Legalization of prostitution

A whisper can be heard to legalize prostitution. It is part of the decriminalization movement re victimless crimes. Not as loudly discussed.  Heard occasionally as part of the discussion, however.

I believe its time will come. Sooner or later, I cannot tell. However, the movement will proceed as others have. Those that at one time no one thought possible. Such as a woman’s right to vote, women in combat, gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, transgender recognition.

Vocal arguments in support will claim such action as being better and safer for the ladies. Provide them with dignity. Pensions and medical coverage will be available. The right to unionize another advantage.

Whether true, remains to be seen.

If prostitution is legal, it will be an occupation as all others. Participants/employers/employees can be taxed as with any other business/occupation. The tax dollars involved huge..

Perhaps pie in the sky. Germany legalized prostitution in 2002. Turned out to be great for tax collections. Detrimental to the ladies.

I published a column in August 2013 regarding Germany’s experience. I republish it as part of this column. An eye opener.

Germany . . .

Biggest whorehouse in Europe

Germany has a propensity for coming up with ideas which appear brilliant on the surface. Ideas which will benefit Germany. Ideas that supposedly will benefit others they intend to do business with. Everyone eats!

In the final analysis, only Germany benefits. Only Germany eats.

The perfect example is the Eurounion which Germany was instrumental in conceiving and selling to fellow European nations. Each nation would be better off economically. It did not work that way. Germany benefited/benefits big time to the detriment of other countries. Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Cyprus being prime examples.

Germany came up with another plan which was to work to the benefit of a certain group. Prostitutes.

Germany adopted a law in 2002 which legalized prostitution. A simple one page law. Its purpose was to destigmatize prostitution. The ladies henceforth would be considered employees as in all other occupations. They were to have contractual rights with their pimps, the right to pension benefits and medical insurance, the right to unionize.

Prostitution was henceforth to be viewed as a voluntary occupational choice. The selling/rental of a woman's body was no longer immoral.

The world's oldest profession had come a long way. St. Augustine considered prostitution immoral and wrong. However, he viewed it as a necessary evil. Hundreds of years later, Germany gave it dignity.

What was the thinking behind the new German law? Was it really the welfare and dignity of the women involved? Or, was there more?

All of the above and perhaps more. Prostitution as a legal occupation became subject to taxation. Taxed nationally by Germany's federal government. Taxed additionally by Germany's municipalities. Pursuant to the law, the municipalities had the responsibility of overseeing the prostitution business.

Prior to the 2002 law, there were 100,000 prostitutes in Germany. Three years after its adoption, 200,000. Today, 400,000.

Competition became keen. Young ladies flocked to Germany. Easy money was in the offing.

The problem was too many got into the business. Most involuntarily, the rest by choice. Of the 400,000 present day prostitutes, 300,000 are estimated to have come from Eastern Europe. Primarily Romania and Bulgaria. Most brought into Germany by unscrupulous pimps who had now become legitimate businessmen. Promises were made that the young ladies would have a better life. Lies, of course. They unknowingly were forced into prostitution when they arrived. Threats and beatings became commonplace to keep the women in line.

Where economics is involved, matters come down to supply and demand. Legality brought with it the tremendous influx of new ladies to the profession. As evidenced by the 400,000 prostitutes presently in Germany.

Today, there are 3,000 brothels in Germany. Five hundred in Berlin alone. It is estimated that 1.2 million men pay for sex daily.

With so many women available, competition became cut throat. Prices for sex services suffered. They dropped. Dramatically. In 2002, the charge for oral sex and intercourse was 40 Euros. Fifty four dollars American money. Today, 10 Euros. Thirteen dollars American money. In many instances, less than 10 Euros. Whatever a lady can get.

A buyer's market.

Package deals have come into play. There is a twelve story brothel in Cologne. Every floor and every room occupied by a working girl that must be kept busy. Hi rises are common in the German brothel business. The Cologne one offers the customer all the sex and all the alcohol he wants for as long as the customer wants it. For 50 Euros.  Roughly $65 American money. Another in a different city offers all the sex the customer can handle in one visit for 50 Euros. These prices include multiple companions.

Germany has become known as the discount sex capital of the world. Obviously.

Tour promoters from other countries, including the United States, offer six day packages. Business is booming. Thailand formerly had the distinction of being the sex capital. Germany has outdistanced Thailand because of it cheap prices.

Big business requires marketing to continue successfully. Brothel operators offer all sort of incentives. An afternoon discount for men 66 or older. A 20 per cent discount to the unemployed. Day passes. Rebates to golfers. Flat rates. Flat rates being the one price for all services for as long as desired described hereinbefore.

