Angeles City

[QUOTE=Chris Long; 1391790]I was not addressing the age issue as much as I was addressing the attack on prostitution in general. But even here why do the Americans feel that they have the right to dictate the age of consent to the world. In many countries the age of consent is much lower, does that mean these countries are immoral? No, they just have a different view than the Americans and the Americans should respect that and not try to push their hypocrafull views of morality and standards on the rest of the world.

The real issue here, however, is the attack on prostitution in general. It is a women's right to choose and she should be able to choose that profession without fear of abuse, harassment, prosecution, or humiliation. Organizations such as the one featured are not doing these women any good they are just furthering their plight and desperation. Women choose this profession for economic reasons and they should be applauded for their entrepreneurial drive. They come predominantly from poor backgrounds with little assets and little options. They take what asset they have and they capitalize on it while they still have their looks. If they are smart they will get an education while they are making money, buy property, or a business. If the father truly wanted to help these women he would be working to make this profession legal so they could get protection from the authorities and not be abused by the authorities.

Take the secret service scandal in Columbia, I am not going to go into the whole can of worms, but the basic premise to be taken from this is that prostitution is legal there and when there was a dispute over money what did she do, she went to the police. In places where it is illegal there would be very little she could do. If the moral crusaders truly wanted to help these women they would be working for its legalization and respect and protection for these women. In this case the father did nothing but return these women to abject rural poverty with little options. The father is helping no one, No one was saved.

Chris[/QUOTE]This guy nailed it. Age of consent varies from state to state (in America) , country to country. Nature's law on this matter is much younger than 18. If there was a world plague tomorrow and the world's population decreased by 1/2 the age of consent would drop to nothing across the board. Sure in todays world the innocent should be protected and so should all others in every corruptible profession. Thanks Chris for your fair and wise assessment.

Ciao

[quote=yujin;1391811]i too am glad that arthur benjamin's exploiting **** children has been shut down.the case against benjamin was about his sexual exploitation of **** girls. nothing more. nothing less. it has nothing to do with americans trying 'to dictate the age of the consent to the world. ' it was the filipino government enforcing their laws on the age of consent; not shutting down legal age prostitution.[/quote]he, as an american, has been then found infringing us law applicable also beyond us borders. so he can be prosecuted in usa, regardless of what local laws might make him feel he is protected by lcal laws (and he was not anyhow) all the rest, ie americans trying to dictate, as you correctly said, is nonsense and just lame excuses by people eventually supporting those practices, directly or undirectly.

[quote=bionicman;1391855]he, as an american, has been then found infringing us law applicable also beyond us borders. so he can be prosecuted in usa, regardless of what local laws might make him feel he is protected by lcal laws (and he was not anyhow) all the rest, ie americans trying to dictate, as you correctly said, is nonsense and just lame excuses by people eventually supporting those practices, directly or undirectly.[/quote]bioniaman i agree 100% with your statement and if he goes to jail in the states. prisoners don't like ****s they are treated as the lowest of the low in jail. everything he has done to his little 16yo girlfriend, the high school girls and the minors that worked for him. he will pay for it many times over. especially since his face and story is posted on the net and on tv.

[quote=ej2208;1392069]bioniaman i agree 100% with your statement and if he goes to jail in the states. prisoners don't like ****s they are treated as the lowest of the low in jail. everything he has done to his little 16yo girlfriend, the high school girls and the minors that worked for him. he will pay for it many times over. especially since his face and story is posted on the net and on tv.[/quote]here is a link to the us government website that explains the laws about americans traveling abroad and committing sex crimes against children.

[url]http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1210/121017washingtondc.htm[/url]

[QUOTE=WhatsUrName; 1392089]Here is a link to the US government website that explains the laws about Americans traveling abroad and committing sex crimes against children.

[url]http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1210/121017washingtondc.htm[/url][/QUOTE]Read the link. 93 arrests in 9 years (odd that they don't mention convictions) with 73 offices in 47 countries.

Horrible return on investment. I wonder what the cost / arrest or cost / conviction is.

[QUOTE=Bionicman;1391855]He, as an american, has been then found infringing US law applicable also beyond US borders. So he can be prosecuted in USA, regardless of what local laws might make him feel he is protected by lcal laws (and he was not anyhow) All the rest, ie americans trying to dictate, as you correctly said, is nonsense and just lame excuses by people eventually supporting those practices, directly or undirectly.[/QUOTE]Not sure about US law in the Phils, but the US has no legal jurisdiction in another country unless local authorities abide by it. If it doesn't pass political muster it's largely ignored. Can you imagine other countries trying to impose their laws on the US? Will never happen unless it satisfied political boundaries and money is exchanging hands. This guy may be able to be prosecuted in the US for his alleged crimes in the Phils, but only as long as the Phillipines agrees with it. I assume enough money and politics has changed hands to make this happen. Keep in mind the German government did basically the same thing about 2-3 years ago.

All I am really saying is that hypocrisy is rampant in this situation because the Philippines gov't should have been leading the charge. Per the video, it appeared that the American ICE agent was leading the pack. The Filipino personnel looked like unwilling puppets.

[QUOTE=Niteluvr; 1392370]Not sure about US law in the Phils, but the US has no legal jurisdiction in another country unless local authorities abide by it. If it doesn't pass political muster it's largely ignored. Can you imagine other countries trying to impose their laws on the US? Will never happen unless it satisfied political boundaries and money is exchanging hands. This guy may be able to be prosecuted in the US for his alleged crimes in the Phils, but only as long as the Phillipines agrees with it. I assume enough money and politics has changed hands to make this happen. Keep in mind the German government did basically the same thing about 2-3 years ago.

All I am really saying is that hypocrisy is rampant in this situation because the Philippines gov't should have been leading the charge. Per the video, it appeared that the American ICE agent was leading the pack. The Filipino personnel looked like unwilling puppets.[/QUOTE]This is not about the US having jurisdiction in the Philippines. Obviously it has none. It pertains rather to the right of the US to prosecute its citizens (when they're back in the US) for violations of US law committed in another country. US law enforcement has a presence here. The FBI maintains an office at the US Embassy, and other enforcement arms of the US Government may do so as well. These operate with the concurrence of the Government of the Philippines.

GE

[QUOTE=GoodEnough; 1392385]This is not about the US having jurisdiction in the Philippines. Obviously it has none. It pertains rather to the right of the US to prosecute its citizens (when they're back in the US) for violations of US law committed in another country. US law enforcement has a presence here. The FBI maintains an office at the US Embassy, and other enforcement arms of the US Government may do so as well. These operate with the concurrence of the Government of the Philippines.

GE[/QUOTE]USA citizens are the property of the United States Government. The USA retains jurisdiction over the person of all its citizens regardless of the country they happen to be located in at any given time. Therefore, government agents of the USA may seize its citizens abroad for crimes committed outside of its borders. These broad powers over its citizens are not limited to their search and seizure. In some cases it may exercise its right to summarily execute citizens without trial as demonstrated in drone strikes. Most Americans believe that they have more freedom than citizens of any other nation. The ones who do not believe this, usually the very wealthy, tend to renounce their citizenship upon departing the country with their millions. It is the only way they can terminate the USA government's right to tax them abroad.

[QUOTE=Niteluvr;1392370]Not sure about US law in the Phils, but the US has no legal jurisdiction in another country unless local authorities abide by it. .[/QUOTE]US law has jurisdiction on its own citizens. As, on principle, any country does.

You citizen A do an offence (rated as offence in country A) in country B (where it is not an offence) and if A comes to know you will get in trouble.

On other hand country B can prosecute citizen A also outside of B, if there is a treaty between the two countries, for offences made in country B, as long as these are rated offences in country B.

A great example is sex with minors, being prosecuted by nearly all countries based on their undersstanding of legal age (which is not age of consent, mind you) even if the offence happened elsewhere in the world (and even if there the age of consent is lower and the guy had sex with somebody of legitimate age there)

Let's not get fooled by "DIY" legal advises. Or one-sided common sense.

[QUOTE=GoodEnough; 1392385]This is not about the US having jurisdiction in the Philippines. Obviously it has none. It pertains rather to the right of the US to prosecute its citizens (when they're back in the US) for violations of US law committed in another country. US law enforcement has a presence here. The FBI maintains an office at the US Embassy, and other enforcement arms of the US Government may do so as well. These operate with the concurrence of the Government of the Philippines.

GE[/QUOTE]Perfectly said!

[QUOTE=Chocha Monger;1392404]USA citizens are the property of the United States Government. The USA retains jurisdiction over the person of all its citizens regardless of the country they happen to be located in at any given time.

The very wealthy, tend to renounce their citizenship upon departing the country with their millions. It is the only way they can terminate the USA government's right to tax them abroad.[/QUOTE]

I do not look forward to the economic maybem the day there is a substantial cut in the credit rating for the US and/or the Chinese et al disontinue financing the bloated US Govt, but I do look forward to the absurdities of many haywire domestic and foreign policies getting cut off at the knees.

Show me some good stats on those uber elites renouncing citizenship and I might believe you. Freedom anywhere is proportionate to the amount of wealth one controls and that is certainly true of the USA. The main driver of expatriating uber wealth anywhere is most often over issues of taxation. In the US most wealth is created in capital or equity / stock markets which is always taxed at lower rates than earned income. Capital gains taxes maxed out at 15% last year and bumped up to 20% in 2013 going forward. Make a million in profit on selling your stocks and you pay roughly half the income rate upper end earned income taxpayers do. Earn a few hundred million or even a billion as several hedge fund managers do any given year trading other peoples money, then use the carried interest loophole and pay half the tax rates as the people who are actually working for a living. Take 10 or 20 million USD in salary as a Fortune 500 CEO and use stock options for 90% of that pay and voila, you halve your tax rate. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir and most of this SHOULD be common knowledge, but it is all very, very favorable to the uber wealthy.

