Taxes and Soft Prostitution

[Im_CIA]

To preface this a little, I believe that platforms such as OnlyFans are rapidly inflating bubbles that will go the way of youtube ad revenue post 2014. Market oversaturation and regulation will catch up eventually, and thousands of women will suddenly be out of cashflow, with no apparent skills or relevant job exprience to speak of.

 

I want to discuss ways of stoping this band wagon derailment; I can think of a decent one right of the bat. 

 

First of all, this type of soft prostitution can't be outright shutdown because A. As much as I hate to say this, It's technically within the American spirit of entrepreneurship and B. You can't shut pandora box after it's opened. So, I propose a tourniquet solution by levying an additional 10-15% occupational tax for this sort of... "work".  A tax such as this will have a two pronged effect: first and most importantly, it will make chasing this trend less economically viable, and second .. hey, maybe they can finally cover all the pot holes on route 80, but it will probably just disappear in black hole under DC.

[BTGBullseye]

I would oppose this, as many of the people doing this are doing so to be able to stay alive during Covid. Trying to force them out now would almost certainly kill people.

 

Later maybe, after UBI becomes a thing.

[Im_CIA]

Not force them to quit, but make it less lucrative to stop the bubble from growing. 

[StrixLiterata]

You're overlooking that there are people who are desperate enough that they will do it regardless, those who live paycheck to paycheck and at any given moment must use whatever instrument is availeable to get some money, no matter how little the profit margin or how great the risk, inconvenience, or humiliation. What those people need is a viable and more stable alternative, not negative feedback

[rairii]

Sex workers are working class individuals and imposing a tax, especially such a heavy tax as 10-15%, would be unethical at best. Not to mention calling OF a bubble is kind of silly, that's like calling the porn industry as a whole a bubble. Honestly, there's not really even such a thing as market oversaturation when it comes to porn because porn has always been in great supply. There are billions of humans on this planet who want to jack off and a comparative handful of people who want to be jacked off to. This entire thread just comes off as a dig at sex workers.

 

11 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

I would oppose this, as many of the people doing this are doing so to be able to stay alive during Covid. Trying to force them out now would almost certainly kill people.

 

Later maybe, after UBI becomes a thing.

It's worth keeping in mind that M4A and free education are immensely more popular policies with American democrats than UBI, and they've also been proven the world over whereas UBI's had a comparatively experimental run. We're more likely to get those first and we probably won't see UBI become mainstream until automation causes an unemployment crisis.

 

As for the rest of your post, agreed 100%, going after working class income during a global pandemic is, for lack of better wording, extremely fucking stupid.

[kerdios]

2 hours ago, Annie said:

especially such a heavy tax as 10-15%,

Haha, thinking that 10-15% is a heavy tax, in some countries just the VAT is that high, and your paycheck gets another 15% tax taken just for national security and the equivalent for the NHS, and the IRS takes another chunck with tax brackets ranging from 10% to 55% differentially,

add to that that prostitution gets paid between 100-1000$ per hour and you get a very high earning worker class that if doesn't all go down the narcotics hole can provide a very nice cushion for later years

[Im_CIA]

6 hours ago, Annie said:

Sex workers are working class individuals and imposing a tax, especially such a heavy tax as 10-15%, would be unethical at best. Not to mention calling OF a bubble is kind of silly, that's like calling the porn industry as a whole a bubble. Honestly, there's not really even such a thing as market oversaturation when it comes to porn because porn has always been in great supply. There are billions of humans on this planet who want to jack off and a comparative handful of people who want to be jacked off to. This entire thread just comes off as a dig at sex workers.

 

It's worth keeping in mind that M4A and free education are immensely more popular policies with American democrats than UBI, and they've also been proven the world over whereas UBI's had a comparatively experimental run. We're more likely to get those first and we probably won't see UBI become mainstream until automation causes an unemployment crisis.

 

As for the rest of your post, agreed 100%, going after working class income during a global pandemic is, for lack of better wording, extremely fucking stupid.

Porn will never be oversaturted, but too many freelancers and not enough customers is definitely a thing- that's where OF is heading. 

If most of them are working class, perhaps it can be bracketed out.

 

The top 20% who can buy houses and cars with pure cash should definitely be paying 15%, while the lower part can be burden with 5 or 6%. 

[rairii]

On 12/13/2020 at 3:06 PM, kerdios said:

Haha, thinking that 10-15% is a heavy tax, in some countries just the VAT is that high, and your paycheck gets another 15% tax taken just for national security and the equivalent for the NHS, and the IRS takes another chunck with tax brackets ranging from 10% to 55% differentially,

add to that that prostitution gets paid between 100-1000$ per hour and you get a very high earning worker class that if doesn't all go down the narcotics hole can provide a very nice cushion for later years

Doesn't mean 10-15% isn't harsh. Especially if you're only making around 1k-1.5k a month which is honestly par for the course for a smaller OF creator. That's more than enough to put you below the poverty line.

