Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Arlington, VA
5,412 posts, read 4,239,885 times
Reputation: 916

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rita Mordio View Post
My idea of legalized prostitution would be something like:

Each prostitute would have a business license - which can only be acquired and maintained by mandatory STD testing (at a fee to cover state expenses - say $20) each month. After that, the prostitute would be either self-employed or he/she could be an employee of a business that hosts a number of prostitutes "for nightly sale".

When a person buys a prostitute (let's say $100 to make it even), a 10% state tax is levied upon the purchase. Therefore, his transaction would be $110. After that, tax rules apply just as they would any other trade.
That has less chance of working than getting strippers to pay taxes on their earnings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,222,878 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rita Mordio View Post
My idea of legalized prostitution would be something like:

Each prostitute would have a business license - which can only be acquired and maintained by mandatory STD testing (at a fee to cover state expenses - say $20) each month. After that, the prostitute would be either self-employed or he/she could be an employee of a business that hosts a number of prostitutes "for nightly sale".

When a person buys a prostitute (let's say $100 to make it even), a 10% state tax is levied upon the purchase. Therefore, his transaction would be $110. After that, tax rules apply just as they would any other trade.
But would that not me a more unfair tax on the poorer prostiute and her client who charges 20 dollars. Would that not hurt the poor more that the rich who can afford prostitues
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:30 AM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
3,644 posts, read 6,305,063 times
Reputation: 1633
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
Would that not hurt the poor more that the rich who can afford prostitues
You didn't turn the page in the liberal playbook. Step two is to subsidize prostitution for the poor -- like food stamps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:32 AM
 
Location: Arlington, VA
5,412 posts, read 4,239,885 times
Reputation: 916
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerbacon View Post
You didn't turn the page in the liberal playbook. Step two is to subsidize prostitution for the poor -- like food stamps.

Wrong. The vast majority of clients in prostitution are men. Regardless of ethnicity/race, men are not really considered darlings of the left, so there will be no subsidies for poor clients...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:33 AM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,321,408 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rita Mordio View Post
I've always supported the legalization and taxation of marijuana. Prostitution, too.
Taxes should be paid with a smile?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,222,878 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerbacon View Post
You didn't turn the page in the liberal playbook. Step two is to subsidize prostitution for the poor -- like food stamps.
what department would Prostitution stamps fall under?
Commerce?
Interior?
education?
Might give the DOE a reason to exist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:34 AM
 
2,857 posts, read 6,725,789 times
Reputation: 1748
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
and finally the left will have something they like get taxed to death. perhaps it might open their eyes on taxation?
You might be surprised at the number of conservatives who enjoy their occasional illicit use of this controlled substance. It's not a vice with any particular political afiliation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Land of Thought and Flow
8,323 posts, read 15,169,951 times
Reputation: 4957
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
That has less chance of working than getting strippers to pay taxes on their earnings.
The same as waitresses or hairdressers paying taxes on their cash earnings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
But would that not me a more unfair tax on the poorer prostiute and her client who charges 20 dollars. Would that not hurt the poor more that the rich who can afford prostitues
A high end prostitute is like luxury car. Everyone wants one, but not everyone can afford them.

For the prostitute that doesn't make a lot of money, she wouldn't be taxed as heavily as the one who makes six figures. A prostitute making $15k would be taxed the same as a waitress making $15k.

As for marijuana, the growing process would be like any other crop. It could be taxed at sale like a cucumber or pepper. In fact, there could even be different tax rates for leaves vs "prepared".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:37 AM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,321,408 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
But would that not me a more unfair tax on the poorer prostiute and her client who charges 20 dollars. Would that not hurt the poor more that the rich who can afford prostitues
Couldn't she be compensated through some sort of Natural Endowment Compensation Program?

A liberal subsidy?

Parity.

All prostitutes are equal in the eyes of the Government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 09:39 AM
 
Location: in my imagination
13,608 posts, read 21,394,406 times
Reputation: 10111
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerbacon View Post
We already have two addicitve drugs that are legal. We don't need a third.

Marijuana is everywhere and used widely despite it being illegal. It being illegal hasn't stopped it much at all. It being legal wouldn't increase more useage that much. And it isn't very addictive, I know because I smoked for 2 years when I was 15 to 17 years old.

I have never heard of a bar fight from being stoned. Never heard of robberies to get money for a MJ addiction. Never heard of someone getting violent from MJ. The only crime and violence associated with MJ is from smugglers and cartels because it is illegal.

Speaking of taxes think of the billions of tax money to fight what I just said above, seems like a waste to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top