Prostitution should be legalized in Nevada

My opponent concedes the point that the legalization of prostitution would force prostitutes to pay for the medical testing out of their pocket, without insurance. My opponent makes the assertion that the prostitutes will be paid more because the brothels would be scattered, and he also proposes that they be limited. I find this proposal to be extremely short sighted on my opponent's part for two reasons. First, my opponent believes that scattering and limiting will increase prices. In a one dimensional economic view, this would be correct. However, my opponent forgets that a limited supply would be met with a high demand, one that could not be filled with limited brothels. In order to meet that demand, illegal prostitution would go on the rise. Second, my opponent asserts that location of the brothels would raise the price. He completely forgets that illegal prostitution has no boundaries and will simply pick up the profits wherever the brothels are not allowed to be built. Third, my opponent's proposal for the brothel buildings is still a poor proposal. My opponent has not mentioned where the funding would come from, so I offer two choices: 1. The government. This would lead to an uprising of the public. There is no way that the government would pay for free medical testing, security, condoms, etc. for street prostitutes. 2. Associated Brothels. I would assume that these street prostitutes are still brothel associated, or regulated/legal in some way. Thus, we can expect these costs to come out of the pocket of the legal street prostitutes, severely cutting their paycheck. If this is the case, illegal prostitutes would be forced to either pay for protection and all those services, or risk it on their own. Guess what? They're going to risk it because that's what they've always done before. Finally, my opponent makes the assertion that since many would rather prostitute themselves than work in a job, brothels will have employees. However, I am confused at his follow up, he says that this would PREVENT overcrowding of brothels and street soliciting. He has not countered my point that women desperate for money look to prostitution, so in essence, he has now added to the population of women who we can expect to prostitute themselves. I repeat my point: Where would we put all of these prostitutes? Especially if my opponent is going to limit the number of brothels and brothel-accepted locations? All of the prostitutes who cannot be regulated will simply be illegal prostitutes, solving absolutely no problem. My opponent's proposals have grown steadily more confusing and ill-thought out, and I attribute this to his rushing. Since it will be his last post next, I would hope that he takes more time to correct all of the flaws I have listed. So far, I have made counterpoints for all his claims, but I still have several issues outstanding I want him to address that he has ignored in his last response for some reason: 1. The statistics on STD transmission I requested. 2. A response to my point about prostitutes not wanting to register and wanting to keep anonymity. In addition, here is a short summary of the issues I raise here: Estimated 20% tax, $50-$100 weekly STD testing fee, Payment to brothels or other supervising center, medicare tax, social security tax, payments towards the brothel-like building and funding for the rent, security guards, condoms, lighting, electricity, cleaning, plumbing, administration fees, as well as any hotel room rental fees for the actual sex (if not in a brothel) will deduct a MASSIVE amount of pay from prostitutes. My opponent's understanding of supply and demand was too light to show that this could all be overcome from a few government regulations. Because of this, my opponent's proposals would not be an incentive for any illegal prostitutes to switch to legalization. He has failed to show why illegal prostitutes would willingly succumb to regulation.