ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Playing devils advocate here, because I dont know a ton about private investments in the prison system, but how should they function? If it's not private I assume on the backs of tax payers?

Seems like a rough sell to the public if so.

...who do you think is paying the private prison?

I assume they get funding awards and contracts and have investors?

It's the government that gives contract to private firms. The money come from the taxpayers either way.

The difference is that private run on a "for profit" system, which encourage them to cut costs everywhere. The result is overcrowding, hygiene issues, food that you wouldn't give to your dog and plenty of other issues. Some of these places don't even have proper miscellaneous personnel (laundry, cook, social workers, re-integration workers, etc) because it's added cost and it's not like the US is somehow having issues sending more people to jail.

Go watch the report, you'll understand.

State owned prisons at least means that you'll have a standard that will be respected and that the money spent is gonna be used for the prisoners and the staff of the prison.

"

faerwin wrote:

It's the government that gives contract to private firms. The money come from the taxpayers either way.

The difference is that private run on a "for profit" system, which encourage them to cut costs everywhere. The result is overcrowding, hygiene issues, food that you wouldn't give to your dog and plenty of other issues. Some of these places don't even have proper miscellaneous personnel (laundry, cook, social workers, re-integration workers, etc) because it's added cost and it's not like the US is somehow having issues sending more people to jail.

Go watch the report, you'll understand.

State owned prisons at least means that you'll have a standard that will be respected and that the money spent is gonna be used for the prisoners and the staff of the prison.

So the other option would be to remove private govt contracts, at assumingly higher cost to taxpayers, to make sure our national criminals have better care?

I dont know how I feel about paying potential higher taxes to make sure the criminals in my state have good care. I mean I dont want them suffering, but again, they are convicted criminals.

"

State owned prisons at least means that you'll have a standard that will be respected and that the money spent is gonna be used for the prisoners and the staff of the prison.

Yeah, this isn't true. Many state owned prisons have deplorable conditions.

Also, its arguable competition would actually improve the standards of prisoners, since incompetence would get a person in charge fired from their position.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

So the other option would be to remove private govt contracts, at assumingly higher cost to taxpayers, to make sure our national criminals have better care?

I dont know how I feel about paying potential higher taxes to make sure the criminals in my state have good care. I mean I dont want them suffering, but again, they are convicted criminals.

Well, as far as I know, a private prison system would be treated it like any business competition.

Where you have private firms build their own prisons. The government regulating them with US laws. So they follow basic prisoner care, hygiene, and humanitarian rights.

And every few years renew the contract, rewarding the prisons with the best records and cost saving measures, with more money. While still maintaining a standard of living for prisoners.

The bad prisons that hurt their prisoners, no proper cleaning staff, and bad food get eliminated. And those that follow government regulations while maintaining a high standard of care, get promoted.

The only questionable thing would be if the US laws allowed prison systems to hire prisoners to do cheap manual or tech related labor to cover some of the overhead cost.

And on that, I'd probably be for it as long as the conditions are voluntary, as prisoners would gain some life skills while serving their term, that they can apply outside of prison. And are technically paying back society with the wages they would have earned.

Maybe, they can even shave off some years off their sentence for doing x years of work. Who knows.

The real concern of for-profit prisons is illegal kickback schemes, cash-for-kids kinda stuff.

Unfortunately, both private and public prisons suffer from this effect of human greed. At least in a private system monopolies take time to form instead of being monopolies from day one.

Anyone have good (comparative) stats between public and private prisons as it pertains to recidivism, cleanliness, general order within the prison, that kind of stuff? I have a gut negative reaction to "for-profit prisons" just because of the implication, but I would need stats to quantify if they're worse or how much worse than the alternative.

And yes, it's public tax money either way.

"

pneuma wrote:

The real concern of for-profit prisons is illegal kickback schemes, cash-for-kids kinda stuff.

Unfortunately, both private and public prisons suffer from this effect of human greed. At least in a private system monopolies take time to form instead of being monopolies from day one.

Anyone have good (comparative) stats between public and private prisons as it pertains to recidivism, cleanliness, general order within the prison, that kind of stuff? I have a gut negative reaction to "for-profit prisons" just because of the implication, but I would need stats to quantify if they're worse or how much worse than the alternative.

And yes, it's public tax money either way.

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/117712/Gregson.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

It's a bit long, but you can take a look at this, which quotes several studies of private and public prisons systems.

Most of the studies show that there are no noticeable difference in the amount of care between public and private prisons.

With some studies claiming private prisons are much better.

I've been in two prisons. I described CoreCivic; I've also been in the county-run detention center. Small sample size at one each, but whatever. I thought they would be both about the same from a detainee perspective. The food in county was significantly better (something I would have never believed in county, as I went there first, and it was shit), but still served by detainees; I never found out how much, or if, they were paid. County also obviously had tighter security, but was decades overdue for a paint job. Nobody ever asked me to do shit, but I was only in there for traffic tickets — lots of traffic tickets. Just a few days, and as good as paid off.

It's worth noting that the sole exception in the 13th Amendment, which otherwise makes slavery unconstitutional in the US, is "as punishment for a crime." That's what Ye was talking about months ago, when he said slavery is still legal in America. I'm not sure I agree with Ye that the 13th should be abolished; if you are guilty by law, seems to me you can help with the chores. But the point is that, under the 13th, it might be that this compulsory labor isn't even illegal.

What I'm worried about is: maybe someone who hadn't been convicted of a crime had been coerced into unpaid labor, in violation of the 13th. I can't really know whether that happened, but that RoF video really got my noggin joggin'. Why would someone found guilty of illegal crossing be held, instead of promptly deported? Was CoreCivic coercing people who hadn't yet had their day in court, people who should be presumed innocent until proven guilty, into unpaid labor, or were they doing that with aliens who had already been found guilty and were in a brief holding pending deportation? How long is such a holding pending deportation on average, and how long should it be? Is ICE or CoreCivic holding pending deportees longer than they need to, to exploit them as free labor? If so, is that illegal somehow, or merely fucked-up repugnant shit?

I really don't know the answers to those questions. Almost makes me want to wander over to Horizon with a camera, do a little James O'Keefery of my own. (CoreCivic wouldn't count as federal property, right? Because there are laws about misrepresenting your identity while on federal property. Could just be "homeless" again.) Also makes me wonder why RoF couldn't put some boots on the ground, do a little more digging.

But I definitely think that these problems could easily happen in both privately ran and government ran prisons. As Ye points out, every prison has a potential to exploit prisoners as laborers.

"

pneuma wrote:

Everyone remember that Mueller was going to testify today? What happened?

He probably realized that Republicans will get to ask questions too and shat himself.

"

Turtledove wrote:

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

Now signed by over 900 former federal prosecutors.

Someone asked about names of the signatories being available. The answer is, of course, reference the link above.

I was the one asking.

Thank you.

When I checked before, there were no names attached. Now there are, and I wouldn't have checked again without your link.

Having verifiable names does lend it more credence. With names, journalists (if there are any real ones left) can question whether they stand by their signature, and why they felt it necessary to make such a statement. It could still be hyperpartisanship, but reporters (not impeachers) can at least question the former prosecutors that signed, or randomly poll others.