[Vision2020] More Whores At Work

[Donovan Arnold]

No, not the same thing. This law protects youth.
 
Prostitution is illegal because some jerk would force his daughters or some young girl that owes him money into it. Young women, although legally free at age 18, many are still financially dependent on their parents. And young women usually don't have the skills needed yet to meet all their needs. Women also make 40% less than men. 
 
Instead of legalizing prostitution, let us first criminalize and end discrimination against women so they don't have to sleep with ugly, nasty, fat, smelly, men than cannot get a willing date. 
 
 
Donovan J. Arnold

From: Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>
To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2012 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] More Whores At Work

1.  I call them the name they themselves find most insulting and vituperative.  2.  I agree with Paul.  Legalize it.  Regulate it.  Protect the workers. Tax it.w. 
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote: 
While we're on the subject, why the hell isn't prostitution legal?
>It's another one of those cases of "legalize it, tax it, regulate it for safety, and take it out of the criminal underground". Those who have moral objections to it can choose not to participate.Paul 
>From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>; 
>To: Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>; vision2020 at moscow.com <vision2020 at moscow.com>; 
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] More Whores At Work 
>Sent: Wed, Jul 4, 2012 6:18:13 AM 
>
>Wayne,
> 
>Why do keep slandering the reputations of whores by associating them with corrupt bankers? 
> 
>Donovan J. Arnold
>From: Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2012 11:23 AM
>Subject: [Vision2020] More Whores At Work
>
>  
>July 2, 2012
>Rigged Rates, Rigged Markets
>Update:After this editorial went to press, Barclays announced that its chief executive, Robert Diamond Jr. had resigned, effective immediately, and that Marcus Agius, who had resigned as chairman of Barclays on Monday, would become chairman again and lead the search for a new chief executive. 
>Marcus Agius, the chairman of Barclays, resigned on Monday, saying “the buck stops with me.” His was the first departure since the British bank agreed last week to pay $450 million to settle findings that, from 2005 to 2009, it had tried to rig benchmark interest rates to benefit its own bottom line. 
>Mr. Agius was right to go and the bank’s chief executive, Robert Diamond Jr., should follow him out the door. But the investigations cannot stop there. 
>The rates in question — the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, and the Euro interbank offered rate, or Euribor — are used to determine the borrowing rates for consumers and companies, including some $10 trillion in mortgages, student loans and credit cards. The rates are also linked to an estimated $700 trillion market in derivatives, which banks buy and sell on a daily basis. If these rates are rigged, markets are rigged — against bank customers, like everyday borrowers, and against parties on the other side of a bank’s derivatives deals, like pension funds. 
>Barclays is only one of more than a dozen big banks that provide information used to set the daily rate for Libor and Euribor. The settlement, struck with regulators in Washington and London and with the Department of Justice, indicates that the bank did not act alone. It shows that unnamed managers and traders of Barclays in London, New York and Tokyo colluded with or prevailed upon bank employees who provide the benchmark data to make false reports. The aim was to bolster Barclays’s trading positions and to aid or counteract other banks’ attempts at manipulation. 
>The evidence, cited by the Justice Department — which Barclays agreed is “true and accurate” — is damning. “Always happy to help,” one employee wrote in an e-mail after being asked to submit false information. “If you know how to keep a secret, I’ll bring you in on it,” wrote a Barclays trader to a trader at another bank, referring to an attempt to align their strategies for mutual gain. 
>If that’s not conspiracy and price-fixing, what is? 
>The Justice Department has left open the possibility of prosecuting officers or employees of Barclays. But it has agreed not to prosecute the bank itself, in part because Barclays was the first to cooperate in the investigation and has agreed to keep cooperating. Such an agreement makes sense only if that cooperation will allow prosecutors to nail other banks that have been involved in setting the rates, including potential cases against Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and HSBC, and people who work there. 
>To date, the Justice Department has not distinguished itself in prosecuting major banks or their executives for conduct leading up to and during the financial crisis. But with Barclays now cooperating, the “Libor scandal” is another chance for government prosecutors to unmask and punish financial wrongdoing. -- Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)art.deco.studios at gmail.com=======================================================List services made available by First Step Internet,serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.              http://www.fsr.net/          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com======================================================= -- Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)art.deco.studios at gmail.com=======================================================List services made available by First Step Internet,serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.              http://www.fsr.net/         
 mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120704/34290eb8/attachment-0001.html>