How a call girl can earn far more by actually working far less

Disclaimer: Freakonomics to me embodies modern business writing at its worst. Anecdotal, single case half-correlations that try to pretend they’re something more than fluff entertainment.<p>In this article, they truly don’t disappoint.<p>A hilarious and misguided glorification of what, I imagine, is a soul crushing business for 99/100 prostitutes.<p>Written like a recruiting pamphlet, to boot.<p>And the answer to how a prostitute can earn far more by working far less?<p>Price elasticity of demand!<p>Stunning discovery Freakonomics.<p>/End Rant

Problems with the article:<p>&#62; Throughout history, it has invariably been easier to be male than female. Yes, this is an overgeneralisation and yes, there are exceptions, but by any important measure, women have had it rougher than men.<p>This one is a PC-friendly thing to say, the opposite point of view is not. If you haven't read it, I <i>must</i> urge you to check out the excellent "Is There Anything Good About Men?" essay by Roy Baumeister:<p><a href="http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm</a><p>Across history, it's estimated that 80% of women all-time had children, whereas only 40% of men did - the majority of men died without descendents. Things like that. Definitely check out Baumeister's essay.<p>&#62; In any arena you look — education, legal and voting rights, career opportunities and so on — it is far better to be a woman today than at any other point in history.<p>At the risk of being controversial, I would point out unhappiness, depression, and suicide are all massively up in those countries among women. I think - I'm hoping - that we're in a transition phase while society gets acclimated to having women as equal participants in the labor market. For a while, being traditionally feminine (focusing on beauty, kind temperament and disposition, managing a household, and raising children) was out of fashion and seen to be a lesser choice, despite the fact that women who act in that traditional role actually have higher happiness levels, lower depression levels, and lower suicide levels than women who are working in so-so positions. As the risk of being controversial, I'll say I firmly understand why a woman would give up these traditional pursuits of being a good wife and mother in order to be an excellent scientist, architect, artist, or entrepreneur, but I have no idea why a woman would rather be a low level middle manager or a clerk instead of being a wife, mother, and active member of the community. Motherhood seems to me like it'd be more enjoyable and more rewarding than all but the most satisfying and self-actualizing of professions. I know this is controversial, but I'm hoping society will adjust to a point where traditional femininity can peacefully coexist as a respected choice for women on how to live their lives, because I think it can be a suitable, powerful, happy, and meaningful for choice for many women, and it'd be a shame if a woman was peer-pressured to do a job she hates because "just getting married and being a housewife" is stigmatized these days.

Allie is not "earning far more by actually working far less." That implies that working less causes her to make more money. Rather, she's earning more by <i>charging more</i>, and she was able to do that because she had complementary skills that she didn't know to market until price experimentation attracted a different kind of customer. As a side effect, her higher hourly rate gives her the freedom of working less.<p>Perhaps there could be a market for prostitutes who don't have sex very often, if there were a way for prospective clients to verify this. But that's not Allie's business strategy.

This reminded of an App Store developer I met a few months ago who had an app selling for $10. He was working too much answering too many technical support questions.<p>What he did was increase the price of the app to $25. Less people purchased his app but his revenue is about the same. The volume of technical support questions dropped significantly because he has less users.

I found the second article (hidden beneath the credits and the book ads) about monkeys adopting currency much more interesting. I know people who do primate research and it doesn't surprise me in the least, but it's much more interesting than the first, which can be summarized as "high-end prostitutes have a good life and make a lot of money, low-end prostitutes have a shitty life and make no money" with the rest being a mix of stereotypes and overconvoluted explanations of the demand curve.

I'm not sure if what they are saying applies to the first girl they speak about. A street hooker cannot easily transition to a highly paid escort. You need to be pretty and young at least, to earn that much. And the street hookers, if they increased their prices, would have no customers.

"So the real puzzle isn’t why someone like Allie becomes a prostitute, but rather why more women don’t choose this career."<p>Most women don't do this because of the social stigma, and those that don't care about the social stigma don't do it because they don't want to contract STDs--in particular, Genital Herpes which can be transmitted through skin-to-skin contact. I'm surprised that the article didn't examine the health risks of the business.<p>I'm certain that a high class escort is safer from health risks than someone who works on the street, but how much safer? That is information I'd be interested to learn.<p>That said, I have several friends--women and homosexual men--that have done and do this type of work. When they talk about it, they always say that they "love it." They do it for awhile and pay off some debt. Then they inevitably age out of it or go onto work that they find more meaningful. This article confirmed the stories they told me.

The article misses everything that isn't economic. That might sound appropriate for economics, but economics is influenced by human behavior, and human behavior is influenced by a lot more than economic factors. For instance, to say that a high-end prostitute working fifteen hours a week is more like a trophy wife than like a street hooker is utterly oblivious to the many, many obligations a trophy wife has. Being a trophy wife is, if not a full-time job, at least a half-time job. A trophy wife has to fulfill all the expectations of a wife of her social class, and fulfill them exceptionally well. She has to entertain. She has to manage a household. She has to manage her social life and social image, and often her husband's as well. Often a trophy wife has to bear and raise children. Of all the duties of a trophy wife, having sex with her husband is among the least essential. I would wager it is the most negotiable, the most often neglected, and the least likely to cause serious dissatisfaction on the husband's part. After all, a husband can develop other sexual interests, but his social image is built around his one wife.

Hmmmf, $500 is a little less than what I get for one month full time as an English teacher :-/

very long-winded.<p>essentially, she charged more and became a high-end sex worker.

I wonder how she does her taxes.

"There is one labour market women have always dominated: prostitution."<p>Uhm. No. The most common prostitute is a man selling sex to another man.

I posted a critical view of sentiments expressed in this article a while back:<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1573319" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1573319</a>

$300/hour? That is one of the highest paying job i ever heard of.

The best part is at the end when the monkey pays another monkey for sex.

It is all about 'to find a [micro] niche', using Internet or other 'connections'. ^_^