4 ms·

> disinterestedly with facts, statistics, and published analyses I think this is the core of the disagreement, and why we're talking past each other... Your a

by seoaeu 5y ago

> disinterestedly with facts, statistics, and published analyses I think this is the core of the disagreement, and why we're talking past each other... Your argument (let me know if I'm stating it correctly): on the objective metrics of cost, recidivism, and so forth there is no compelling statistical difference between public and private prisons. Therefore there's no grounds to rule out either. Since different incentives can change behavior, better laws could result in private prisons optimizing for these metrics and we'd have better outcomes. My argument (evidently not clear from previous posts): Prisoners shouldn't be treated cruelly regardless of whether that improves or worsens some objective metric. Example: it isn't morally OK to serve prisoners rotten food, even if that makes them less likely to come back. An academic or government agency who is disinterested in the welfare of prisoners is the least qualified to study how prisons should be run, while those with a track record of promoting human rights and humane treatment for prisoners have the most credibility on how to make things better. Edit: I'd also add just how catastrophically bad it is that private prisons do lobbying. Their fundamental incentive is the exact opposite of the rest of society: to have the highest number of criminals possible.

ALittleLight 5y ago
No, that's not my argument at all, though I apologize because I can see how you would get there. I spent too much time arguing matters of fact that are incidental. If private prisons were worse on every metric I would take that as evidence of my statement that their incentives are misaligned. I don't think it's well demonstrated that they are worse, but that question is beside my point. My point is that the incentives of private prisons are misaligned with society. As I wrote earlier, they would view recidivism as repeat customers. I then suggested a concept to realign private prisons with society and prisoners. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with private prisons. The problem is that they are misaligned, not that they exist - as I see it. To approach the problem a different way - public prisons don't have a good incentive structure either and they produce some pretty poor results. In fact, it is our public criminal justice system that is currently hiring misaligned private prisons in addition to running their own poorly performing prisons.
- worik 5y ago
  > I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with private prisons. The problem is that they are misaligned, not that they exist I have lived through some of these cycles, of trying to adjust incentives so markets can deliver goods/services in a sensible way when the naturally occurring incentives are skewed in all the wrong ways. In imprisoning people the incentives are all wrong to involve the private sector. The public sector too faces bad incentives. It is a catastrophe AFAICT both in the USA, here in Aotearoa, and in our neighbouring state Australia. These are the cases I know something about. We can only fix it one bite at a time, and keeping the private sector out of the mix - with their millions in lobbying power, is one such bite. Here we have mostly succeeded. Where the private sector has gotten in the lives of prisoners have gotten worse. Remember: Every prisoner will be released (here - maybe not there) and they will be your neighbour. How do you want to treat them when you have them in your power? So you think cruel treatment will increase, or decrease, the chances of bad actions when they are living next to you?

by seoaeu 5y ago

ALittleLight 5y ago

No, that's not my argument at all, though I apologize because I can see how you would get there. I spent too much time arguing matters of fact that are incidental. If private prisons were worse on every metric I would take that as evidence of my statement that their incentives are misaligned. I don't think it's well demonstrated that they are worse, but that question is beside my point. My point is that the incentives of private prisons are misaligned with society. As I wrote earlier, they would view recidivism as repeat customers. I then suggested a concept to realign private prisons with society and prisoners. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with private prisons. The problem is that they are misaligned, not that they exist - as I see it. To approach the problem a different way - public prisons don't have a good incentive structure either and they produce some pretty poor results. In fact, it is our public criminal justice system that is currently hiring misaligned private prisons in addition to running their own poorly performing prisons.

worik 5y ago
> I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with private prisons. The problem is that they are misaligned, not that they exist I have lived through some of these cycles, of trying to adjust incentives so markets can deliver goods/services in a sensible way when the naturally occurring incentives are skewed in all the wrong ways. In imprisoning people the incentives are all wrong to involve the private sector. The public sector too faces bad incentives. It is a catastrophe AFAICT both in the USA, here in Aotearoa, and in our neighbouring state Australia. These are the cases I know something about. We can only fix it one bite at a time, and keeping the private sector out of the mix - with their millions in lobbying power, is one such bite. Here we have mostly succeeded. Where the private sector has gotten in the lives of prisoners have gotten worse. Remember: Every prisoner will be released (here - maybe not there) and they will be your neighbour. How do you want to treat them when you have them in your power? So you think cruel treatment will increase, or decrease, the chances of bad actions when they are living next to you?