Editorial: Sex trade demands public intervention

  • Article by: EDITORIAL BOARD
  • Updated: September 26, 2012 - 6:23 PM

Not only is prevention morally correct, it's cost-effective.

  • 5
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 5 of 5
owatonnabillSep. 27, 12 7:22 AM

"It concludes emphatically that the prevention of early adolescent sex trafficking is in taxpayers' best interest." ............. Wow! So how many taxpayer dollars were spent arriving at THIS earth-shattering and completely unexpected conclusion? We're talking about kids here. How is it NOT in the taxpayers' best interests to do anything BUT all we can to protect them? But this is in reality a two-part question. Adolescents and persons under 18 forced to prostitute themselves? A monstrous evil and worthy of our best attempts to eradicate. People over 18 who choose to sell their bodies for sex? An entirely different kettle of fish. The Oldest Profession does not deserve that honorific without good reason. Sex for compensation has always been with us and always will. Does this part of "the sex trade" demand public intervention? Good question, at the very least.

4
2
liora51Sep. 27, 12 8:18 AM

Bill, stay focused on the important message here and remember that bleeding heart libs like me have been conditioned to produce economic arguments about humane and moral treatment of other human beings to address the "don't spend my money for your problems" crowd's indifference to any suffering that might be alleviated with our taxes.

6
2
starboy123Sep. 27, 1211:54 AM

Not to worry. Minneapolis only has one cop to work on this and even he takes vacations. Everybody talks about the issue but no one is really doing anything about it.

1
1
basia2186Sep. 27, 12 5:38 PM

Get the johns busted again. Put their photo and full names and addresses on the front page of the metro. Bill the parents the full cost of housing the rescued sex workers,and perhaps, charge tbem with, child abuse.

1
0
JsensSep. 30, 12 7:31 AM

I agree with President Obama, trafficking in young girls is abhorrent. But even a cursory reading of the study reveals that the cost benefit analysis conclusions are not supported by solid data but by what are at best rough estimates. A rather elegant mathematical formula is set forth but the results of such formulas are only as good as the accuracy of the facts used; in this case, such accuracy is not established. The report has a lot of verbiage, but little else. The report is just not convincing; if you want the precision of mathematics you have to start with precise facts.

0
0
  • 1 - 5 of 5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT