User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 31

  1. #11
    On The blessblessblessblesster
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    xNtJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    I think they're talking about when the person actually gets the room and proceeds to run the business out of it. So they'd have customers coming and going.

    I wondered how they would even know about it in the first place at first, because it typically seems to be the opposite of this - they pick up first elsewhere and then get the room as a one shot deal - but then I realized they must be talking about when they get the room and station there and actually run their business from that room.

    If that's the case then I'm inclined to agree with the ruling, especially in hotels. It would be hard to miss customers traipsing through the lobby at any hours of the day strangely going to one room. It'd be quite obvious, kind of like how drug houses are here with all the strange people that come and go.
    Well it's kind of hard to mistake. Oftentimes hookers clearly look like hookers. And the guys they're with don't quite look like the type that would be hanging out with the hookers. Now when the chick is leaving the hotel and coming back every few hours with another guy, it becomes really really obvious. Can't ever prove anything, really. But I suppose if laws allow, management could ask anyone who they "suspect" to leave. That would cause problems for people who aren't actually hookers though but are mistaken for one though...

    Anyhow, I suppose I'm sympathetic to hotels for not wanting hookers and their clients traipsing around and having their other guests see that all the time, and sympathetic to hookers wanting to ply their trade, and sympathetic to guys needing a bust a nut. I'm just a sympathetic guy all around.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bilateral Entry View Post
    Well IMO society's a little too image-obsessed anyhow. People having sex in a hotel room for free, vs. for money doesn't change the quality of the actual hotel. I don't think discriminating for purposes of upkeep of a reputation is a legitimate reason. I would say to the hotels "sorry these customers aren't convenient for you. But unless they're causing damage or bothering other guests, you don't have a reason to discriminate".
    Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not this reputation would affect the business negatively. Economically speaking, this is an externality. The prostitute is passing on part of the cost of doing business to the hotel (without its consent).
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  3. #13
    On The blessblessblessblesster
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    xNtJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not this reputation would affect the business negatively. Economically speaking, this is an externality. The prostitute is passing on part of the cost of doing business to the hotel (without its consent).
    Lol so whose opinion is relevant then? At some point a subjective judgment needs to be made.

    I think it's a bit of a misrepresentation to say that a prostitute is passing along costs to the hotel. She (usually it's a she) would be tarnishing the reputation of the hotel, hence potentially costing the hotel money (whether or not this is actually true is quite speculative IMO). I would agree this could be classified as an externality. That doesn't automatically equate to something that should be stopped or compensated for. That would depend on opinion based on notions of fairness.

    Say that an HIV positive support group decided to rent out one of their conference rooms, and stay for a few nights in their lodging rooms as well. Let's say that tarnishes the hotel's reputation, because other guests don't want to be exposed to the possibility of infection. Should the hotel be allowed to refuse HIV positive people from renting a room? They certainly cause an externality. My point is, it's subjective.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bilateral Entry View Post
    Lol so whose opinion is relevant then? At some point a subjective judgment needs to be made.
    Your opinion that "society's a little too image-obsessed anyhow" is irrelevant...unless you have a solution. Do you? Does anyone?

    I think it's a bit of a misrepresentation to say that a prostitute is passing along costs to the hotel. She (usually it's a she) would be tarnishing the reputation of the hotel, hence potentially costing the hotel money (whether or not this is actually true is quite speculative IMO). I would agree this could be classified as an externality. That doesn't automatically equate to something that should be stopped or compensated for. That would depend on opinion based on notions of fairness.
    No, it's not a misrepresentation at all. Almost all businesses have overhead costs. The prostitute is reducing her overhead cost by deceiving her "landlord". This is the hotel's property. The burden of proof would be on the prostitute to prove that she is not causing the hotel any economic harm, not the other way around...unless you don't believe in property rights.

    Legally speaking, if a hotel was knowingly allowing prostitutes to operate in their rooms, the owner and/or manager could be charged with running a brothel. And don't get me started on issues like zoning and licensing...

    Say that an HIV positive support group decided to rent out one of their conference rooms, and stay for a few nights in their lodging rooms as well. Let's say that tarnishes the hotel's reputation, because other guests don't want to be exposed to the possibility of infection. Should the hotel be allowed to refuse HIV positive people from renting a room? They certainly cause an externality. My point is, it's subjective.
    False equivalence. A better comparison would be someone secretly opening up an HIV testing facility in the hotel, and yes, the hotel should be able to refuse that.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #15
    On The blessblessblessblesster
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    xNtJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Your opinion that "society's a little too image-obsessed anyhow" is irrelevant...unless you have a solution. Do you? Does anyone?
    It's relevant in my opinion of whether or not I think hotels should be allowed to discriminate. Also, I believe that it is possible to change societal values. I don't know exactly how that solution would look, but I believe that a solution is possible. I don't know what it is, and I certainly don't know if anyone else does.

    No, it's not a misrepresentation at all. Almost all businesses have overhead costs. The prostitute is reducing her overhead cost by deceiving her "landlord".
    And what exactly is the overhead cost that she is passing along? And how would she pay that cost herself?

    This is the hotel's property. The burden of proof would be on the prostitute to prove that she is not causing the hotel any economic harm, not the other way around...unless you don't believe in property rights.
    You mean legally the prostitute has the burden of proof, or in your opinion you feel that she should?

