Cash is King. Another reason added to the list for opposing the replacement of physical cash with all-digital central currency.
If an agency gets busted...
- Thread starter new_in_town
- Start date
I don’t blame any escort for not paying taxes or the bare minimum.
The government is the only act in town that fucks more people than any escort ever will.
I assume yes on reportable/traceable income, but no on cash income. Not the case?
That answers most of my concerns even if im mostly drawn towards incalls and MP's but since im in a serious relationship I tend to focus on activities without body fluid exchange since a condom can rip in the middle of action very annoying when it happends !!!!
I tend to favor decriminalization over full legalization precisely because if something is fully legalized, the state gets its claws in irrevocably. Because it wants its tax money (officially). This debate was flaring in the old country many years ago and one of the main arguments against legalizing prostitution was "if they can't find work, the state would have to pay them unemployment benefits like for any other worker" (and said state is strapped for cash at the best of times, we don't have a massive welfare state that can afford super-generous social programs). So it's not my intention to get too political up in here, but there exists primarily financial arguments both for and against legalization. I lean towards the decriminalization route instead and can understand your rationale for feeling the same way.
If it was legalized, options for clients would be more limited, and many of us wouldn't be able to practice legally.
In Nevada there are more arrests related to prostitution than anywhere else in the United States. Precisely because the government wants control over what happens. You can't work independently as an escort there, either.
Not everyone can work for a legal brothel. A lot of people don't want it to be official to the government that they do sex work, too. Of course there's the idea that workers could unionize but that's only if they're willing to be escorts on paper and if they can go through the process of being hired at one of these places.. or if they're allowed to, to begin with.
Yeah. It's mostly conservative groups who try to get clients criminalized. Even a lot of organizations that were initially against the decriminalization of sex work are changing their minds because they're seeing that it doesn't work, and many people are working behind the scenes to educate advocates for various causes.
A lot of politicians are just not interested in this subject immediately and they think it's like opening a can of worms. In Quebec there's a lot of misinformation about this industry and many people are not properly informed and push the narrative that most workers began when they were literally kids, lots of misconceptions about clients in general as well..
When in fact decriminalization would actually change the mentality around this and clients & employers who aren't respectful would be held accountable. If we had more legit platforms to advertise it would also be a lot easier for clients to avoid certain traps.
From my observations, the more old-school conservatives want the working girls themselves criminalized, because they see them as sinful and destroying society’s morality by leading men into temptation to commit adultery (the stereotype that johns are largely married men being unfaithful is somewhat common). The small-government conservatives who lean towards libertarianism will oppose such an approach, arguing "look, pornography's been legalized decades ago, you no longer need to buy it in a back alley from a guy working for the mob, keeping prostitution illegal is both hypocritical in that context and ignoring the fact that you will never be able to make it go away via legislation" (similar to how they may not be in favor of drug use but realize that the "war on drugs" has been a massive failure).
Conversely, the ones wishing to see clients criminalized instead are the left-wing, "progressive" types. Who might have a vested interest to oppose heterosexual sex to begin with, it takes all kinds.
I don't know if progressive types want clients criminalized, generally... I've met a lot of people who aren't in the industry and are for decriminalization. but I do think that some people on both conservative and progressive sides are not well informed about the industry at all. It's really unfortunate.
Last edited:
I’m a realist. I would never under any circumstances suggest either ALL or NONE for anything or anyone.
Even lawyers do “1/2 Cash” for clients’ personal (non deductible) legal payments. “Some” people have cash they probably shouldn’t have and didn’t pay taxes on.
Have even seen this on significant home purchases between a buyer and a seller. The lawyers discretely leave the room as they can’t be a party to that since they’re “officers of the court.”
There are Parking Garages in NYC, where the City charges an 18% tax, that only accept cash. A smart administration would use CCTV or a person with a clicker counting cars going in and out.
Income taxes (federal & local) in NYC & Montreal are about 35% on a USD$100,000 net income or salary.
I don’t work for the IRS or care that much when working people do it to survive.
I have an issue with people earning $100M paying ~6% because they borrow against their assets and paying accountants millions. While it’s a lot of money Bezos pays about 4.5%.
Harper passed the law because the supreme court "ordered" the government to change sex laws based on a case of a dominatrix out of Toronto. The Harper government was given a "hot potato" by the courts, and they chose the new laws that they chose (the so called "nordic mode" was in vogue at the time).
I have often wondered what the Turdeau liberals would have done if they were given the "hot potato". I give him credit for legalizing cannabis, but not so sure what he would of done with prostitution.
To an extent, I get it, the prosecution of johns is built into the law so law enforcement has a recourse against PDF files who rent underage girls and the pimps who facilitate this. But that's shoddy legislation, they should explicitly codify the exploitation of minors as the offense that is grounds for prosecution, instead of the "one size fits all" approach which also leaves itself open to legal challenges. It's not fucking rocket appliances, Julian. My parents still disapprove of me not passing the bar.
