ok, so nobody knows where she stands on anything at all, because she just caters her positions to the polling. i'm still getting to know kamala, but some clarification is opening up: career politician with little if any conviction on much of anything. pay-to-play.

and, we're talking about prostitution...

you'd expect reason to frame the issue in terms of market theory, rather than in terms of human dignity, and i'm going to just throw that entire discourse in the trash bin - this is neither about supply nor is it about demand, but actually about economic opportunity. i'm not naive about this: there will always be women that would rather sell their bodies. it's easy money, and lots of people are lazy. they shouldn't be thrown in jail, but the system should be modified so that they're all that's left. if you want to use the language of market theory, adopting policies that restrict the supply by shifting labour out of the market would have the effect of increasing the price, which is the ideal end point. prostitution should only exist on the highest of scales, with the wealthiest of clients - and the most enthusiastic types of consent.

the best policies around prostitution have to do with social policies ensuring that women have access to affordable child care, to affordable housing, to education and to addictions services. women need to be given better options. the issue needs to be reframed in these terms, not reduced to a crass discussion about a market interaction.

and, i actually suspect she might agree with me if she'd get a little bit of conviction and take a stance.

https://reason.com/blog/2019/02/26/kamala-harris-sex-work-legal-fosta