San Francisco weighs prostitution proposal

vbimport

#1

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27306120/

Making prostitution legal is not the answer it will only mean more women being taking advantage of by men.

Well on second thought we men have been taking advantage of women for years without paying them at least this way they will get paid.


#2

The SF government is just looking for a piece of the action. How many tax dollars do you think they will collect from these people? Don’t tell me they haven’t thought of this angle.


#3

Never thought of that you are right it all about getting there cut.

I wander if they will take it out in trade:):slight_smile:


#4

Every time the government looks to regulate something or pass a law look at the revenue aspect of it. Most times there is an angle to get more money out of our pockets. Do you really think they care about using cell phones while driving? They want to write tickets. The same goes for photo RADAR, taxing cigarettes and they are zeroing in on fast food restaurants as I type this. The list of things they have done to dig money out of our wallets would stretch to the Moon and back. If Obama, Pelosi and Reid get to call the shots look for this to behavior to run rampant.


#5

Will they be having sales like buy 1 get 1 free? If so some:bigsmile:one give me a PM.


#6

[QUOTE=UTR;2144942]The SF government is just looking for a piece of the action. How many tax dollars do you think they will collect from these people? Don’t tell me they haven’t thought of this angle.[/QUOTE]
Agreed … more police on the street, rather than hanging around in jail cells with arrested hookers :stuck_out_tongue:

But seriously … I don’t really understand why prostitutes should be arrested …
If they are under duress, under the influence of drugs/etc, then they should be hauled in for questioning & pimps (and other undesirables-aka customers) arrested :iagree:

With regulation may come cleaner standards, although I doubt it.

Apparently in Oz, prostitutes must be tested for STD’s every 6 months … if they fail … BAM … they can be arrested for deliberately spreading disease … in the case of aids … that’s practically homicide.
But there also has to be a measure of decency … they must still be dressed appropriately & must not ply their wares within (I think) 150m of school zones & “places of worship”.

Doesn’t stop the mob from luring gullible asian women desperate to get out of their country, and shipped in by cargo container to be used as sex slaves though.

Despicable :a


#7

Like most things do, legalizing prostitution has good points and bad points. The same goes for drugs. If the government can’t make money off it then they won’t got to the trouble to regulate it.


#8

cigarettes are a good example states brought lawsuits against the complanies to punish them for lying about cigarettes. All that happen was they raised the price big time so they could pay the new tax that was supposed to punish the companies. All this really did was punish the people who smoke while letting the lawyers,states and cigarette companies make even more money. How stuped we have to be to let this happen.


#9

[QUOTE=samlar;2145151]cigarettes are a good example states brought lawsuits against the complanies to punish them for lying about cigarettes. All that happen was they raised the price big time so they could pay the new tax that was supposed to punish the companies. All this really did was punish the people who smoke while letting the lawyers,states and cigarette companies make even more money. How stuped we have to be to let this happen.[/QUOTE]
If it was up to me, I’d tax cigarettes at $10/ciggy :stuck_out_tongue:

It’d be amazing how quick people would give up, or resort to a life of crime :stuck_out_tongue:
Saves hospital bills & improves everyones quality of life … don’t give me that crap about personal rights … we stop people from suiciding, right?


#10

[QUOTE=debro;2145201]If it was up to me, I’d tax cigarettes at $10/ciggy :stuck_out_tongue:

It’d be amazing how quick people would give up, or resort to a life of crime :stuck_out_tongue:
Saves hospital bills & improves everyones quality of life … don’t give me that crap about personal rights … we stop people from suiciding, right?[/QUOTE]

Once the government starts this type of behavior where do they stop it? There are so many things that can be considered bad for us that it would never end. They will eventually get to the things YOU like. :wink:


#11

debro I see what your saying but taxing way high will only lead to crime as they have in New York over untax cigarettes. crime leads to more people who did nothing getting rob or killed. The tax it higher and higher will make people stop has been around for a while. The simple and best way that would cause less of a problem and work better would to make the companies reduce a third every three months the nicotine in cigarettes until it it less than .01 percent. The companies know this the government knows this so why do we not do this simple money. Again the companies would loose big time and the government would loose big time. Something that is this bad for you should not be a money maker for the government.

UtR you are right I do not like anything so I guess the government can tax me on everything.


#12

[QUOTE=samlar;2145206]debro I see what your saying but taxing way high will only lead to crime as they have in New York over untax cigarettes. crime leads to more people who did nothing getting rob or killed. The tax it higher and higher will make people stop has been around for a while. The simple and best way that would cause less of a problem and work better would to make the companies reduce a third every three months the nicotine in cigarettes until it it less than .01 percent. The companies know this the government knows this so why do we not do this simple money. Again the companies would loose big time and the government would loose big time. Something that is this bad for you should not be a money maker for the government.[/QUOTE]

The Federal Government tried something similar to this in the 1920s and it was called Prohibition. We all know how that little social experiment turned out. For those who aren’t familiar with this tidbit of American history, here’s a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

[QUOTE=samlar;2145206]UtR you are right I do not like anything so I guess the government can tax me on everything.[/QUOTE]

They are working their way to it. Just be patient.


#13

Prohibition was different in that they band alcohol all togather. That leaves peole with not only the physical need for it but mental. With removing the Nicotine a little at a time would get them off the physical part but they could keep the mental part if need be. The mental part is that part that you see when a smoker has s cigarette in his mouth but not lit. That is why they try to get smokers to switch to candy or gum so they can replace the mental need for that cigarette with candy or gum. I am not say all would get off them but it would give them a better chance right now the companies with the ok from government have been addign nicotine.


#14

It doesn’t matter what they do because people want the nicotine just like they wanted the alcohol. Can you imagine the reaction of the public if the government told brewers to slowly take the alcohol content out of beer until it reached zero? The only thing Prohibition did was turn organized crime into an industry. Trying to ban, or control the nicotine content of, cigarettes will just create another black market. Then our wonderful government will be putting people in prison for growing tobacco and selling decent cigarettes. They can barely keep a lid on pot sales so trying to tightly control tobacco is just a pipe dream, IMO. People do have the right to do stupid things that can kill them. We all do something everyday that can kill us. If these liberals have their way life is going to be one long, boring experience that won’t be worth the effort. You can bet George Soros, Al Gore, Obama etc. will get their quota of fun though. The rules they toute aren’t really for them they are just for us common folks. Where’s that picture of Obama dragging on a cigarette? In fact, I think I’ll get a Big Mac tomorrow before they get banned after Obama is elected. :wink:


#15

Total Prohibition versus Prohibition of Commercialisation of ciggy’s? Or Alcohol, or Big Macs, if that’s your poison of choice :slight_smile: