a lot people.

    "If so many college women are signing up for the site, it must be something different. It must be more socially acceptable somehow. It can’t really be prostitution."

    You're right Aka, there's some large self-deception going on in view of this statement.

    As for them being college girls, surely no lady would scam anyone if they knew being a "college girl" was at a premium for profitability. Background checks anyone.



    Merlot

  10. #10
    As i understood it a Sugar Daddy/Sugar Baby thing is an ongoing thing. Guy pays your expenses and some cash on a monthly basis for regular and at least somewhat frequent access.

    You might be able to swing a couple at a time but if you have seen 50 guys you are either not engaged in a SD SB type gig or you are so horribly bad at it that none of the guys are dropping you like a rock.

    It isn't much different though than porno chicks saying they are not prostitues. You fuck for money. The camera doesn't change shit. Oh they claim but I get to choose who I work for, well so do escorts, and many porn actresses can't make that claim at least not a strong claim to that.

    As someone who values honesty, that bothers me. If a porno chick says she only works on camera and doesn't escort, that is one thing, but the ones who put their noses in the air like what they do is so different are funny. Also kinda insulting to escorts and the work they do.

  11. #11
    Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Northern emisphere
    Posts
    5,925
    Hi all

    Over the centuries they have always been ladies courting for advantages .Fiding words to make it look better and more morally acceptable in society !What was originally a companion
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/companion


    A companion was originally a courtier, which means a person who attends the court of a monarch or other powerful person.[1] The modern use of the term for a prostitute, concubine or mistress of a man of rank[2] belies a much more complex heritage.

    In feudal society, the court was the centre of government as well as the residence of the monarch, and social and political life were often completely mixed together. Prior to the Renaissance, companions served to convey information untrusted to servants to visiting dignitaries. In Renaissance Europe, courtiers played an extremely important role in upper-class society. As it was customary during this time for royal couples to lead separate lives—commonly marrying simply to preserve bloodlines, fortunes or social status and to secure political alliances—men and women would often seek gratification and companionship from people living at court. In fact, the verb to court originally meant ``to be or reside at court``, and later came to mean ``to behave as a courtier`` and then ``to pay amorous attention to somebody``.[3] The most intimate companion of a ruler was called the favourite.

    In Renaissance usage, the Italian word cortigiana, feminine of cortigiano (``courtier``) came to refer to ``the ruler`s mistress``, and then to a well-educated and independent woman, essentially a trained artisan of dance and singing, especially one associated with wealthy, powerful, or upper-class men who provided luxuries and status in exchange for companionship.[4] The word was borrowed by English from Italian through the French form ``courtisane`` during the 16th century, especially associated to the meaning of court-mistress and prostitute.[1]


    For now the term Sugar babies looks and sounds better than maybe other words
    Sugar Daddies also has a better ring then other terms but at the end its the same


    Regards


    Booker

  12. #12
    I think people are reading a bit too much into the societal hierarchy component to the Sugar Baby's supposed attitude of superiority to other sex workers. I think it is a U.S. tax thing and she is educated by the site and through the site's propaganda to believe certain things.

    Income from prostitution is taxable in the United States, regardless of whether it is legal or illegal. That surprises a lot of foreigners. It is completely fine for a sex worker to list escort on her tax return, although most list model or entertainer as her occupation. Part of the deal U.S. Citizens have with our government, due to having to sign our tax returns under the Penalties of Perjury without the benefit of the Fifth Amendment, is that the IRS cannot disclose the information on an accurate return to another law enforcement agency. If the IRS auditor comes to the understanding that the subject is prostitute earning $100,000 a year and that she paid her taxes, the IRS auditor cannot phone the vice police and tell them about her. The opposite is not true. If the vice police discover a prostitute and have evidence that she makes a lot of money, they can contact the IRS so the IRS can audit her and penalize/prosecute her if she has avoided or evaded paying taxes.

    Realistically, most of us believe that higher-end escorts in the U.S. report some, but not all, of their income. They likely decide how much based on how much money they deposit and how obvious their daily calendar and screening history is. The likelihood is that a lot of cash from repeat customers never makes it on the books.

    Gifts, on the other hand, are not taxable to the recipient. And the giver has to make an absolute hell of a lot of gifts before the giver pays a gift tax. So these Sugar Baby sites set things up to maximize the possibility that a girl can argue that the guy, whose name she knows, was her real boyfriend and he gave her gifts unrelated to sex to help her with college costs and living expenses.

