
The Dickensian Conditions of Life in a For-Profit Lockup - andrewl
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/books/review/shane-bauer-american-prison.html
======
skh
I hope someday that a large majority of Americans come to the belief that the
love of money is not always the best motivator. Being profit driven does not
magically make something more efficient or better. It only makes people try to
maximize profit and usually at the expense of more important outcomes. The
notion that government can’t do anything right is a destructive one and it
needs to die quickly. Privatization in industries that ought not be profit
driven is a bad thing.

~~~
rayiner
Being profit driven does make things magically better. Countries like India
suffered for decades under central planning policies, and have been going
through a huge boom in prosperity since the 1990s thanks to reforms that took
power away from government planners and made room for the market.

At the same time, the government hasn’t proven to be any more “humane.” Most
US prisons are public. Are prisoners treated humanely in Illinois, where
private prisons have been banned since 1990? New York, another state that has
long banned private prisons, is famous for the abuses in its _pre-trial_
system, where non-convicts are sometimes held for years.

~~~
skh
You claim that being profit driven does make things magically better and
provide a single example. Do you really think I can't find a single example of
where being profit driven made things worse? You can't think of a single
example in all the history of the world in which being profit driven made
things worse? I guess you wrote in hyperbole but it seems like you actually
believe it and to disprove your belief I merely need to come up with a single
example. However, to prove your point you need much more than one example.
Indeed, you need to prove it in all examples. Good luck!

Prisoners are generally not treated humanely in the U.S. They tend to be
treated better in government run prisons than in for profit prisons. If your
point is that since prisoners are not humanely treated in government run
prisons then it is OK for them to be treated the way described in the article
then I think your position is morally repugnant.

~~~
rayiner
> They tend to be treated better in government run prisons than in for profit
> prisons.

The article presents no evidence of that (much less the actual relevant
comparison, which is whether government-run prisons in those same states would
be better).

> If your point is that since prisoners are not humanely treated in government
> run prisons then it is OK for them to be treated the way described in the
> article then I think your position is morally repugnant.

The question in this sub-thread isn't whether prisoners should be treated
humanely, but whether its the for-profit nature of prisons that makes then
inhumane. The fact that government-run prisons in the U.S. also are inhumane
is highly relevant to that question.

~~~
skh
_The article presents no evidence of that (much less the actual relevant
comparison, which is whether government-run prisons in those same states would
be better)._

My evidence is not limited to the NYT article. Your original comment indicated
that the profit motive always improves things. If true then for profit prisons
ought to be an improvement to government run prisons. My belief based on
working at prison and knowing some people who work at jails and having read a
bit about the topic is that for profit prisons are not better than government
prisons.

You further asked if prisoners are humanely treated in government run prisons
in Illinois.

 _Are prisoners treated humanely in Illinois, where private prisons have been
banned since 1990?_

Prisoners in the U.S. are not humanely treated by either government run
prisons or for profit prisons. Prisons are generally better run and more
humane when run by government. It appeared your argument was that since
government run prisons are still inhumane then for profit prisons are OK. I
think that logic is bad. But I gather from what you wrote above that to you
the question is whether or not the profit motive is what makes for profit
prisons bad. My answer is yes given that the voting public in general does not
want to fund humane prisons and that a for profit enterprise ought to run it
cheaper than what government run prisons cost.

To me the question is one of betterment. Which system is better? Both are bad
but one is worse than the other. That is what is germane to me. Pointing out
government run prisons are bad is not relevant to the discussion if despite
them being bad they are better than for profit prisons.

------
tyingq
A woman gave birth in a CCA run prison because the guards didn't believe she
was in labor. The baby died. The prison was eventually shut down.

[https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/07/10/premature-baby-born-
at-d...](https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/07/10/premature-baby-born-at-dawson-
jail-without-medically-trained-personnel/)

------
rectang
No amount of cruelty will slake the barbaric craving of many Americans to see
"criminals" harmed. When privately run prisons shirk the constraints that
public institutions operate under, they are responding to a public demand for
savagery.

~~~
throwaway8879
Violence through revenge is deep within our core, and to deny it is to deny
our humanity. Morality is only useful in times of civilized comfort.

Wanting to see criminals suffer horribly is exactly as wrong, or exactly as
right, as wanting to see them locked up for years and eventually possibly
rehabilitate and rejoin greater society.

In other words, it really doesn't matter.

~~~
rectang
> _Violence through revenge is deep within our core, and to deny it is to deny
> our humanity._

I agree. Dehumanizing the "other" is profoundly human.

But rising above bloodthirst through rationality and empathy, and crafting
institutions (such as laws) which better us all, together... is also
profoundly human.

> _In other words, it really doesn 't matter._

The universe may be indifferent, but human actions are meaningful to other
humans.

------
gaius
Assuming he meant stuff like this, Kanye Kardashian was absolutely right about
the 13th Amendment, which is what permits involuntary servitude as punishment
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Penal_labor_exemption)

As an aside, I will be happily posting away here then suddenly I will get a
message "you're posting too fast, please slow down". I immediately know that
one of my comments has been downvoted, because that's what triggers that.

~~~
fjsolwmv
Kanye's request was to make slavery more legal, not less legal.

The 13th didn't make prison slavery legal, it made non-prison slavery illegal.

~~~
gaius
_Kanye 's request was to make slavery more legal, not less legal._

That interpretation makes no sense, why would he want that?

~~~
s73v3r_
Most of what Kanye says makes no sense.

