It was legalised in Germany about 20 years ago. The proposal to legalise it was very thoughtful and readable, quite unlike your single-sentence assertion.
Two brief examples that I remember: ① Many prostitutes were also witnesses to related crimes, which were difficult to prosecute because the key witnesses would have to admit to their own prostitution. ② The first employer of an ex-prostitute has to teach the ways of normal employment. Some employers will make that effort, but not many. The organisations that help prostitutes find regular employment stated that a criminal record made the search much more difficult.
Why do you think they’re trying to do the Nordic model now? Hint: it’s not because legalizing sex work proved to be a great solution for their society.
Interesting to note, Germany ranks lower than the US on the happiness index.
Much better. However, their thoughtfulness is not a reason for you to be thoughtless. If you want to write that someone "haven’t thought through the implications", then you yourself need to think through the implications.
Not just write a single sentence that implies that some implications exist.
You’re operating under old internet rules where we didn’t have open source AI or paid AI to flesh out pros and cons prior to speaking with others.
What stands out to me the most is that the Nordic model proves that reducing sex work improves the economic wellbeing of people, regardless of the legalization of sex work.
