Ricci Levy

Rebates

Filed By Ricci Levy | April 03, 2008 10:32 AM | comments

Filed in: Entertainment
Tags: humorous blog post

A friend just shared this with me, pointing out that it is clearly in the best interest of the government to legalize sex!

"The federal government is sending each and every one of us a $600 rebate.

If we spend that money at Wal-Mart, the money will go to China. If we spend it on gasoline it will go to the Arabs, if we purchase a computer it will go to India, if we purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala, if we purchase a good car it will go to Japan, if we purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan and none of it will help the American economy.

The only way to keep that money here at home is to buy prostitutes and beer, since these are the only products still produced in the US.

Thank you for your help."


Recent Entries Filed under Entertainment:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | April 3, 2008 10:45 AM

This post is smart, funny and on target Ricci. One of the effects of NAFTA, WTO and fast track trade agreements is that our trade deficit has exploded. So much of what we now buy on a daily basis is made in other countries.

If the rebates are to have any effect, which I don't believe they will, we should spend the money on American made goods.

I am wondering, though, if that means we need to come up with a kind of prostitute Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval that says made in America.


What? Y'all, are you reading this thing? Sure, it's funny up until the .0005 seconds it takes to realize how NASTY it is.

It isn't cute to call women products. We aren't THINGS. Prostitutes are not a little plastic toy that you can pick up at your Giant Warehouse Retailer of Choice. Sure, the economy is crap and it begs for the ranting, but trivializing sex workers and all the crap they're so often forced to go through already... that's just enragingly wrong. Good Lord, I'd expect this from bigoted wingnuts, who as we know hate women, gays, people of color, basically everyone but the rich and straight and white and male... but not from here.

I love this site and it's for that reason that I've got to call you on this post. I have come to expect so much more from here.

That was really funny. I've bitched and moaned to Jerame a million times about what a cock-eyed crazy scheme this was. Borrow a kazillion dollars from the Chinese just to give it away here to make more debt! What damn sense does that make?

Midget, not all sex workers are female. And not all sex workers are exploited. Many choose the profession, for any number of reasons. Is objectification wrong? Yes. But our sexphobic culture is what makes prostitution seem like it's any more oppressive than any other form of paid labor. If I cut someone's hair and they pay me for it, there is a monetary exchange for services performed. How is this any different from giving someone a blow job and getting paid for it?

If I flip burgers and some big corporation makes money off of it and and then turns around and pays me pennies for making it, how is that any less exploitative than if I work the pole and make a couple hundred bucks in a night? In my book, it's more oppressive to slave away to make money for somebody else than it is to provide a service directly to the customer and get paid cash money for every bit of my labor.

Ricci, we could only buy American beers if you want to take your argument out to its logical conclusion. Which is why it's a good thing that Corona is actually bottled in Chicago and not Mexico. Because it's my beer of choice.

Bottles (and boobies) up!

I don't care if a sexworker is male or female, they still deserve quite better than that.

And yes, exploitative is exploitative, but chances are good that one is much less likely to get victim-blamed for being beaten up, or raped, when working as a McDonalds employee than when working as a prostitute. That can and does happen when people take on a "things, not people" attitude. Rape gets reduced to "theft of services."

Midget, that's only because prostitution is illegal in this country. Your argument simply prooves that prostitution should be legal, not that it's inherently exploitative.

Aside from the sex-worker stuff, I'm worried about the nativism in that email.

Maybe I'm just reading too much into it, but what's wrong with money going to Guatemala or "Arabs" (as if all the oil in this country comes from ethnically Arab people)?

I completely disagree, Alex. It's not nativism when the point of the article is about the cash influx Bush is bribing the nation with - money that's borrowed from another country. After NAFTA, CAFTA and BAFTA, we're sending most of our dollars for manufactured goods to foreign countries. Listing which of our major imports come from where isn't nativism. It's not "wrong with money going to Guatemala or Arabs," but it sure as hell doesn't make a helluva lotta sense to to borrow money from a foreign country to spend it on goods from other countries while claiming it's to kick start the American economy.

Midgetgirl - I can see your point on prostitutes being compared to a good rather than a service. I don't think that was the point here as much as just stretching a tad to fit the framework.

Bil, you're so right. And then the kicker of it all is that this "rebate" is just going to be deducted from our refunds next year. It's not free money.