3 ms·

The US and most countries' prison system seeks to punish and extract cheap labor out of prisoners, not rehabilitate them for reintroduction to society. It's big

by xyzzyz 5y ago

The US and most countries' prison system seeks to punish and extract cheap labor out of prisoners, not rehabilitate them for reintroduction to society. It's big business[1]. That’s just simply untrue. The value of labor of prisoners is so low that it wouldn’t cover the cost of imprisoning them, even if all of the prisoners actually worked full time (and the actual figures are well short of that). Now, to be sure, a lot of people make money on prisons, mostly government employees (as great majority prisons are government run), but also some private businesses too. However, the causation goes the opposite way to what you seem to argue: majority of people in prisons are there, because they committed a serious crime, usually violent, not because the prison industrial complex has somehow snatched them from the street for cheap labor. Even the private prisons make most of their money on contracting with government, not on products of prisoner labor (which, again to reiterate, is worth very little).

sollewitt 5y ago
I think you are assuming the company charging for labor is paying for lodging, food, and other expenses, and that doesn't break even. But that isn't how it is: the prisons charge companies or the government for labor and charge the taxpayers a day rate for the service of incarceration - additional prisoners mean additional profit. Like most graft in the US, the issue is that private companies get to make a profit on public expenses. This is "more efficient" than having the government do it at cost (see also: medicine). The practice in this case disincentivizes rehabilitation, means people lobby for things like 3 strikes, or trivial parole violations, mandatory minimums etc. The incentive structure creates systemic reinforcement. You go in to the system and it doesn't particularly want you to come out.
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  No, I think it is pretty clear from my comment that I do believe that companies are making money on prisons. It can be deduced for example from the part where I say: > Now, to be sure, a lot of people make money on prisons, (...) but also some private businesses too. In fact, it would be beyond strange to expect a private company to provide a useful service to the people indefinitely at a loss; that’s not how business works. > Like most graft in the US, the issue is that private companies get to make a profit on public expenses. This is "more efficient" than having the government do it at cost (see also: medicine). The problem is that “at cost” is not some sort of objective, physical notion. Most things that government does are “at cost”, but this means little to the taxpayers who foot the bill, if they end up paying more for government services provided “at cost”, than for private services, the providers of which end up making good profits. The entire point of private prisons is that they are cheaper to taxpayers than the government ran ones. In all, I see no problem whatsoever with private companies get to make a profit on public expense, if taxpayers benefit compared to the alternative. > The practice in this case disincentivizes rehabilitation, means people lobby for things like 3 strikes, or trivial parole violations, mandatory minimums etc. The incentive structure creates systemic reinforcement. You go in to the system and it doesn't particularly want you to come out. 3 strikes, mandatory minimums etc are not a product of private prison lobbyists sneakily instituting them, while the public is kept in the dark. The actual history of those policies is that they were instituted with wide public support, during a time of large increase in crime compared to previous periods, when many of the offenders were found to have offended many times before, and got away with slap on the wrist. For example, first state to introduce 3 strikes law was Washington state, not exactly known for private prisons, or population hell bent on punishment. It was introduced by public ballot measure, which passed 75% to 25%. The voter pamphlet argued that under current law, a violent robber, who has two earlier violent felony convictions, is recommended only 5 years in prison, not even considering early release for good behavior. Not exactly what you would call a trick pulled on the public by sinister private prison lobby,
imiric 5y ago
What's untrue? The main goal being punishment instead of rehabilitation is pretty widely known to be true. Solitary confinement is torture. The death penalty is still legal and carried out in several states. Even if there are rehabilitation programs in place, the off-the-record treatment of prisoners and prison violence don't make for an environment conducive to rehabilitation. I wasn't implying there's some big conspiracy where the State _wants_ more prisoners because it's profitable. According to this[1] the average cost of incarceration is around $35k/y, much higher than the $6-14k that can be generated from each inmate, according to the article I linked above. Still, the incarceration cost is covered by taxpayers, and there is a lot of private and side business that also benefits. The bail bond system alone reeks of corruption, where the wealthy can walk away while those unable to pay get to wait for trial in jail. And let's not forget the racial and ethnic discriminations, "war on drugs" and similar farces... It's a complex topic and we can argue about the details, but there's not much worth defending about the current US prison system. Disclaimer: I'm speaking as an outsider with layman familiarity, but please include links to backup any counter arguments. [1]: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09062/annual-determination-of-average-cost-of-incarceration https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09...

by xyzzyz 5y ago

sollewitt 5y ago

I think you are assuming the company charging for labor is paying for lodging, food, and other expenses, and that doesn't break even. But that isn't how it is: the prisons charge companies or the government for labor and charge the taxpayers a day rate for the service of incarceration - additional prisoners mean additional profit. Like most graft in the US, the issue is that private companies get to make a profit on public expenses. This is "more efficient" than having the government do it at cost (see also: medicine). The practice in this case disincentivizes rehabilitation, means people lobby for things like 3 strikes, or trivial parole violations, mandatory minimums etc. The incentive structure creates systemic reinforcement. You go in to the system and it doesn't particularly want you to come out.

xyzzyz 5y ago
No, I think it is pretty clear from my comment that I do believe that companies are making money on prisons. It can be deduced for example from the part where I say: > Now, to be sure, a lot of people make money on prisons, (...) but also some private businesses too. In fact, it would be beyond strange to expect a private company to provide a useful service to the people indefinitely at a loss; that’s not how business works. > Like most graft in the US, the issue is that private companies get to make a profit on public expenses. This is "more efficient" than having the government do it at cost (see also: medicine). The problem is that “at cost” is not some sort of objective, physical notion. Most things that government does are “at cost”, but this means little to the taxpayers who foot the bill, if they end up paying more for government services provided “at cost”, than for private services, the providers of which end up making good profits. The entire point of private prisons is that they are cheaper to taxpayers than the government ran ones. In all, I see no problem whatsoever with private companies get to make a profit on public expense, if taxpayers benefit compared to the alternative. > The practice in this case disincentivizes rehabilitation, means people lobby for things like 3 strikes, or trivial parole violations, mandatory minimums etc. The incentive structure creates systemic reinforcement. You go in to the system and it doesn't particularly want you to come out. 3 strikes, mandatory minimums etc are not a product of private prison lobbyists sneakily instituting them, while the public is kept in the dark. The actual history of those policies is that they were instituted with wide public support, during a time of large increase in crime compared to previous periods, when many of the offenders were found to have offended many times before, and got away with slap on the wrist. For example, first state to introduce 3 strikes law was Washington state, not exactly known for private prisons, or population hell bent on punishment. It was introduced by public ballot measure, which passed 75% to 25%. The voter pamphlet argued that under current law, a violent robber, who has two earlier violent felony convictions, is recommended only 5 years in prison, not even considering early release for good behavior. Not exactly what you would call a trick pulled on the public by sinister private prison lobby,

imiric 5y ago

What's untrue? The main goal being punishment instead of rehabilitation is pretty widely known to be true. Solitary confinement is torture. The death penalty is still legal and carried out in several states. Even if there are rehabilitation programs in place, the off-the-record treatment of prisoners and prison violence don't make for an environment conducive to rehabilitation. I wasn't implying there's some big conspiracy where the State _wants_ more prisoners because it's profitable. According to this[1] the average cost of incarceration is around $35k/y, much higher than the $6-14k that can be generated from each inmate, according to the article I linked above. Still, the incarceration cost is covered by taxpayers, and there is a lot of private and side business that also benefits. The bail bond system alone reeks of corruption, where the wealthy can walk away while those unable to pay get to wait for trial in jail. And let's not forget the racial and ethnic discriminations, "war on drugs" and similar farces... It's a complex topic and we can argue about the details, but there's not much worth defending about the current US prison system. Disclaimer: I'm speaking as an outsider with layman familiarity, but please include links to backup any counter arguments. [1]: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09062/annual-determination-of-average-cost-of-incarceration https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09...