Prostitutes have been left behind. Those whose lives were to have been enriched by the 2002 law. There are no contracts, pension or medical plans. The ladies are subjected to significantly more abuse than before.

Business is tough. Brothel operators have become tough. The girls are required to service more men per day. Whereas most used to do 10 men per day, the number is now 20 or 40, depending on the brothel involved. Unbelievable! In the infrequent times they are not working, the ladies are kept crowded in small single rooms with one bed. No toilet facility, except down the hall.

Germany and the municipalities are not suffering, however. They are getting rich tax wise.

Germany's federal government taxes a prostitute's income. Brothel operators are also taxed. A flat rate per prostitute per day. Twenty five to 30 Euros. Note per day. The municipalities also tax. Acceptable conduct in the taxing world.

All this amounts to triple taxation. Not double taxation.

The tax flow dollars are tremendous. No source could be discovered which measured the federal government's take. However, information was available indicating the tax income of certain municipalities. Astronomical!

Not everyone is inclined to voluntarily pay taxes. Tax avoidance is a universal game at every level and profession. Bonn was concerned the street walkers were not paying. Without a brothel operator or pimp, it was difficult to compel voluntary payment.

Bonn put in automated pay stations on the streets. Like parking meters. Each street walker is required to deposit 6 euros a night. Nine dollars American money. Police keep tabs on the ladies. They cannot be arrested for prostitution as it is legal. They can however be fined for not having their 6 euro receipt.

Bonn's cost for each meter was $11,575 American money. The number speaks for itself as to the tax dollars involved.

The Bonn street walkers are incensed. They consider the meter double taxation.

Bonn does provide a service. It has constructed large wood garages where the ladies can take their customers to do the deed in the privacy of a customer's car.

The thrust of this article is not that prostitution is legal in Germany. It is legal in other places. Nevada, Amsterdam, and Sweden for example. The thrust is to show another example of how Germany came up with a brilliant idea to help a certain class. The help did not materialize. Never the less, Germany benefited. The class walked away empty handed. In worse condition than before.

Germany did it with the Eurounion. It has done it again with the prostitutes.

Please Germany, no more brilliant ideas! No ideas! You are bad news!

BLACK LIVES MATTER / PLAY TOUGH

Republicans do not have a monopoly on wealth. There are wealthy persons on the Democratic side of the ledger, also.

Whereas wealthy Republicans generally make political donations to further selfish business interests, wealthy Democrats tend to support a cause rather than a monetary interest.

A noteworthy Democrat is Gorge Soros. Soros made his fortune in the stock market. He is a recognized American business magnate. Forbes lists him as the 17th richest person in the world. His wealth is estimated at $24 billion.

Soros is a supporter of progressive liberal causes. He believes in social justice and supports organizations so inclined. His donations are  in the millions.

He also supports those major political candidates who believe as he does. Hillary Clinton, an example. He has already given in the first six months of this year to two Clinton super PACs. Priorities USA Action and American Bridge 21st Century. $1 million each. It is expected similar sized and larger donations will be made as the campaign progresses.

Soros thought George W. Bush was bad for America. Especially Bush's decision to invade Iraq. He contributed $20 million in the 2004 Presidential election to various groups in an effort to defeat Bush.

Soros donations to liberal causes and candidates are made personally and through his Open Society Foundations. Those receiving contributions are close to one thousand. 

Soros assumes no direct control over the groups receiving the monies. He understands the liberal thought process of the groups receiving the money and leaves it to them to do the right thing. Soros does not mini-manage them.

The first anniversary of Michael Brown and Ferguson recently occurred. It is said Soros contributed $33 million to bank roll the demonstrations which took place a couple of weeks ago. Not to one group alone. Too many. Not at the time of the demonstrations, but months before.

The Chief of Police for St. Louis County said the demonstrations were not locally caused. He said outsiders were fomenting the trouble. I did not believe him at the time. I do now. $33 million adds a lot of inflamed protest to a situation.

Many of the recent Ferguson protesters were outside activists. Primarily from Washington, DC and New York. Professional organizer types. All on the payroll of the organization they represented. Most funded by Soros.

One of the Soros funded organizations at Ferguson was Black Lives Matter. They have been in the news frequently the past few weeks. Black Lives Matter is the group that has been interrupting Presidential candidates. One being a Bernie Sanders at a rally in Seattle on August 8.

Black Lives Matter is a grassroots activist movement. It was born in the wake of and in protest of George Zimmerman's acquittal in the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2013. The 2014 shooting of Michael Brown and the choking death of Eric Garner enraged the group further.

