The other side of this coin is that, for these "low-cost workers," the goat farm gig is probably better than their alternatives. > Workers on this farm get str

The other side of this coin is that, for these "low-cost workers," the goat farm gig is probably better than their alternatives. > Workers on this farm get strip-searched. If they're caught with drugs or tobacco, or get in fights, they could lose this job and be sent to a higher-security facility with a lot less freedom. > > And then there's the pay. It varies, depending on the job, but most inmates on the farm earn a few dollars a day. That's better than most prison jobs, which typically pay less than a dollar a day, but still, it's cut-rate labor. Should that opportunity cost to the prisoners in this program have weight in whether this "cut-rate labor" is ethical or not? If the farm can't sell it's goat milk for ethical reasons and the prisoners wind up in lower-paying or worse jobs, was Whole Foods' righteous action actually ethical? Lots of complex questions here. I don't know the answers here, but it's a little annoying that one letter to Whole Foods taking the moral high ground could handwave so much nuance.