 

On 12/13/2020 at 7:19 PM, Im_CIA said:

Porn will never be oversaturted, but too many freelancers and not enough customers is definitely a thing- that's where OF is heading. 

If most of them are working class, perhaps it can be bracketed out.

 

The top 20% who can buy houses and cars with pure cash should definitely be paying 15%, while the lower part can be burden with 5 or 6%. 

Sex workers already pay taxes, it's not ethical to burden them with more just because they're in a different line of work, and again, certainly not in the middle of a pandemic and certainly not when the economy is this badly fucked.

[kerdios]

22 hours ago, Annie said:

Doesn't mean 10-15% isn't harsh. Especially if you're only making around 1k-1.5k a month which is honestly par for the course for a smaller OF creator. That's more than enough to put you below the poverty line.

I don't see how it is , 150 out of 1500 isn't a big cut , especially since this kind of work should really be more of an added revenue than a full time job for these men and women who can't get a big enough following to put them over the monthly 10k revenue. (also keep in mind this line of business is on par as being an athelte in regards to where most peek at the middle 20s and from there they start losing the thing that makes them "good" at their sport)

basically imo it's like a potter or cobbler who's product isn't too good (his pots are shoddy or his shoes and sandals are worse than the ones made by factories) and therefore should be thinking about a cerreer or location change.

Edited January 10, 2021 by kerdios (see edit history)

[rairii]

16 hours ago, kerdios said:

I don't see how it is , 150 out of 1500 isn't a big cut , especially since this kind of work should really be more of an added revenue than a full time job for these men and women who can't get a big enough following to put them over the monthly 10k revenue. (also keep in mind this line of business is on par as being an athelte in regards to where most peek at the middle 20s and from there they start losing the thing that makes them "good" at their sport)

basically imo it's like a potter or cobbler who's product isn't too good (his pots are shoddy or his shoes and sandals are worse than the ones made by factories) and therefore should be thinking about a cerreer or location change.

Just want to establish my position here first and foremost, so you can see where I'm coming from: Fuck taxation.

The best thing I could possibly say about taxation is that it could be a valuable tool in alleviating some of the woes caused by wealth inequality. Tax doesn't fix wealth inequality itself, and without wealth inequality tax would not be necessary. In the best case scenario, tax provides a short term solution for the quality of life of people living in bad economic conditions. Right now, a lot of us are living in abysmal economic conditions, still being taxed, and having absolutely nothing to show for it.

 

With that out of the way, let me just say, you're completely detached from reality if you don't think $150 is a significant cut to working class income. I can think of several instances where $150 would have made the difference in me being able to eat and afford my medication. The burden of tax shouldn't fall on those of us who can hardly afford to pay it, and beyond that, I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from when I say I'd rather my money help me than help the federal government fund the defense budget.

 

And here's what's really confusing to me, why tax sex workers specifically? Well, I can't draw many conclusions about you but the OP doesn't paint a good picture here at all. I mean take a look at the implications there, the post hints at the notion that sex work isn't real work and that it's somehow a reprehensible economic venture, not to mention the implication that women working in the sex industry have no other marketable skills or talents and  the fact that all of this is thinly veiled behind a frankly pathetic "Onlyfans is a bubble" excuse. Most of the rhetoric I read against sex work and sex workers seems to be pretty deeply rooted in this misogynistic attitude against any form of female sexual expression. Call me paranoid but I'm suspicious of the premise of this thread on that basis alone.

[kerdios]

4 hours ago, Annie said:

And here's what's really confusing to me, why tax sex workers specifically? Well, I can't draw many conclusions about you but the OP doesn't paint a good picture here at all. I mean take a look at the implications there, the post hints at the notion that sex work isn't real work and that it's somehow a reprehensible economic venture, not to mention the implication that women working in the sex industry have no other marketable skills or talents and  the fact that all of this is thinly veiled behind a frankly pathetic "Onlyfans is a bubble" excuse. Most of the rhetoric I read against sex work and sex workers seems to be pretty deeply rooted in this misogynistic attitude against any form of female sexual expression. Call me paranoid but I'm suspicious of the premise of this thread on that basis alone.

The way I interpret it, he's not even talking about all sex workers, only the streamer types which he thinks are going into a job that will become barren in a few years because of oversaturation(i.e. more showgirls than guys willing to pay for something that is mostly free today?), and that imposing taxation now will prevent enough from going into the business so they don't get hurt when the well dries or when the IRS and congress start making up laws to protect and regulate them ( a la what happened a few months ago with an underaged girl being kidnapped from her home and used as a verified showgirl on pornhub against her will) which might increase the cost of running a showgirl business.

 

I don't really have an opinion about this. He could be right, or he could be full of shit, no way for me to know.

Quote

not to mention the implication that women working in the sex industry have no other marketable skills or talents

That's why I'm saying that for most ppl this is an added income job and not a full time job.

And I'll add that this is why many of them don't show their face, in hope of avoiding the stigma that comes as part of the work.

Edited January 11, 2021 by kerdios (see edit history)

[BTGBullseye]

15 hours ago, Annie said:

without wealth inequality tax would not be necessary.

I just want to single this out as absurdly moronic. With no wealth inequality, taxes would still be needed to cover infrastructure, military, and other governmental costs. Humans aren't that nice that they'd pay for good roads for everyone out of the kindness of their hearts.

15 hours ago, Annie said:

let me just say, you're completely detached from reality if you don't think $150 is a significant cut to working class income. I can think of several instances where $150 would have made the difference in me being able to eat and afford my medication. The burden of tax shouldn't fall on those of us who can hardly afford to pay it, and beyond that, I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from when I say I'd rather my money help me than help the federal government fund the defense budget.

100% agreed on this however.

[Im_CIA]

On 1/11/2021 at 9:55 AM, kerdios said:

The way I interpret it, he's not even talking about all sex workers, only the streamer types which he thinks are going into a job that will become barren in a few years because of oversaturation(i.e. more showgirls than guys willing to pay for something that is mostly free today?), and that imposing taxation now will prevent enough from going into the business so they don't get hurt when the well dries or when the IRS and congress start making up laws to protect and regulate them ( a la what happened a few months ago with an underaged girl being kidnapped from her home and used as a verified showgirl on pornhub against her will) which might increase the cost of running a showgirl business.

 

I don't really have an opinion about this. He could be right, or he could be full of shit, no way for me to know.

That's why I'm saying that for most ppl this is an added income job and not a full time job.

And I'll add that this is why many of them don't show their face, in hope of avoiding the stigma that comes as part of the work.

 

Yes. I'm also full of shit, as you say, but those without son should cast the first stone 

[kerdios]

On 1/11/2021 at 4:55 PM, kerdios said:

a la what happened a few months ago with an underaged girl being kidnapped from her home and used as a verified showgirl on pornhub against her will

 

[rairii]

On 1/11/2021 at 7:00 PM, BTGBullseye said:

I just want to single this out as absurdly moronic. With no wealth inequality, taxes would still be needed to cover infrastructure, military, and other governmental costs. Humans aren't that nice that they'd pay for good roads for everyone out of the kindness of their hearts.

100% agreed on this however.

Absurdly moronic is kinda harsh don't you think? Especially coming from a person who in the past has made a habit of reporting of reporting others for breaking rule 1. Please keep your anger in check.

 

And worth keeping in mind that there are several positions on taxation outside of the default taken by more liberal ideologies. Marxists like me favor a stateless endgame where the community solely relies upon itself for support, not state revenue. Most leftists also disgree with the notion that police and military are strictly necessary.

[Shaddy]

That's treating it as a binary, though. Taxes would eventually be phased out in an ancom society. If you did it immediately with no transition plan, you could fuck everything up.

[Im_CIA]

On 1/13/2021 at 3:46 PM, Annie said:

And worth keeping in mind that there are several positions on taxation outside of the default taken by more liberal ideologies. Marxists like me favor a stateless endgame where the community solely relies upon itself for support, not state revenue. Most leftists also disgree with the notion that police and military are strictly necessary.

 

On 1/13/2021 at 9:32 PM, Shaddy said:

That's treating it as a binary, though. Taxes would eventually be phased out in an ancom society. If you did it immediately with no transition plan, you could fuck everything up.

1. We transition to anarcho communism with no military or police. 

2. Another society with more power projection becomes new player and starts treating us like a gaggle of warring Somalian warlords, which we pretty much will be 

 

Americans had it too good for too long to think ANY of this bullshit is a good idea

[rairii]

On 1/13/2021 at 7:32 PM, Shaddy said:

That's treating it as a binary, though. Taxes would eventually be phased out in an ancom society. If you did it immediately with no transition plan, you could fuck everything up.

I never said there shouldn't be a transitional phase, I simply think taxation is unethical and should ultimately go at some point in the future. Believe me, I'm not some "taxation is theft" brainlet who's advocating for its immediate removal.

Also I'd just like to clarify that I'm not exactly an anarchist.

[StrixLiterata]

20 minutes ago, Annie said:

I never said there shouldn't be a transitional phase, I simply think taxation is unethical and should ultimately go at some point in the future. Believe me, I'm not some "taxation is theft" brainlet who's advocating for its immediate removal.

Also I'd just like to clarify that I'm not exactly an anarchist.

I'm having trouble picturing how that would work: how is the state supposed to provide services if it doesn't receive resources from it's citizenry?

[Shaddy]

4 hours ago, Im_CIA said:

 

1. We transition to anarcho communism with no military or police. 

2. Another society with more power projection becomes new player and starts treating us like a gaggle of warring Somalian warlords, which we pretty much will be 

 

Americans had it too good for too long to think ANY of this bullshit is a good idea

If that were so guaranteed, we wouldn't need to constantly assassinate foreign leaders ourselves, since apparently someone else would just do it for us.