    Legally speaking, if a hotel was knowingly allowing prostitutes to operate in their rooms, the owner and/or manager could be charged with running a brothel. And don't get me started on issues like zoning and licensing...
    But as it stands, they know, but they don't know. They suspect, but they don't have the power to act on that suspicion and kick the suspects out.


    False equivalence. A better comparison would be someone secretly opening up an HIV testing facility in the hotel, and yes, the hotel should be able to refuse that.
    Not false equivalence. The point is that externality doesn't equal something that should be stopped.

  6. #16
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Private property rights give the owner rights to discriminate regarding their patrons, don't they?

    Sometimes women have their babies in hotels as well. A planned home birth, away from home. I've never felt like this is legitimate, however. I think conducting business in a hotel outside a planned venue for such is not something that should be allowed, and is a good parameter to adhere to. If it were my hotel anyway.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  7. #17
    On The blessblessblessblesster
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    xNtJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Private property rights give the owner rights to discriminate regarding their patrons, don't they?
    Not necessarily. It's called "refusing service" and usually businesses can't do that without a very good reason.

    Sometimes women have their babies in hotels as well. A planned home birth, away from home. I've never felt like this is legitimate, however. I think conducting business in a hotel outside a planned venue for such is not something that should be allowed, and is a good parameter to adhere to. If it were my hotel anyway.
    Of course if it was your hotel you'd want to do whatever benefits your business the most. If you were planning a home birth away from home, however, you'd likely have a different perspective. Everybody wants what's in their own self interest. Opinions on right and wrong, and how things should be are based in individual values and notions of fairness. Everyone's always claiming righteously that their perspective is the right one, and cry bloody murder when things go the other way. Very few people can see their own values as just their own.

    It's not that I don't see the perspectives of hotel owners who are concerned about their reputation and potential damage to hotel property or liability. I just have enough sympathy for women who are whoring themselves for a living that I don't want them getting hurt. The occupation is shitty enough. So in my mind, I balance the interests of the hotel vs. the interests of the prostitutes. The hotel's getting paid, and if the prostitutes don't make a mess in the room, and don't bother any other guests, I'd say it's a fair enough solution all around.

    So, I'm not exactly assessing things based on rigid principles. I think that's just a front for people who are driven by other emotional reasons anyway. Like someone might have zero sympathy for prostitutes, and have a value system that is very individualistic and competitive. Such a person would certainly side with a very cutthroat business environment, because they see life as a competition and live that way themselves. The most logical thing to do is develop the self awareness to realize why we believe what we do.

  8. #18
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bilateral Entry View Post
    Not necessarily. It's called "refusing service" and usually businesses can't do that without a very good reason.

    Of course if it was your hotel you'd want to do whatever benefits your business the most. If you were planning a home birth away from home, however, you'd likely have a different perspective. Everybody wants what's in their own self interest. Opinions on right and wrong, and how things should be are based in individual values and notions of fairness. Everyone's always claiming righteously that their perspective is the right one, and cry bloody murder when things go the other way. Very few people can see their own values as just their own.

    It's not that I don't see the perspectives of hotel owners who are concerned about their reputation and potential damage to hotel property or liability. I just have enough sympathy for women who are whoring themselves for a living that I don't want them getting hurt. The occupation is shitty enough. So in my mind, I balance the interests of the hotel vs. the interests of the prostitutes. The hotel's getting paid, and if the prostitutes don't make a mess in the room, and don't bother any other guests, I'd say it's a fair enough solution all around.

    So, I'm not exactly assessing things based on rigid principles. I think that's just a front for people who are driven by other emotional reasons anyway. Like someone might have zero sympathy for prostitutes, and have a value system that is very individualistic and competitive. Such a person would certainly side with a very cutthroat business environment, because they see life as a competition and live that way themselves. The most logical thing to do is develop the self awareness to realize why we believe what we do.

    I care about prostitutes too. But that is really beside the point.

    I was taking it from a business perspective. All in all, a hotel is for personal respite unless it has been arranged to be used for commercial reasons beforehand. I think it's within a hotel's rights to know if it's occupants are using it's property for commercial or other endeavor. I don't know.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  9. #19
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bilateral Entry View Post
    Not necessarily. It's called "refusing service" and usually businesses can't do that without a very good reason.
    Business can refuse service when they want to.

    It's not "you can't refuse service except in these special cases" it's actually "you can refuse services except in these cases"


    Or in other words, discrimination laws list the things that you are not allowed to discriminate against, which means the right to discriminate is pretty much a default except for the listed things (such as race, gender, or disability)

  10. #20
    On The blessblessblessblesster
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    xNtJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Business can refuse service when they want to.

    It's not "you can't refuse service except in these special cases" it's actually "you can refuse services except in these cases"


    Or in other words, discrimination laws list the things that you are not allowed to discriminate against, which means the right to discriminate is pretty much a default except for the listed things (such as race, gender, or disability)
    My bad. Did a quick google search on it which confirms what you said.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 07-16-2015, 06:04 AM
  2. USA gvmt + Gang-raped employee not allowed to sue b/c of contract
    By Usehername in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-16-2009, 02:36 PM
  3. Should convicted felons be allowed to vote?
    By Domino in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 09-16-2008, 02:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO