6 ms·

Insane are the people who look at that stock and say, "that's a good investment"...

by TheOneTrueKyle 10y ago

mtgx 10y ago
"Terrorism can only be good for business."
- koolba 10y ago
  > "Terrorism can only be good for business." Maybe domestic terrorism but not international. Private prisons only make money when people are captured alive and locked up on US soil.
  - jonlucc 10y ago
    Until they run GitMo too?
  - happyslobro 10y ago
    International terrorism makes great money for the military complex, when a good customer uses it as an excuse for an invasion. And then employment goes up, people focus away from the domestic problems, politicians get their kickbacks without sacrificing an election, you've heard this story a million times...
- paulsutter 10y ago
  You might want to rephrase. I assume you're saying, the perversity goes well beyond prisons, including the companies that profit from war and paranoia generally. But as your comment stands, its hard to tell.
taurath 10y ago
I haven't heard a single argument from anyone about how it's even slightly moral or good for anyone other than the private prisons to use them. There is nothing better about them - I hope they all go bankrupt.
- jonwachob91 10y ago
  I don't recall exactly when, but Jim Cramer did an entire episode of Mad Money last year about how private prisons are a good investment. Here is a link to a segment form 2011 about private prisons being good investments - http://www.cnbc.com/id/44677873 http://www.cnbc.com/id/44677873 I'll keep looking for last years episode.
- FireBeyond 10y ago
  Have a look into the Barrier Fund (was the Vice Fund), and clones: http://vicefund.com http://vicefund.com > The Barrier Fund will concentrate its net assets in industries that have significant barriers to entry including the alcoholic beverages, tobacco, gaming and defense/aerospace industries.
  - taurath 10y ago
    Nearly 10% YOY returns - it certainly does pay to have no morals
WalterSear 10y ago
I'd argue it's not insane, it's human nature. http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_articles_on_the_banality_of_evil_in_the_inew_yorkeri_archive.html http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_a... I'd also argue it's something we need to actively work to engineer out of society and humanity.
- happyslobro 10y ago
  The problem with engineering our way to a utopia, or at least, a humane government and economy, is determining who gets to write the specs that the engineers implement. It basically the same problem of deciding who should govern us, and how much of our own autonomy we should delegate to them. We're still going to have the same problems with a technocracy, that we already have with representative democracy.
  - WalterSear 10y ago
    I wasn't suggesting neo-marxism. I was pointing out that we are fucked in the long term unless we collectively stamp this out.
Unbeliever69 10y ago
Now if we can only bring down the scourge know as for-profit schools!
- wil421 10y ago
  I don't think they are always a bad thing. If we could make it so that didn't profit off tuitions/fees that would be great. Some schools have contracts with companies, the government, or even have legitimate patents.
  - jonwachob91 10y ago
    So make the for-profit institutions non-for-profit... Please note that private institution and for-profit institutions are not the same thing.
  - r_smart 10y ago
    Private schools are for profit. They are generally regarded as the best education you can get for K-12 schooling (at least where I live in the US). Same goes for many of the colleges in the US (actually, wait, isn't that the difference between a college and a university?). For profit schools pretty much kick ass. I think the exception comes when the government contracts a business to run a school. This is a very different arrangement and is prone to all of the horrors that come along with the government signing contracts for various services. Once the contract is in place, given how slow the government is to act, all one needs to do is comply with the contract enough to not lose it outright.
    - vonmoltke 10y ago
      > Private schools are for profit. No, they aren't. The vast majority of private schools are non-profit corporations.
    - throwaway729 10y ago
      > Private schools are for profit This is far more false than true. Most private schools are, in fact, not-for-profit. All of the house-hold private university names, except for University of Phoenix, are all not-for-profit. Harvard, Yale, etc. are all not-for-profit. > They are generally regarded as the best education you can get for K-12 schooling The only for profit K-12 schools I know of are basically web-based GED prep courses. Not exactly the "best education you can get", but it'll get you that McDonalds gig. This isn't even true of not-for-profit private schools. There are plenty of public schools, e.g. in wealthy suburbs, that are far higher quality than your average Catholic private school, for example. > actually, wait, isn't that the difference between a college and a university? No, not at all. The only difference is that a university a) has multiple colleges and b) offers graduate degrees. Colleges and universities can be private for-profit, private not-for-profit, or public. > For profit schools pretty much kick ass Sorry to burst your bubble, but in higher education, for-profit universities are usually bottom of the barrel in terms of both prestige and quality.
pc86 10y ago
I mean if you believe they will continue to exist and make a profit, it makes financial sense to invest in them.
SilasX 10y ago
So, it's perfectly fine to personally enrich yourself by: A) Working as a prison guard/admin (in which your job security/salary increase with incarceration); B) Hiring released convicts (in which your model becomes increasingly profitable as more of the labor force is branded as less hireable due to greater incarceration); C) Supplying goods to prisons (in which your specialization at the problems of delivery to prisons becomes more valuable with greater incarceration) D) Lobbying for tough-on-crime laws due to the above incentives, as e.g. CO interest groups have done [1] But running the prison itself? "That's too much, man!" Frankly, the anti-private prison movement is, IMHO, very confused. Numerous groups financially profit from the prison system even when they're publicly run, and such prisons produce the same egregious incentives to encourage more incarceration. (See the three-strikes lobbying.) It seems like a way to exploit anti-market, anti-profit bias to get the masses enraged at an enormous red herring -- which, by the way, is still only 6-16% [2]. [1] http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/the_undue_influence_of_californias_prison_guards_union-californias_correctional_industrial_complex.pdf http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/the_undue_influen... [2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/privatization-criminal-justice/private-prisons https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/privatization...
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  I think it is, in fact, fine to do A, B, and C. We do need prisons. Some people are too dangerous to be allowed in society, and this will likely always be the case. So they must be guarded. (Technically, you're also guarding everyone else from them.) If it's immoral to work as a prison guard, it's also immoral to work as a policeman, or a firefighter, or a street cleaner - as your job becomes more secure when there are more criminals, or house fires, or litterers. Patent nonsense. Hiring released convicts is also a good thing, in general - people go to prison, pay their debt to society, and come out. They need jobs, now. And a person is going to need a bed sheet, a tooth brush, and toilet paper whether they're in prison or free. D, I agree with, is wrong. And especially when done by the folks who do C.
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y ago
  There is a big difference between profiting from people versus profiting indirectly through supplies that a public prison uses. The incentives are totally backwards. The state should be encouraging people to not be in prison, but instead we have monetary incentives in place for putting more people in prison and keeping them there.
cloudjacker 10y ago
I mean.... I do plan on looking at the 10-K to form an objective opinion about it There's really almost no scenario where I'm going to say "yeah I don't want to be in a position to make a downpayment on a house by analyzing and pursuing that profitable scenario" whether long, short, no play, I'll take a look how about you?

