Letters to the Editor
healthyskeptic
Published Letters: 671 Editor's Choice: 14
-
FYI
[Read the article: New debates about the oldest profession]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Contrary to the usual claims of prostitution catering solely to misogynistic perversion, in fact, the industry of male prostitution and female "johns" is and has been growing rapidly. Gay and Lesbian prostitution is also thriving and has been for decades.
Japan's industry of male "host clubs" has thrived for decades. Women, typically office workers, go after work to to be entertained by handsome and charming male escorts through the evening, and often into the night. The male escorts are well paid and pretty happy with the work considering alternatives. A documentary was made about them: "Great Happiness Space" (2006)
Sex tourism is widespread, among men and women. Beach resorts in Asia, Latin America, and Africa are regular destinations for typically older men and women. Parts of Africa cater to older Caucasian women seeking African studs.
-
Ummm, tina schrier
[Read the article: New debates about the oldest profession]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why don't you try to substantiate any of the claims you're making? Saying that you believe something isn't a persuasive argument.
-
Amerigo
[Read the article: New debates about the oldest profession]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's an ironic effect, the shadow of thier success. It's not their legalization so much as the criminalization everywhere else.
It's similar to the way San Francisco has so many homeless from other places because we're more tolerant and have better weather. But we didn't create the vast majority of them. They'd still be homeless, or dead, somewhere else. In fact, San Francisco and CA has often been frustrated by other states unwillingness to take some responsibility for a problem they create but don;t pay a price for, because they export it to SF.
-
better?
[Read the article: The rise of the superclass]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Superclass" makes a case that today's elites are an improvement on those of the past: Instead of inherited aristocracy or sheer military might, power is more likely to go to the smart, ambitious and hardworking. Membership is fluid to an unprecedented extent, with new people muscling their way into the inner circle and slackers dropping out of the bottom all the time."
Does that alone really make them "better" than past elites? I tend to doubt it. I think it could actually make them worse, in the sense of them being more capable and competent predators should they choose. Machiavelli's Prince perfected.
Rome was meritocratic in regards to successful military leaders ascending to power. They were the most capable at crushing thier opposition. Once in power they typically did all they could to crush potential adversaries including killing off their own families. They often made Rome in their own image, more cruel and ruthless, and less democratic.
Successful and innovative companies often become anti-competitive as soon as they can.
The ability to succeed in business doesn't necessarily indicate a higher consciousness towards humanity, any more than a full stomach necessarily indicates a brilliant mind.
-
-- ShawnWM
[Read the article: The rise of the superclass]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bill Clinton certainly is in the same wealth and power bracket as Murdoch. They're both in the tiniest fraction of the global economy globally.
You seem to be misunderstanding both wealth and power.
First of all, most of Murdoch's wealth isn't cash he can spend. It's stock he controls, but the value of that stock is dependent on evaluation of other stock holders, and their evaluation is dependent on Murdoch not spending it and investing it in ways they deem good investments.
His actual "cash" isn't that much more than Bill's. Both have more than they could ever spend unless they took up some perversely expensive and unusual habits.
What's far more important is the amount of power and influence they wield, and in that regard, they're certainly in the same class.
-
Amerigo
[Read the article: New debates about the oldest profession]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually, CA, including SF, has better weather for the homeless, because we don't have any weather to speak of. (Not that I'm bragging or anything. I'd like warm tropical waters or the occasional snow storm.)
We don't have real seasons, hot nor cold. No heat waves. No snow. Not much rain. Temps mostly range from 80' to 50' Fahrenheit year round. The worst we have is fog. No mosquitoes, hurricanes, or all that tropical nonsense either. We get earthquakes, but it's not a major issue for people without shelter to begin with.
-
tina schrier
[Read the article: New debates about the oldest profession]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"nobody has any idea where the spike in crime is coming from, truthfully."
Nope, that's not truth. In fact they collect copious data on exactly those questions.
Every tourist and convention city sees elevated crime as part of the package. Where are the massage parlors located in every city? Right next to the convention center. Out of towners in tolerant cities always party, drink, and do drugs more than the locals, because they can't handle the newfound freedom. Amsterdam doesn't create most of their junkies and criminals.
Overall, the liberalization is a net good for Amsterdam and other liberal cities despite bearing the brunt of many problems carried in from other communities.
Fortunately liberal cities also get to enjoy the good things disproportionately. Liberal cities typically enjoy thriving economies and dynamicism, have the best universities and entertainments, and so on. Industries ranging from tourism to technology and arts/media all thrive in liberal hub cities.
-
Wow
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I knew she had issues, and had been a racist for a long time. But I didn't know a lot of the things Conason wrote about. Her entire character, the good and bad, hangs together and makes a lot more sense now. So does her support for Hillary.
-
We've heard this from Hillary before.
[Read the article: Obama and Clinton plan to cool it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Both candidates want to talk about their strong suit.
She'll be back on the sleazy and bogus attacks this weekend or next week at the latest. She can't help it. It's all she's got.
Obama will be talking about issues, judgment, and their records. Demonstrating his calm and cool temperament and superior character, as usual. All of which are his strong suit.
-
btw, on the environment...
[Read the article: Obama and Clinton plan to cool it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hillary's plan on global warming is a lot like her failed healthcare reform of '92. All talk, too east to block, likely to be DOA and kill reform. Obama's plan is a lot more realistic moving towards real energy independence and much harder to block.
-
crazy people
[Read the article: Are you offended by a tampon ad with a beaver?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who cares? Get a life and a little perspective people.