4 ms·

Having the ability to earn a wage while in prison is a great idea. Paying those people at least minimum wage instead of pennies is a great idea.

stronglikedan 5y ago
> Paying those people at least minimum wage instead of pennies is a great idea. Yes, as long as a reasonable amount for food and housing is deducted from their paycheck.
- danShumway 5y ago
  I don't know if you're making a serious suggestion or not, but prisoners are already forced to pay for a lot of the resources they get in prisons, including basic services like video calls and extra medical supplies. And they pay exorbitantly higher prices than people outside of prison. Outside of prison, a video call with your family is free because you use Skype or Zoom. Inside of prison, a 30 minute call can have a double digit price tag. Even basic necessities like menstrual products and tampons for women often have to be purchased at prices far above what normal consumers pay. There's no competition or prisoner autonomy over which businesses they give their money to, and there's no commercial incentive for businesses that are authorized to sell to prisoners to lower prices; they literally have a captive market. State-approved monopolies are allowed to restrict access to those supplies and "privileges" unless prisoners pay up. This has also led to really perverse policy incentives. Video call companies have lobbied states to restrict and/or remove in-person visiting, meaning that if you want to have any contact with your family or the outside world, you need to pay for the privilege. Often, books and entertainment will have a single company you can purchase through. Prisoners don't get access to the free market and even completely noncontroversial, obviously positive rehabilitative measures like family visits are being restricted for the sake of monetary exploitation. So short answer, we're not giving prisoners a minimum wage and we're already charging them and their families an artificially inflated amount of money for basic necessities.
  - stronglikedan 5y ago
    All that other stuff is fucked up in its own right, as is the privatization of prisons, but I'm only talking about room and board. I don't think taxpayers should foot that bill, if the prisoner is able-bodied.
    - danShumway 5y ago
      Quick sidenote, but some prisons do already charge room and board[0]. Florida comes up a lot in these conversations about prisoner rights: > Each state prisoner shall pay from such income and assets, except where such income is exempt by state or federal law, all or a fair portion of the prisoner's daily subsistence costs, based upon the inmate's ability to pay. An order directing payment of all or a fair portion of a prisoner's daily subsistence costs may survive against the estate of the prisoner. And Florida does not pay prisoners a minimum wage. So while I disagree with the overall premise (more on that below), giving prisoners a real wage for their work would still be an improvement over the current system, which is the worst of both worlds. ---- But ignoring that and just talking about the policy on its own merits, I would ask the same question about whether those room and board costs are fair. I can choose where I live, a prisoner can't. Prison accommodations are not a free market. So should prisoners be allowed to "shop around" for which prison they want to be incarcerated in based on the prices of room and board? Should prisoners be allowed to decide when they turn lights on and off in their cells to save power? Prisoners have no say in how much their accommodations cost. In multiple states they don't even have voting rights, so they lack the bare minimum of input into the policy behind how those costs are determined. To me, it's a little problematic to charge someone for something that they are legally forced to purchase from a single source. We should generally try to avoid that. But it's extra problematic to force someone to work to pay for that charge. That's when we start getting into direct comparisons with slavery. Slaves were also provided living accomodations on plantations. But like prisoners, they couldn't leave or execute any choices about their arrangement. In practice, what really is the difference between charging a prisoner for tampons and charging them for the electricity in their cell block? Both are required purchases by a captive market. [0]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/charging-inmates-stay-prison-smart-policy https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/char...
- effingwewt 5y ago
  Ah yes, go to jail/prison to pay your debt to society, and also you will be charged for food and lodgings. This is indentured servitude. Jail/prison should be for rehabilitation, not to line the pockets if every-greedier corporations.
  - stronglikedan 5y ago
    Why shouldn't you pay for food and lodging? You would outside of prison. Why should taxpayers foot the bill? Privatized prisons aside, because that is perverse and should be flat out illegal.
  - dahfizz 5y ago
    You and I, the tax payers, are who ultimately pay for lodging for prisoners. It makes much more sense to me for the person who committed the crime to bear this cost (if possible). The abuses of private prisons, etc is a tangential issue. As a high level, it's all still funded by taxpayer money.
    - Taylor_OD 5y ago
      But that is not the system we've set up. That also sets up a very scary system of indentured servanthood.
- Taylor_OD 5y ago
  lol that is what they, you, and I pay taxes for.
- Taylor_OD 5y ago
  I've thought about this more and this is such an odd take. If you want to live in a society that locks people up for crimes then you should expect for society to collectively pay for the place to lock them up in and the cost to meet their basic needs. I don't even understand what other take there is other than making them pay for their own detention which just doesnt work out unless you allow them to keep their jobs.

stronglikedan 5y ago

> Paying those people at least minimum wage instead of pennies is a great idea. Yes, as long as a reasonable amount for food and housing is deducted from their paycheck.

danShumway 5y ago
I don't know if you're making a serious suggestion or not, but prisoners are already forced to pay for a lot of the resources they get in prisons, including basic services like video calls and extra medical supplies. And they pay exorbitantly higher prices than people outside of prison. Outside of prison, a video call with your family is free because you use Skype or Zoom. Inside of prison, a 30 minute call can have a double digit price tag. Even basic necessities like menstrual products and tampons for women often have to be purchased at prices far above what normal consumers pay. There's no competition or prisoner autonomy over which businesses they give their money to, and there's no commercial incentive for businesses that are authorized to sell to prisoners to lower prices; they literally have a captive market. State-approved monopolies are allowed to restrict access to those supplies and "privileges" unless prisoners pay up. This has also led to really perverse policy incentives. Video call companies have lobbied states to restrict and/or remove in-person visiting, meaning that if you want to have any contact with your family or the outside world, you need to pay for the privilege. Often, books and entertainment will have a single company you can purchase through. Prisoners don't get access to the free market and even completely noncontroversial, obviously positive rehabilitative measures like family visits are being restricted for the sake of monetary exploitation. So short answer, we're not giving prisoners a minimum wage and we're already charging them and their families an artificially inflated amount of money for basic necessities.
- stronglikedan 5y ago
  All that other stuff is fucked up in its own right, as is the privatization of prisons, but I'm only talking about room and board. I don't think taxpayers should foot that bill, if the prisoner is able-bodied.
  - danShumway 5y ago
    Quick sidenote, but some prisons do already charge room and board[0]. Florida comes up a lot in these conversations about prisoner rights: > Each state prisoner shall pay from such income and assets, except where such income is exempt by state or federal law, all or a fair portion of the prisoner's daily subsistence costs, based upon the inmate's ability to pay. An order directing payment of all or a fair portion of a prisoner's daily subsistence costs may survive against the estate of the prisoner. And Florida does not pay prisoners a minimum wage. So while I disagree with the overall premise (more on that below), giving prisoners a real wage for their work would still be an improvement over the current system, which is the worst of both worlds. ---- But ignoring that and just talking about the policy on its own merits, I would ask the same question about whether those room and board costs are fair. I can choose where I live, a prisoner can't. Prison accommodations are not a free market. So should prisoners be allowed to "shop around" for which prison they want to be incarcerated in based on the prices of room and board? Should prisoners be allowed to decide when they turn lights on and off in their cells to save power? Prisoners have no say in how much their accommodations cost. In multiple states they don't even have voting rights, so they lack the bare minimum of input into the policy behind how those costs are determined. To me, it's a little problematic to charge someone for something that they are legally forced to purchase from a single source. We should generally try to avoid that. But it's extra problematic to force someone to work to pay for that charge. That's when we start getting into direct comparisons with slavery. Slaves were also provided living accomodations on plantations. But like prisoners, they couldn't leave or execute any choices about their arrangement. In practice, what really is the difference between charging a prisoner for tampons and charging them for the electricity in their cell block? Both are required purchases by a captive market. [0]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/charging-inmates-stay-prison-smart-policy https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/char...
effingwewt 5y ago
Ah yes, go to jail/prison to pay your debt to society, and also you will be charged for food and lodgings. This is indentured servitude. Jail/prison should be for rehabilitation, not to line the pockets if every-greedier corporations.
- stronglikedan 5y ago
  Why shouldn't you pay for food and lodging? You would outside of prison. Why should taxpayers foot the bill? Privatized prisons aside, because that is perverse and should be flat out illegal.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  You and I, the tax payers, are who ultimately pay for lodging for prisoners. It makes much more sense to me for the person who committed the crime to bear this cost (if possible). The abuses of private prisons, etc is a tangential issue. As a high level, it's all still funded by taxpayer money.
  - Taylor_OD 5y ago
    But that is not the system we've set up. That also sets up a very scary system of indentured servanthood.
Taylor_OD 5y ago
lol that is what they, you, and I pay taxes for.
Taylor_OD 5y ago
I've thought about this more and this is such an odd take. If you want to live in a society that locks people up for crimes then you should expect for society to collectively pay for the place to lock them up in and the cost to meet their basic needs. I don't even understand what other take there is other than making them pay for their own detention which just doesnt work out unless you allow them to keep their jobs.