Comment on Anon goes to therapy
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 days agovery little cost to taxpayers or society
How would it be a cost, surely it would be a net positive since we can now tax something that’s already being done, no?
I see no downsides, provided there are restrictions on advertisement and where they can set up shop. I’m not interested in it at all, but I am interested in reducing sex slavery, arrests of women (and men!) who are just trying to feed their kids, etc. My general philosophy is that if someone wants to do a thing, and it doesn’t violate anyone else’s rights, there should be a legal way to do that thing.
conditional_soup@lemm.ee 6 days ago
It would need to be regulated to ensure that people are doing this work freely and responsibly (not being compelled by a pimp or spreading STDs). No regulation enforcement is free. It would be a net positive, sure, but not free.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
Sure, but regulation is implied by having it be “legal” instead of decriminalized. It would more than pay for itself w/ tax revenue.