Insane are the people who look at that stock and say, "that's a good investment"...

mtgx 10y ago

"Terrorism can only be good for business."

koolba 10y ago
> "Terrorism can only be good for business." Maybe domestic terrorism but not international. Private prisons only make money when people are captured alive and locked up on US soil.
- jonlucc 10y ago
  Until they run GitMo too?
- happyslobro 10y ago
  International terrorism makes great money for the military complex, when a good customer uses it as an excuse for an invasion. And then employment goes up, people focus away from the domestic problems, politicians get their kickbacks without sacrificing an election, you've heard this story a million times...
paulsutter 10y ago
You might want to rephrase. I assume you're saying, the perversity goes well beyond prisons, including the companies that profit from war and paranoia generally. But as your comment stands, its hard to tell.

taurath 10y ago

I haven't heard a single argument from anyone about how it's even slightly moral or good for anyone other than the private prisons to use them. There is nothing better about them - I hope they all go bankrupt.

jonwachob91 10y ago
I don't recall exactly when, but Jim Cramer did an entire episode of Mad Money last year about how private prisons are a good investment. Here is a link to a segment form 2011 about private prisons being good investments - http://www.cnbc.com/id/44677873 http://www.cnbc.com/id/44677873 I'll keep looking for last years episode.
FireBeyond 10y ago
Have a look into the Barrier Fund (was the Vice Fund), and clones: http://vicefund.com http://vicefund.com > The Barrier Fund will concentrate its net assets in industries that have significant barriers to entry including the alcoholic beverages, tobacco, gaming and defense/aerospace industries.
- taurath 10y ago
  Nearly 10% YOY returns - it certainly does pay to have no morals

WalterSear 10y ago

I'd argue it's not insane, it's human nature. http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_articles_on_the_banality_of_evil_in_the_inew_yorkeri_archive.html http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_a... I'd also argue it's something we need to actively work to engineer out of society and humanity.

happyslobro 10y ago
The problem with engineering our way to a utopia, or at least, a humane government and economy, is determining who gets to write the specs that the engineers implement. It basically the same problem of deciding who should govern us, and how much of our own autonomy we should delegate to them. We're still going to have the same problems with a technocracy, that we already have with representative democracy.
- WalterSear 10y ago
  I wasn't suggesting neo-marxism. I was pointing out that we are fucked in the long term unless we collectively stamp this out.