    It is a highly subjective question -the receipt of a nontaxable gift versus taxable income from prostitution. The tax benefits of gift classification are pretty damn enormous, so I really think that is what drives a lot of what is said in these articles. I think the greatest risk of shutdown is the anger that may occur from college girls (and their parents) who do not participate in sex work but instead work a low-paying, high-tax (when she factors in payroll tax) job and does not do as well financially as the Sugar Baby.

    The mainstream media is never a friend to johns.

  13. #13
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,128
    Patton is correct in his legal analysis. When escort agencies in the USA get busted, historically, the only thing they are usually convicted of is income tax evasion. Usually bigger operations like the Empire Club which was Spitzer's agency only get on the radar of being worthy of prosecution because of the large amounts of money that is not being taxed. A lot of people forget that the EC investigation started by accident because LE thought Spitzer was making funny bank transfers to illegally launder campaign money. They then realized that he was paying a lot of money on HDH hookers. At that point they went after EC. The original target of the investigation, Spitzer, was never even charged with a crime. EC was busted for income tax evasion among other things. They would still be in business if they didn't do business with Spitzer. There is some dispute over whether they knew who they were dealing with but the evidence suggests they did although Spitzer used an alias.

  14. #14
    Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Northern emisphere
    Posts
    5,925
    Hi all

    If we are talking of legal ramifications on escorts revenues their is consequences here too!
    They confiscate assets obtain from "prostitution" in Canada its a reverse Onus of proof for goods obtain from crime a partial judgment of a Quebec court below confiscating assets obtain from "running a escort agency "

    68] Even as prosecutors argued before the undersigned on November 21, 2002, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in the case, Quebec PG c. Laroche, 2000 A.C.S. 74 and stated: "The application for forfeiture is necessarily the terms of an alternative created by. 462.37 (1) and 462.38 (2). These correspond to different legal situations. Indeed, the confiscation order is issued, the if necessary, following the standards of evidence that differ depending on the legal situation warrants. ""Defining more closely the subject of confiscation, s. 462.37 (1) requires proof that the property is derived from the offense with which the defendant was convicted. However, this demonstration takes place in accordance with the lower standard of proof on a balance of probabilities. by cons, in the case of a confiscation order requested under s. 462.38 (2), the Criminal Code does not require proof of attachment of property crime referred by conviction. At the relevant time, it was enough that the prosecutor establishes that goods coming from other designated offenses or other offenses of organized crime, but then according to the higher standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. ""The presence of these separate standards of proof inevitably affects the functioning of mechanisms for authorizing seizure and restraint orders and revisions. At these stages, the judge was forced to a foresight exercise. He must assess, the standard of probability, if a confiscation order would be issued under either ss. 462.27 (1) and 462.38 (2). as the standards applicable to the order of confiscation of evidence depends their source, so it is important that further specify the provision under which it would require confiscation and the legal and factual basis for it. Against this background, as in this case, situations arise where, in connection with different goods, confiscation orders are likely to be issued under the various provisions of the Criminal Code. was even imagine situations where the enabling provisions would be invoked alternatively or in the alternative to each other. "([14]) [69] At the resumed hearing of 31 January 2003, prosecutors have not commented on the ruling. [70] The Court of Appeal of Quebec, April 9, 2003, in the case Union Canadienne Compagnie D'Assurances c. Sansfaçon 2003 J.Q. 3332 indicated that: "I am of the opinion that the provisions of the Criminal Code relating to the restraint order must be narrowly construed." ([15]) *FINAL CONCLUSION [71] Considering the entire record; [72] Given the unusual procedure that have suffered the accused, after pleading guilty at the hearing; [73] Considering that the punishment should always be proportionate to the offense; [74] Considering that the facts of this case do not fit well with the concept of ... crime or benefit of, at the direction of a criminal organization or in association with ... [75] Considering the totality principle of sentencing. **1) CHAPTER OF LEGAL FEES ORDERS that the sum of $ 30,000.00 to be paid within thirty days of the date Study Legal and Grey Casgrain, to take even the first liquid funds of these confiscations or failing during the liquidation of real property to load the Attorney General of Quebec. *2) CHAPTER OF THE AWARD OF ROSEMARY BREYTHER Suspended sentence, probation for three months in the general condition of good behavior and keep the peace. No surcharge because it would be an undue hardship in this case. Concurrent sentence to the other files, and between each competitor head. **3) CHAPTER OF FORFEITURE ORDERS the forfeiture of the Attorney General of Quebec the following property: ********** "a building located at 9 49th Avenue in the Municipality of Notre-Dame de l'Ile Perrot, Quebec, J7V 9Z7, registered in the office of the District Registrar of the Land Registry District of Vaudreuil as belonging to Joseph Thomas Toth and Rosemary Breyther buildings designated as follows: lot 2069633, Quebec cadastre ********** with all the buildings above erected bearing civic number 9 49th Avenue, Notre Dame de l'Ile Perrot, Quebec, J7V 9Z7. ********** such as whole stands at present with and subject to all active and passive easements, apparent or unapparent, attached to said building. for it is disposed of in accordance with instructions which becomes the sole owner and be substituted and / or subrogated to the rights of the respondents in all claims dependents, respect existing property rights to 16 February 2001 "ORDERS the owners and current occupants of the return and / or abandon them within fifteen days of this judgment; ORDERS the Officer in Charge of the Office of the District Registrar of the Land Registry District of Vaudreuil, publish the order against the real property described above; ORDERED that the cancellation of the registration of the freeze order issued under number 358 223 16 February 2001 the Office of the District Registrar of the Land Registry District of Vaudreuil and, upon publication of this judgment forfeiture Bureau District Registrar; ORDONNEla forfeiture of all money and other valuables being contained and / or attached to the account number 09-301-25 National Bank located at 4506 St-Denis in Montreal, H2X 2L3, said account being registered in the name from: safety Consultants AG; ORDERS National Bank quoted in the previous paragraph immediately pay to the Attorney General of Quebec all forfeitures said account; ORDONNEla forfeiture of all money and other valuables being contained and / or attached to the accounts with the numbers 36263-26, 00538-80, 01502-23, 00117-89 and 12476-89, 223-14, the latter account being registered to Crystal Star Creation Scotiabank, located at 3064, rue St-Charles, Kirkland; ORDERS Scotiabank, cited in the previous paragraph immediately pay to the Attorney General of Quebec all forfeitures audits accounts; ORDERS forfeiture of all money, investments and other securities and all interest, fees and other benefits generated by these property on content and / or attached to the account 20503 registered under the Advisers name safe AG at the Caisse Populaire St. Odile, located at 4995, rue de Salaberry in Montreal; ORDERS the Caisse Populaire St-Odile, cited in the previous paragraph immediately pay to the Attorney General of Quebec all forfeitures said account; ORDERED that the delivery of all other seized and all other frozen assets to be delivered to the accused objects; ORDERS meaning to all the respondents of this judgment; WAIVER meaning the accused as well as security consultants and Crystal Star Creation AG; To avoid confusion, no surcharge will be added; ******** *****__________________________________ MICHEL MERCIER, J.C.Q.

