The impending Depression Lite will be a boon to high-end sex workers, researcher Sudhir Venkatesh assures Slate readers. Venkatesh has made a name for himself in the post-Freakonomics, après-Spitzer era of hooker metrics, and the high end of the industry is his niche. Venkatesh actually does get that the sex trade is way more about moneyed escapism than anything else. But when he spins off onto the subject of "high-tech" hookers, he loses his credibility.

The continuing post-Spitzer articles about why-high end escorts make so such money are, let's admit it, porn. Wonking about the economics of high-end sex and money is a great way to pretend there's nothing titillating about it. This week, Economist blogger Allison Schrager asks how these girls can charge so much — that is, she asks everyone but the escorts themselves.

Sudhir Venkatesh, hooker economics expert, is back. Just yesterday he was on Slate saying New York governor Eliot Spitzer was caught with a call girl because he didn't pay enough. Today he's in the New York Times claiming that high-class hookers are imaginary — no matter how much they make, Venkatesh frets, the poor girls are all exploited, miserable and in physical danger. Is there really no one else to go to for expertise on the business? What about some of the high-end providers themselves — or has Venkatesh convinced reporters they don't exist? (Photo by jamesyu)

"Did Eliot Spitzer get caught because he didn't spend enough on prostitutes?" Slate contributor Sudhir Venkatesh deserves credit for reporting that Spitzer's alleged $4,300 date was not premium pricing. But his generalizations are far too broad for such a diverse industry as Web-powered prostitution. Were I his editor, I'd have sent back these redlines: