Sorry not sorry that you have to actually start paying taxes on your income like the rest of us. Some of these quotes are really helping to make the case for the law.
Just because you're personally caught under a boot doesn't mean you should cheer when the net ensnares someone else. That's called the crab bucket mentality.
This article is a year old.
Oh look, a free market!
I'm a capitalist. But I recognize that the difference between theory and reality is that in theory there is no difference.
The reality is the strippers have as much leverage as the other side doesn't (that's the hole concept of leverage). Club owners have the leverage of the cost of setting up a great club, and local regulations.
This then translates to: the more strip clubs in a city, the more they will have to compete. That is, if they aren't colluding * Which is a lot easier when the people controlling that side of the supply equation are likely less than a dozen sophisticated guys in a city (who tend to all know each other). While the supply of labor is likely in the 1000s or 10,000s (and mostly not-so-sophisticated and can't all know each other)
Even more so than servers, strippers are a tip-based job.
And frankly, let’s start with taxing other places, this really doesn’t strike me as a place of conspicuous tax avoidance compared to, say, the board room.
I do not see anything in the bussiness model that precludes raising prices. The issue seems to be that current prices are based on the assumption of tax evasion.
I have nothing against sex work, but it does not strike me as an industry worthy of tax breaks.
I was defining the business model by success with current regulations. I refuse to speculate about market effects beyond the possibility of any change aside from the regulatory change.
> I have nothing against sex work, but it does not strike me as an industry worthy of tax breaks.
Yea I never voted to fund defense contracts either. Yet, those fucks are getting paid. Not much to do about it but vote and revolt.
I am. Paying taxes on income (that is then taxed again when spent) is a terrible disincentive. Some states agree with me; I would rather see the standard move toward a model free of income taxation than toward universal taxation. Doubly so when the tone of your comment seems to point to the motivation being largely spite.
While I can understand opposing income based taxation, I don't understand why opponents of income based taxation would support specific industries evading existing income based taxation laws rather than working to change the taxation laws for everyone.
Technically, given the way you put it, I suppose I would advocate for more and more specific industries not being subject to income taxation until no industries were paying it. Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming have realized this situation by one means or another. But I agree that, in general, consistent tax laws for everyone is a preferred outcome.
I personally think that how we handle unemployment and food stamps do more to disincentivize work than our income taxation.
Taxation is complex and tricky to do well. Unfortunately it is treated as a wedge issue and this prevents productive discussion and effective policy making.