Regarding work, almost nobody does "what they want", we find some compromise between our interests, abilities, and available work opportunities. Work is often understood to be that which we don't do voluntarily.

   you have pimps.

I'd appreciate it if you could be more precise.

1. What do you mean by "pimp"? Is it the same as a co-worker, or is it the same as "boss" or something else?

2. For your chosen concept of "pimp", could you explain which of the following you belive to be true, and what the credible, methodologically controlled evidence you have for your belief:

- All prostitutes in all legislations have one or more "pimps"?

- Some but not all prostitutes in all legislations have one or more "pimps"?

- All prostitutes in some but not all legislations have one or more "pimps"?

- Some but not all prostitutes in some but not all legislations have one or more "pimps"?

For all the "some"s, I'd appreciate quantitative data, are we talking about 99.9% or 0.1%. And: is there a systemic difference w.r.t. "pimping" between legal systems where prostitution is legal, and those where it is not?

Finally, I'd be interested to learn why -- for your chosen notion of "pimp", having one or more "pimps" is good/bad.

Harvard scholars are not credible, but we're debating the virtues of pimps?

I've learned what I need to learn. Moving on.

Have you learned something? Hmmm. I think you are defending a belief system against a principled challenge by looking away. That is a labour saving device and convenient.

The rhetorical device you've used in the last reply include "argumentum ad auctoritatem" and "non sequitur".