Since Zimmerman's acquittal in 2013, the Black Lives Matter group has conducted Black Lives Matter demonstrations 984 times worldwide.

Black Lives Matter is a growing force of influence. Politically and otherwise.

Mighty oaks from little acorns grow applies here. Black Lives Matter was started by three black ladies in 2013. Today it has chapters all over the U.S. and continues to open new chapters at a fast rate.

Black Lives Matter is full time paid persons. This is their work for which they are adequately compensated. A difference from other political movements. The monies primarily coming from Soros contributions.

Black Lives Matter representatives are hard ass people. Tough. They do their job well. Perhaps too well.

On July 15, they interrupted the Netroots Nation Conference in Phoenix. The cry was, "Burn everything down!" At the same event, the group interrupted the speeches of Democratic candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley.

Bernie Sanders was in Seattle on August 8. There is no Democratic candidate further to the left. He has been a social and civil rights activist his whole life. He is an Independent seeking the Democratic nomination.

Black Lives Matter members stormed the stage. They physically took the microphone from Sanders. They took over the rally. Sanders walked off the stage.

Bullies in the pulpit.

Black Lives Matter representatives said Sanders was not doing enough to reform criminal justice and promote racial equality.

Republican candidates were not immune. On August 13, the group interrupted a Las Vegas Jeb Bush rally.

Following the Sanders Seattle rally, members of Black Lives Matter were asked by a media person..... Why Sanders? What about other candidates? The reply was they had something planned for everyone.

I was concerned. Sanders was moving up in the polls. He was about to overtake Clinton. He has recently in New Hampshire. I wondered whether favoritism was being shown Clinton. Recall Soros is a major Clinton contributor and expected to be even a bigger one as the campaign moves forward.

Was there concern by some that Sanders had to be brought down in order to help Clinton?

The question brought to mind the dirty tricks by Donald Segretti on behalf of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President in the famous Nixon campaign. The dirty tricks were considered questionable and unethical. Apparently illegal. Segretti was sentenced to jail.

Federal laws were passed post Watergate covering dirty tricks.

On August 11, Clinton was holding a public forum in Keene, New Hampshire. The topic involved mass incarceration. Boston chapter members of Black Lives Matter were on their way to attend the rally. I assume also to interrupt, as per their prior activities.

The group arrived as the rally was in progress. Clinton had not spoken yet. The door to the rally was locked. No further persons were permitted to enter. The Clinton people had been made aware that the group was on its way and intended to appear.

I never heard of people being barred from a political rally. Lock the door? Come on.

The reason given was capacity. An overflow crowd. Too many. It was represented that the Secret Service had decided no further persons be admitted. Since, a Secret Service representative has verified that it was their idea to preclude further admissions.

I may be getting cynical in my old age. I find it hard to believe public officials. Especially the Secret service. A group that partied with prostitutes paid for by a drug cartel in a South American country, who have not been able to secure the White House, etc.

The Boston group were placed in an overflow room and required to watch Clinton on TV. The overflow group, including the Black Lives Matter people, totaled less than 20.

Afterwards, Clinton did meet with the group in the overflow room for 15 minutes. Black Lives Matter representatives said no pictures and no reporters. Clinton agreed. However, Black Lives Matter videoed the interview and intend showing it at a later date.

Following the meeting, kumbaya prevailed.  The group said they were satisfied with Clinton's responses. Though they had further questions they would raise at a later time.

I do not believe Soros had anything to do with the Clinton rally. Nor the Sanders rally for that matter. He leaves those he funds alone to do their thing. Also, he is not as his wealthy Republican counterparts. He contributes money to further liberal causes. Not to add to a company or person's bottom line. The contrast glaring when it comes to motivations.

I have to question the Clinton rally. The group showing up late, being barred because there was no room at the inn, having to watch on TV in another room, interviewing Clinton in that room afterwards, refusing reporters to be present or photos taken, coming out of the meeting saying in effect everything was A-ok, etc.

Fishy? Sounds that way.

The Sanders rally speaks for itself.

Black Lives Matter is here to stay. The group is sufficiently funded to live a long life. Their purpose is right. Admirable. Their methods wrong. Deplorable. Interrupting a speaker as they have done does not set right with me. Nor does the shooting of blacks by cops. Two wrongs do not make a right, however.

HEMINGWAY'S FIRST LOVE

Ernest Hemingway was 18 years old. William Robertson described him as ".....untested in love, war or writing." Not for long, however. 