Unbeliever69 10y ago

Now if we can only bring down the scourge know as for-profit schools!

wil421 10y ago
I don't think they are always a bad thing. If we could make it so that didn't profit off tuitions/fees that would be great. Some schools have contracts with companies, the government, or even have legitimate patents.
- jonwachob91 10y ago
  So make the for-profit institutions non-for-profit... Please note that private institution and for-profit institutions are not the same thing.
- r_smart 10y ago
  Private schools are for profit. They are generally regarded as the best education you can get for K-12 schooling (at least where I live in the US). Same goes for many of the colleges in the US (actually, wait, isn't that the difference between a college and a university?). For profit schools pretty much kick ass. I think the exception comes when the government contracts a business to run a school. This is a very different arrangement and is prone to all of the horrors that come along with the government signing contracts for various services. Once the contract is in place, given how slow the government is to act, all one needs to do is comply with the contract enough to not lose it outright.
  - vonmoltke 10y ago
    > Private schools are for profit. No, they aren't. The vast majority of private schools are non-profit corporations.
  - throwaway729 10y ago
    > Private schools are for profit This is far more false than true. Most private schools are, in fact, not-for-profit. All of the house-hold private university names, except for University of Phoenix, are all not-for-profit. Harvard, Yale, etc. are all not-for-profit. > They are generally regarded as the best education you can get for K-12 schooling The only for profit K-12 schools I know of are basically web-based GED prep courses. Not exactly the "best education you can get", but it'll get you that McDonalds gig. This isn't even true of not-for-profit private schools. There are plenty of public schools, e.g. in wealthy suburbs, that are far higher quality than your average Catholic private school, for example. > actually, wait, isn't that the difference between a college and a university? No, not at all. The only difference is that a university a) has multiple colleges and b) offers graduate degrees. Colleges and universities can be private for-profit, private not-for-profit, or public. > For profit schools pretty much kick ass Sorry to burst your bubble, but in higher education, for-profit universities are usually bottom of the barrel in terms of both prestige and quality.

pc86 10y ago

I mean if you believe they will continue to exist and make a profit, it makes financial sense to invest in them.

SilasX 10y ago

So, it's perfectly fine to personally enrich yourself by: A) Working as a prison guard/admin (in which your job security/salary increase with incarceration); B) Hiring released convicts (in which your model becomes increasingly profitable as more of the labor force is branded as less hireable due to greater incarceration); C) Supplying goods to prisons (in which your specialization at the problems of delivery to prisons becomes more valuable with greater incarceration) D) Lobbying for tough-on-crime laws due to the above incentives, as e.g. CO interest groups have done [1] But running the prison itself? "That's too much, man!" Frankly, the anti-private prison movement is, IMHO, very confused. Numerous groups financially profit from the prison system even when they're publicly run, and such prisons produce the same egregious incentives to encourage more incarceration. (See the three-strikes lobbying.) It seems like a way to exploit anti-market, anti-profit bias to get the masses enraged at an enormous red herring -- which, by the way, is still only 6-16% [2]. [1] http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/the_undue_influence_of_californias_prison_guards_union-californias_correctional_industrial_complex.pdf http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/the_undue_influen... [2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/privatization-criminal-justice/private-prisons https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/privatization...

pavel_lishin 10y ago
I think it is, in fact, fine to do A, B, and C. We do need prisons. Some people are too dangerous to be allowed in society, and this will likely always be the case. So they must be guarded. (Technically, you're also guarding everyone else from them.) If it's immoral to work as a prison guard, it's also immoral to work as a policeman, or a firefighter, or a street cleaner - as your job becomes more secure when there are more criminals, or house fires, or litterers. Patent nonsense. Hiring released convicts is also a good thing, in general - people go to prison, pay their debt to society, and come out. They need jobs, now. And a person is going to need a bed sheet, a tooth brush, and toilet paper whether they're in prison or free. D, I agree with, is wrong. And especially when done by the folks who do C.
eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y ago
There is a big difference between profiting from people versus profiting indirectly through supplies that a public prison uses. The incentives are totally backwards. The state should be encouraging people to not be in prison, but instead we have monetary incentives in place for putting more people in prison and keeping them there.

cloudjacker 10y ago

I mean.... I do plan on looking at the 10-K to form an objective opinion about it There's really almost no scenario where I'm going to say "yeah I don't want to be in a position to make a downpayment on a house by analyzing and pursuing that profitable scenario" whether long, short, no play, I'll take a look how about you?