The wealth is used to employ high end legal teams with top media contacts to control PR and most importanly to finance political operatives called congressmen, senators or even the President directly through contributions or through K street lobbyists. Many of these 7 figure per year lobbyists and high level corporate execs are also former bureaucraps who are looking to exchange their 100K per year govt job for the golden rainbow from Wall St and Corp America, providing the most opaque and pervasive form of corruption. These bureaucrats are beholden to any potential source of future income (a / k/a "captured"). Altogether, the uber elites in the US have freedoms most of us could never imagine.

Generally speaking the uber wealthy are very happy living in the USA.

[QUOTE=Pete Benetar; 1392419]I do not look forward to the economic maybem the day there is a substantial cut in the credit rating for the US and / or the Chinese et al disontinue financing the bloated US Govt, but I do look forward to the absurdities of many haywire domestic and foreign policies getting cut off at the knees.

Show me some good stats on those uber elites renouncing citizenship and I might believe you. Freedom anywhere is proportionate to the amount of wealth one controls and that is certainly true of the USA. The main driver of expatriating uber wealth anywhere is most often over issues of taxation. In the US most wealth is created in capital or equity / stock markets which is always taxed at lower rates than earned income. Capital gains taxes maxed out at 15% last year and bumped up to 20% in 2013 going forward. Make a million in profit on selling your stocks and you pay roughly half the income rate upper end earned income taxpayers do. Earn a few hundred million or even a billion as several hedge fund managers do any given year trading other peoples money, then use the carried interest loophole and pay half the tax rates as the people who are actually working for a living. Take 10 or 20 million USD in salary as a Fortune 500 CEO and use stock options for 90% of that pay and voila, you halve your tax rate. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir and most of this SHOULD be common knowledge, but it is all very, very favorable to the uber wealthy.

The wealth is used to employ high end legal teams with top media contacts to control PR and most importanly to finance political operatives called congressmen, senators or even the President directly through contributions or through K street lobbyists. Many of these 7 figure per year lobbyists and high level corporate execs are also former bureaucraps who are looking to exchange their 100K per year govt job for the golden rainbow from Wall St and Corp America, providing the most opaque and pervasive form of corruption. These bureaucrats are beholden to any potential source of future income (a / k/a "captured"). Altogether, the uber elites in the US have freedoms most of us could never imagine.

Generally speaking the uber wealthy are very happy living in the USA.[/QUOTE]Well said.

[blue][Unannotated link deleted by Admin][/blue]

Chris

[b][u]EDITOR'S NOTE[/u]: [/b] [blue]This report was edited to remove what appeared to be an [u]unannotated link to another website[/u].

Please do not post links to other websites without some explanation as to what may be found at the linked webpage.

In other words, if you want to post a link to another website, please include some commentary describing what the link is to.[/blue]

I'm flabbergasted that PB needs "stats" since this has been reported so much. PB gives some good info, but I've snipped most of it. I assume those that are interested have already read it. Sorry for being off topic, but I couldn't just ignore this.

[url]http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/eduardo-saverin-isnt-the-only-rich-guy-defriending-the-us/257087/[/url]

[QUOTE=Pete Benetar; 1392419]SNIP.

Generally speaking the uber wealthy are very happy living in the USA.[/QUOTE]

Shit fellas', but isn't this stuff a little off topic? Be nice to get back to little short stories / suggestions about, massage places, vendors to avoid, or maybe a decent restaurant? No wonder no one wants to, RTFF. Things seem a little overly verbose, if your know what I mean?

[QUOTE=X Man; 1392457]I'm flabbergasted PB.

[url]http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/eduardo-saverin-isnt-the-only-rich-guy-defriending-the-us/257087/[/url][/QUOTE]LOL, don't be so flabbergasted X and I don't feel too apologetic about being OT since Tax Policy here in the US is what funds the Femi Fascists from Team USA now deployed worldwide.

The uber rich BTW are a tiny blip on the overall tax exodus situation thanks largely to a fairly onerous exit tax on all financial assets iimposed on the individual by the IRS. No such imposition is set on corporations which is where the REAL exodus has taken place. Off shore havens continue to protect individuals who stay in the US. I know Saverins has been the poster boy for elites exiting the US, but the benefits are overblown (Forbes link) and in any case of the 1760 most are middle class and upper end income earners and not the uber elites.

[url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/05/17/eduardo-saverins-current-tax-saving-67-million-and-it-could-be-a-tax-loss-in-the-end/[/url]