3 ms·

> My point is, what works for Norway (population: 5.2m, prison population: 3874 or 0.0745% [0]) is never going to work for Brazil (population: 207m, prison popu

by sampo 9y ago

> My point is, what works for Norway (population: 5.2m, prison population: 3874 or 0.0745% [0]) is never going to work for Brazil (population: 207m, prison population: 659020 or 0.31% [1]). Actually the population density of Brazil is just 1.5 times that of Norway. Not a great difference.

cam_l 9y ago
Yeah, I have come to understand the whole population scale argument is just an example of American (or in this case Brazilian) exceptionalism. Basically just a right wing taking point that denied the reasons in favour of a blanket 'this well not work here' fallacious argument.
joshjje 9y ago
While I dont really agree with the original argument, while what you say is true, I dont think population density was the point. Prison population as a percentage of the total was. Brazil has ~4.2 times higher prison population compared to total. You could argue that compounds with the 1.5 times population density though which would come out to ~6.4 times prison population density. Though 659k vs 3.9k prisoners is a pretty significant difference if you look at it that way.
cgriswald 9y ago
If you were to place New York City on Mars, you could have its population density be any value you want simply by expanding its political borders. When comparing countries, it's the distribution that matters. If I have 50 people spread throughout my house, or 50 people shoved into a single room in my house, my house will have the same population density, but in the latter case I'll have 50 pretty irritable people. The same is true for a country. Take Canada: It's population density is quite low, but that doesn't paint a very accurate picture of living conditions, since the vast majority of the population lives within a much smaller region along the US border. In any case, I agree with the sibling that population density is not the statistic the GP is using in support of his position. He is using prisoner per capita, which is 3x higher for Brazil than Norway and surely has at least some effect on the ability of Brazil to treat its prisoners in the same way.

by sampo 9y ago

cam_l 9y ago

Yeah, I have come to understand the whole population scale argument is just an example of American (or in this case Brazilian) exceptionalism. Basically just a right wing taking point that denied the reasons in favour of a blanket 'this well not work here' fallacious argument.

joshjje 9y ago

While I dont really agree with the original argument, while what you say is true, I dont think population density was the point. Prison population as a percentage of the total was. Brazil has ~4.2 times higher prison population compared to total. You could argue that compounds with the 1.5 times population density though which would come out to ~6.4 times prison population density. Though 659k vs 3.9k prisoners is a pretty significant difference if you look at it that way.

cgriswald 9y ago

If you were to place New York City on Mars, you could have its population density be any value you want simply by expanding its political borders. When comparing countries, it's the distribution that matters. If I have 50 people spread throughout my house, or 50 people shoved into a single room in my house, my house will have the same population density, but in the latter case I'll have 50 pretty irritable people. The same is true for a country. Take Canada: It's population density is quite low, but that doesn't paint a very accurate picture of living conditions, since the vast majority of the population lives within a much smaller region along the US border. In any case, I agree with the sibling that population density is not the statistic the GP is using in support of his position. He is using prisoner per capita, which is 3x higher for Brazil than Norway and surely has at least some effect on the ability of Brazil to treat its prisoners in the same way.