Random thoughts on assorted topics.
Is prostitution really the oldest profession? San Francisco this week is voting on a ballot measure that would decriminalize prostitution, so, naturally, I've been hearing news stories about "the world's oldest profession."
This got me to thinking (and that's rarely a good thing).
First off, is prostitution really the oldest profession? How could this be?
The Internet wasn't much help (or at least it wasn't for the couple of minutes I spent searching). Others have questioned the claim, but the consensus of those other smart-alecs (the ones who aren't me) is that the oldest profession is really advertising.
Here's the problem I have with this "oldest profession" claim: if prostitutes were the first people to have jobs, how did they get paid?
If nobody else has a job, then nobody else has any money or other stuff. It's not a "profession" if you're selling your body for free.
Picture Adam and Eve getting booted out of the Garden of Eden and, instead of looking for food, Eve decided that the way to survive was to offer herself to Adam even though he didn't have anything either.
It's just not logical - unless she took credit.
Hmm. Maybe that's how we got into this financial mess.
This is why I've never quite understood the standard business community opposition to minimum wage laws. Really. There's a connection here.
How can you expect to sell more and more goods and services if you don't have people who can buy them? If workers get paid more, they can go out and spend more. Businesses should be insisting that minimum wages go up.
And prostitutes can't sell what they're selling without customers who can afford them.
So, listen up San Francisco. If you're going to decriminalize prostitution, you really ought to up the minimum wage too. Everyone will be happy.
Which brings us to the gross domestic product - with emphasis on both "gross" and "domestic."
Whether you like prostitution or not, you've got to admit there's an awful lot of money changing hands (or wherever else it changes). If it's illegal, it doesn't get officially quantified, but it could be having just as great an impact on all of us as AIG or Lehman Brothers.
And what does Ben Bernanke have to say about this?
Well, probably no one has asked him, but he ought to be thinking about it.
If nothing else, it could take some of the pressure off....
CREATIVE DOES. You don't see an awful lot of originality in lawsuits, so I was pleased to see a defendant listed as "Maureen Moe" the other day.
OK, it's not that imaginative, but it's better than another Doe. After all, if you can make up fictitious names for yet-to-be-identified defendants, why not take the opportunity to be a little creative?
If you've got four defendants to name, why not use Eeny, Meeny, Miney and Moe? Think of the fun you'll have choosing which one to replace when you've got a real name.
This is a good way to please your clients too because you can be descriptive in your naming.
What client wouldn't appreciate suing Rat Bastard or Evil Incarnate?
You'll enjoy this.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.