The side I tend to think of is, while legalization hurts the providers, clients would see a dramatic drop in who is accessible to them. And others would be at heavy risk to even offer services. (It would take just 1 bad apple to be upset he was denied, and your favorite underground girl disappears) because you like something outside of the 18-25 cis-woman model style girl, because they now control who you get to have access to. Tastes and desires are varried many like other types of providers.
Your preference now become government data to track and follow as it becomes recorded.
Or Decriminalization, where it gets clients out from the criminal side of things, they still get to maintain their anonymity, and they could report scammers, who fraud them, and clean out the danger in their selection pools. Also makeing it possible for people on either side to report trafficking if they came across it.
I want to see change. I might as well bring the other side people won't say because there is then the backlash of those very same bad players who would retaliate because their access to victims became restricted.
Often just knowing there is the possibility of report, can reduce offenses, even if it isn't reported, because who really wants to deal with the headache of having law enforcement into your personal business.
All other forms still leave room for the underground to victimize providers, and villainize either side of the transaction, from being able to reduce the number of victims.
Cheaters will cheat no matter what. It takes dedication to pay for it, and no manipulation or coercion was done. If it isn't available for payment they will find someone who then has expectations for some relationship from them, interfering with their current relationship. A cheater won't just go without. Either they will find someone else to satisfy their desires, or it then could become their partners problem whether they want it or not.
If their paying for it, to fill their desires by providers who are available and happy to accommodate, there are less people feeling victimized by a system that closed every option available to reduce victims in the sex industry, that as long as men/people have the capacity get horney, will continue to exhist. It's not a patriarchy system that creats the demand for SWers, it's basic human nature that does.
That's my 2 cents worth.
No form is without victims and things can always go wrong. But, decriminalization is the only one that can minimize victims within the industry.
Edit: You can rip my understand to shreds, but to remove the skin and bones, legalese of it this becomes the outcome I see from the model. Human nature is not going to change. Laws around it need to accept that fact. There's still plenty of people and churches who will demonize those who participate, to make sure society hasn't become completely corrupted.
It isn't patriarchy who creats the way for SW. It's capitalism. If we didn't have to require high payments to live, or survive, the access might not exhist.
(Just so tired of seeing this discussion from anit-SW people on other platforms and ranting it out here.)
Your preference now become government data to track and follow as it becomes recorded.
Or Decriminalization, where it gets clients out from the criminal side of things, they still get to maintain their anonymity, and they could report scammers, who fraud them, and clean out the danger in their selection pools. Also makeing it possible for people on either side to report trafficking if they came across it.
I want to see change. I might as well bring the other side people won't say because there is then the backlash of those very same bad players who would retaliate because their access to victims became restricted.
Often just knowing there is the possibility of report, can reduce offenses, even if it isn't reported, because who really wants to deal with the headache of having law enforcement into your personal business.
All other forms still leave room for the underground to victimize providers, and villainize either side of the transaction, from being able to reduce the number of victims.
Cheaters will cheat no matter what. It takes dedication to pay for it, and no manipulation or coercion was done. If it isn't available for payment they will find someone who then has expectations for some relationship from them, interfering with their current relationship. A cheater won't just go without. Either they will find someone else to satisfy their desires, or it then could become their partners problem whether they want it or not.
If their paying for it, to fill their desires by providers who are available and happy to accommodate, there are less people feeling victimized by a system that closed every option available to reduce victims in the sex industry, that as long as men/people have the capacity get horney, will continue to exhist. It's not a patriarchy system that creats the demand for SWers, it's basic human nature that does.
That's my 2 cents worth.
No form is without victims and things can always go wrong. But, decriminalization is the only one that can minimize victims within the industry.
Edit: You can rip my understand to shreds, but to remove the skin and bones, legalese of it this becomes the outcome I see from the model. Human nature is not going to change. Laws around it need to accept that fact. There's still plenty of people and churches who will demonize those who participate, to make sure society hasn't become completely corrupted.
It isn't patriarchy who creats the way for SW. It's capitalism. If we didn't have to require high payments to live, or survive, the access might not exhist.
(Just so tired of seeing this discussion from anit-SW people on other platforms and ranting it out here.)
Last edited:
It's called "the world's oldest profession" (alongside politics) for a reason. Which means it preceded capitalism by millennia, back in the halcyon days of monarchy and feudalism.
Enforcement seems to depend on municipalities. Depends on the mayor. I remember when we had that POS Denis Coderre he destroyed Montreal's red light district and had a vendetta against MPs and stripclubs. Many got shut down under his tenure. He always said he wanted to make Montreal a World Class city. The guy was so arrogant, he wanted to turn it into some boring lame family city. The Longueuil mayor must have similar priorities. I am with you, many on this board seem to take it easy oh not not here but I say think again. Bill C-36 gives the municipalities the tools to go after the clients, nothing there is to stop them. It is all a question of selective enforcement. Tbh I find sex work in Canada is becoming more and more like the US with each passing day.
Many SWERFs feminists would disagree with you. They blame men for sex work.
Similar threads