    Its a Google translate version

    But escort agencies owners are very badly equip to face does situations

    So good luck to all


    Warmest Regards


    Booker

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    NY State
    Posts
    2,808
    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver View Post
    Patton is correct in his legal analysis. When escort agencies in the USA get busted, historically, the only thing they are usually convicted of is income tax evasion. Usually bigger operations like the Empire Club which was Spitzer's agency only get on the radar of being worthy of prosecution because of the large amounts of money that is not being taxed. A lot of people forget that the EC investigation started by accident because LE thought Spitzer was making funny bank transfers to illegally launder campaign money. They then realized that he was paying a lot of money on HDH hookers. At that point they went after EC. The original target of the investigation, Spitzer, was never even charged with a crime. EC was busted for income tax evasion among other things. They would still be in business if they didn't do business with Spitzer. There is some dispute over whether they knew who they were dealing with but the evidence suggests they did although Spitzer used an alias.
    Not true. Escort agencies and owners do get busted, and when they do, it is on the first page of the NY tabloids. Remember Julie Moya who owned a NYC brothel in her name, and her friend Jason Itzler, who owned the extremely expensive and exclusive Escort agency called New York Confidential. They were both doing time at Rikers at the same time. Both were busted by NYPD and convicted in NYC courts. There have been others in NY and other municipalities. So to say when agencies in the USA get busted, historically, the only thing they are usually convicted of is income tax evasion is extremely incorrect. By the way (and you should know this Beav), tax evasion is a federal crime. Running a place of prostitution is a state crime. The same authority would not investigate both crimes.
    So when will Hillary go to Prison?

    Only the Democrats would have a potential CONVICT as their Top Presidential Candidate. Simply Pathetic

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •