3 ms·

Nixon dropped gold standard in 1971 and state power started expanding like crazy with printed money. Incarceration rate is just one of the effects of growing vi

Nixon dropped gold standard in 1971 and state power started expanding like crazy with printed money. Incarceration rate is just one of the effects of growing violent power.

MRSallee 13y ago
Interesting connection. I'd say these charts alone aren't enough to solidify that causation, but it sounds plausible and I'd love more info to back it up.
- EliRivers 13y ago
  It's the other way around. Nixon saw the increase in crime and this prompted him to drop the gold standard :p
oleganza 13y ago
Those who downvote are invited to provide a rational counter-argument. My facts are: 1. State promised to provide gold in exchange for U.S. dollars before November 1971. 2. After November 1971 it basically defaulted on that promise. But due to different factors (including military domination in many countries) people overseas kept trading in dollars, so dollar did not collapse. 3. When money is created it gets in someone's hands who now have some purchasing power they didn't have before (I'm not debating if it's "good" or "bad", it's just the fact). 4. Mainly, money is created via bonds issued by the government. So it's mainly government who get new purchasing power (the whole point of those bonds is to make some cash for government spending). 5. Government is different from any corporation in a sense that it has monopoly on violence. Only government agencies can put people in jail, use guns on massive scale at home and in the world. Again, I'm not saying if it's evil or "good for society", it's just the way it is. 6. Extra purchasing power for government means more economic power to do things that only government can do. E.g. pay policemen to chase drug dealers, computer hackers, bitcoin traders etc. 7. No wonder that incarceration rate grows. Where am I wrong?
- nawitus 13y ago
  You're wrong because there's plenty of other Western nations without the gold standard and higher state expenditures, yet they have low incarceration rates. The point is that there's no clear connection between your economic theory and jail sentencing. (Of course economic policies affect sentencing a lot).
  - oleganza 13y ago
    Do you agree that if your policy is more jail-oriented, than free money will only accelerate it? Also, do you agree that no matter how evil your government is, without money (taxes and/or inflation) their evilness does not mean anything - they won't be able to execute on it. Therefore, monetary policy accelerates whatever your government is up to. If it already had a lot of military power, expect that to grow with cheap money being added.
    - zanny 13y ago
      The prison industrial complex is the formulation of dozens of compounding effects. * The civil rights movement. * Concentrated federal power since the first signing of the constutition to protect rich property interests (as the selfish goal, the other one was to be strong enough to resist European insurrection). * Culture of fear, and a distrust of the "different". * A corrections system that isn't correctional, but retributional. So here are some reasons imprisonment rates are lower in other western nations: * Monocultures and single race societies (for the most part) mean more cultural congruency and less conflict. Hemp was outlawed because of Mexicians, and Crack was outlawed because of Blacks, and it let them throw vast swathes of them in jail. * The Finnish / Sweedish / etc corrections systems are correctional and rehabilitate inmates. US inmates get raped and get more access to drugs behind bars than outside them. They get into the prison culture and cycle. * More foreign corrections systems do not engage with for profit private prisons that make money by having higher incarceration rates. * Most foreign nations don't have a war on drugs (which is caused by the cultural animosity towards the "different"). * Other nations don't have as much blind nationalistic pride as many Americans do. I'm American - I constantly question and doubt my government. But many people in this country don't, especially those who were around to "win" the cold war.

Nixon dropped gold standard in 1971 and state power started expanding like crazy with printed money. Incarceration rate is just one of the effects of growing violent power.

MRSallee 13y ago

Interesting connection. I'd say these charts alone aren't enough to solidify that causation, but it sounds plausible and I'd love more info to back it up.

EliRivers 13y ago
It's the other way around. Nixon saw the increase in crime and this prompted him to drop the gold standard :p

oleganza 13y ago

Those who downvote are invited to provide a rational counter-argument. My facts are: 1. State promised to provide gold in exchange for U.S. dollars before November 1971. 2. After November 1971 it basically defaulted on that promise. But due to different factors (including military domination in many countries) people overseas kept trading in dollars, so dollar did not collapse. 3. When money is created it gets in someone's hands who now have some purchasing power they didn't have before (I'm not debating if it's "good" or "bad", it's just the fact). 4. Mainly, money is created via bonds issued by the government. So it's mainly government who get new purchasing power (the whole point of those bonds is to make some cash for government spending). 5. Government is different from any corporation in a sense that it has monopoly on violence. Only government agencies can put people in jail, use guns on massive scale at home and in the world. Again, I'm not saying if it's evil or "good for society", it's just the way it is. 6. Extra purchasing power for government means more economic power to do things that only government can do. E.g. pay policemen to chase drug dealers, computer hackers, bitcoin traders etc. 7. No wonder that incarceration rate grows. Where am I wrong?

nawitus 13y ago
You're wrong because there's plenty of other Western nations without the gold standard and higher state expenditures, yet they have low incarceration rates. The point is that there's no clear connection between your economic theory and jail sentencing. (Of course economic policies affect sentencing a lot).
- oleganza 13y ago
  Do you agree that if your policy is more jail-oriented, than free money will only accelerate it? Also, do you agree that no matter how evil your government is, without money (taxes and/or inflation) their evilness does not mean anything - they won't be able to execute on it. Therefore, monetary policy accelerates whatever your government is up to. If it already had a lot of military power, expect that to grow with cheap money being added.
  - zanny 13y ago
    The prison industrial complex is the formulation of dozens of compounding effects. * The civil rights movement. * Concentrated federal power since the first signing of the constutition to protect rich property interests (as the selfish goal, the other one was to be strong enough to resist European insurrection). * Culture of fear, and a distrust of the "different". * A corrections system that isn't correctional, but retributional. So here are some reasons imprisonment rates are lower in other western nations: * Monocultures and single race societies (for the most part) mean more cultural congruency and less conflict. Hemp was outlawed because of Mexicians, and Crack was outlawed because of Blacks, and it let them throw vast swathes of them in jail. * The Finnish / Sweedish / etc corrections systems are correctional and rehabilitate inmates. US inmates get raped and get more access to drugs behind bars than outside them. They get into the prison culture and cycle. * More foreign corrections systems do not engage with for profit private prisons that make money by having higher incarceration rates. * Most foreign nations don't have a war on drugs (which is caused by the cultural animosity towards the "different"). * Other nations don't have as much blind nationalistic pride as many Americans do. I'm American - I constantly question and doubt my government. But many people in this country don't, especially those who were around to "win" the cold war.