It was the spring of 1918. World War I was raging. Hemingway went to Italy to become a Red Cross ambulance driver. Within one short year, he became expert in love and war. Soon thereafter, in writing.

Hemingway was severely wounded by mortar fire. Shrapnel in his legs. After suffering the wounds, dragging himself along he assisted several Italian soldiers to safety. He received the Italian Silver Medal for Bravery.

He was sent to a hospital in Milan. His recovery took six months. During that time, Hemingway fell deeply in love with Agnes von Kurowsky. Agnes was a Red Cross nurse.

Plans were made to marry. Hemingway returned to the States. Agnes was to follow soon thereafter.

Agnes did not follow. Instead she sent Hemingway a Dear John letter. 

The letter began, "I am writing this late of night after a long think by myself and I am afraid it is going to hurt you, but I'm sure it won't harm you permanently....."

Agnes was seven years older than Hemingway. In the letter, she referred to him as "kid, my kid." She wrote she was fond of him "more as a mother than a sweetheart."

Agnes broke Hemingway's heart.

After Hemingway had left Italy and before she wrote Hemingway, Agnes fell in love with an Italian officer. The officer came from an influential and moneyed family. They never married. The Italian officer broke off the engagement. He became convinced she was marrying him for position and money.

Agnes had several such relationships after Hemingway. Strange that she felt it necessary to better herself via marriage or otherwise. She was already part of the social hierarchy. Her father had been a teacher of languages, an uncle a world famous Chicago architect, and a grandfather a general in the U.S. Army.

Agnes studied at a seminary school for ladies. She became a librarian. Her specialty cataloging. She found the position unexciting. She returned to school and became a nurse.

Agnes did not marry till 1928. She was twice married.

Hemingway and Agnes neither saw nor spoke to each other after the Dear John letter. 

Hemingway went on to literary fame. Agnes a housewife who in later years returned to to work as a library cataloger. 

Agnes maintained the relationship was an innocent flirtation. Hemingway viewed it as a loving affair, sex a definite part of it.

Agnes to her dying day denied sex was involved. In the Milan days, virtue was part and parcel of a woman. No sex before marriage. No living together before marriage. Agnes was preserving her public virginity by denying sexual involvement with Hemingway.

Hemingway kept his pain to himself. Except in his writings. Literary scholars believe the emotional effect of Agnes' rejection molded his impression of women. The Agnes experience triggered his literary preoccupation with romantic loss.

Many believe Catherine Barkley in A Farewell To Arms was based on Agnes. They are also of the opinion she was the heroine in two short stories. A Very Short Story and The Snows Of Kilimanjaro. 

Things get a bit murky. Agnes moved to Key West to live in 1951. She lived in Key West with her second husband till 1965. While in Key West, she worked at the Monroe County Library as a cataloger. She left in 1965 because she got sick of the conch train going by her home and announcing over the loudspeaker.....This is the house of Ernest Hemingway's girl friend.

Agnes had always sought to keep her Hemingway relationship secret. She sought neither gain nor notoriety at any time.

Hemingway was dead. His fourth wife Mary returned to Key West to clean out a trunk of old papers stored at Sloppy Joe's. Among the papers were Agnes' letters to Hemingway, including the Dear John letter.

Mary met with Agnes. In fact, they met several times. Became friends. Mary returned to Agnes the letters written by Agnes to Hemingway. Most were passionate. Those letters were eventually given to Henry Villard who shared them and other documents with John Nagle, a Hemingway expert.

When Hemingway was in the hospital in Milan, a fellow patient was Henry Villard. Villard and Hemingway became best friends. A friendship that lasted their lifetimes. Villard became a prominent American diplomat.

Agnes needed a favor from Villard. This was after Hemingway's death and while she was still living in Key West. She wrote Villard and told him that if he could arrange the favor (which had nothing to do with the Hemingway/Agnes relationship), she would surprise him at some point.

That time came upon Agnes' death. Agnes had kept a diary of her relationship with Hemingway. She left the diary and letters previously mentioned to Villard.

The diary and letters were examined ad infinitum by literary experts. The issue became.....Did the two really have sex? Opinion falls on both sides of the issue.

Hemingway was a frequent traveler from Havana to Key West after he took up residence in Cuba. He never saw Agnes while in Key West. It is believed he never knew she resided in Key West.

Interesting. More interesting than fiction. The truth always is.

THE STEALING OF AMERICA

Money controls elections. Election results provide control of Congress, the decision making process of government. Results even control Presidents.

There is an old saying.....He who pays the fiddler calls the tune. How true!

