4 ms·

I'd bet it's relatively cheap, especially compared to the prison system. While this is probably a false equivalency and anecdotal, I'd like to point out that t

I'd bet it's relatively cheap, especially compared to the prison system. While this is probably a false equivalency and anecdotal, I'd like to point out that there are 2.3 million people in prison and it costs the US about $80bn/year. We have roughly 46 million people on food stamps and it costs us roughly $80 billion a year. With the money wasted on prisons, mostly going into the pockets of private industry, I'd wager a large bet there's likely the amount needed to feed, cloth, and house them all within our currently wasted expenditures. So the answer should be: all of us; because, we'd VERY likely be saving money and have a more functional society.

r00fus 9y ago
Not to mention almost all that money would then be spent and taxed (and again and again up to 5 more times) as opposed to being disbursed to a for-profit concern that likely does it's best to avoid taxes. Unemployment and welfare can actually return up to 1.7x the amount disbursed in tax revenues. Obviously this factor reduces as the amount disbursed goes up as a proportion of overall GDP, but pales in comparison to e.g. tax cuts for corporations/wealthy which net much closer to zero - corporations simply move that money overseas or tax shelter it using things like "double irish with a dutch sandwich" schemes.