Big money controlling the government has resulted in elected politicians becoming feudal serfs of those who have the money. Elected officials no longer represent the people. Major corporations and the rich reap the benefits of laws that make it easier for them to increase their net worth and profitability. To the detriment of the American people.

Former President Carter recently said that the United States was an oligarchy. He was correct. He said the United States became that way because of unlimited political bribery. Correct again.

Carter claims that large unlimited contributions by the rich are ".....a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors." He observed that elected officials consider ".....unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves." 

Our elected representatives are dance house ladies willing to dance with anyone who can pay their way. Major corporations and the rich buy all the tickets.

Million dollar contributions are the direct result of Citizen United decided several years ago. Recall, corporations are persons, they have a right to be heard, etc. Called freedom of speech. Citizen United and subsequent decisions paved the way. The modus operendi. Contributions would be to super PACs. The money in turn found its way into candidate’s coffers. All legal.

For years, the United States recognized the danger of large amounts of money influencing elected persons. Contributions were limited. Today, unbridled.

A perfect example is Hedge-Fund magnate Roger Mercer. He donated $11 million to a super PAC supporting Ted Cruz. If he had donated directly to Cruz's campaign, his contribution would have been limited to $2,700.

Who is screwing who here?

Today, there are three ways to make contributions to candidates. 

The first is the old fashioned method of personal direct payment. Limited by law. The $2,700 thing. The second is the relatively new super PAC indirect way which permits corporations and the rich to give unlimited dollars into the millions. The third involves contributions via non profit groups. Referred to as 501(c) (4) contributions. Disclosure not required.

Quite frankly, the nonprofit one confuses me. I cannot figure it out. All I know is that the contributor to the nonprofit fund is not disclosed. Important to those who do not want the public to know who they might be trying to influence or buy.

Analyzing which candidate is taking in the most money is difficult. Direct contributions are one item. Super PACs another. Considered separately for accounting and disclosure purposes.

Via the direct contribution route Hillary Clinton as of 7/31 had raised. $47.5 million. She had raised twice as much as any other candidate. Jeb Bush raised only $11.4 million re the direct donation route. A far cry from Clinton's $47.5 million. However, Bush had raised considerably more when super PAC monies were considered. Bush had raised $103 million as opposed to Clinton's $15.6 million.

Scott Walker announced his candidacy on July 13. Within days, Wisconsin billionaire Diane Hendricks contributed $5 million to the Walker Super PAC. In two weeks, Walker took in $20 million total via super PAC contributions. He even announced he was going to finance his candidacy with super PAC dollars rather than direct contributions.

Walker appears to be a favorite among super PAC contributors. His Wisconsin governor years have been supported by the Koch brothers. In addition to the $5 million Hendricks contribution, Marlene Ricketts gave $4.9 million. The owners of the Chicago Cubs $2.5 million.

Then there are those candidates who have few if any supporters with the big bucks. Bernie Sanders, for example. He raised $15.2 million via direct contributions. Significantly less from super PAC monies. Direct contributions represented 76 percent of the $15.2 million.

Ted Cruz has taken in $38 million via super PAC contributions. Glad to receive the money. However, he is right up front condemning the process. An intelligent man. He speaks effectively out of both sides of his mouth. He recently said, "Lobbyists and career politicians today make up what I call the Washington Cartel..... (They) on a daily basis are conspiring against the American people.....career politicians' ears and wallets are open to the highest bidder."

Joe Biden says that ".....where the money is, there's almost implicitly some string attached."

John Dingell, the 29 term Democratic Congressman from Michigan, recently stated, “.....our government has largely been put up for sale."

John Kerry in his farewell remarks to the Senate in 2013 said, ".....alliance of money.....is steadily silencing the voice of the vast majority of Americans.....corrosion of money in politics.....muzzles more Americans than it empowers.....an imbalance that can only sow the seeds of unrest."

In 2009, a year after the bank created recession, John Durbin said, "The banks.....are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill.....they frankly own the place."

The America we knew is gone. Do we want it back? If so, we have to work for it. Citizen United must be reversed. Only the Supreme Court can do it. Which means the next member of the Court has to be a Democrat. Get involved. Watch for whom you vote. Party affiliation should not be the guiding force in who to vote for. Make candidates keep promises made. Let them know you are watching.

Keep in mind that money talks, bullshit walks. Another reason Citizens United has to go.

It is said we have become a 1 percent / 99 percent society. Things are bad. For the people. Not the rich. Some say power still resides with the people. It has only diminished. I say under present circumstances less power is no power.

We are supposed to be and once were a government of the people, by the people, for the people. We have become a government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich. 

Is this what we want?