http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/US_...
But that's not all; prison labor is now used as cheap labor to compete with foreign countries, instituting a new age of under-the-radar slavery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwT6CisM0mU
The more you look at this cyclic process, the more disturbing it becomes.
I think the real issue is that the US has some socio-economic issues that we've as yet let unresolved: drugs (as mentioned), policing strategy, judicial/legislative strategy, welfare, education, etc. I don't think institutionalization is a major contributor.
Oh, don't worry, those countries are fighting back, too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8677486.stm
Free the market, free the people, eh?
A quick google search finds a source claiming that about 10-20% of the prison population (a few hundred thousand) are seriously mentally ill:
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/forensic-psych/content/artic...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1220177...
I think the history of our neglect as a society of the mentally ill has little to tell us about crime and a lot to tell us about the homeless underclass in America.
To digress: I just visited DC again a couple weeks ago. You go in a public bathroom right outside the Washington Monument and there are big signs next to the sinks that say "NO BATHING". I felt ashamed.
This is BS IMHO. Would you rather see prisoners set free or do nothing all day?
Do you really think that a person will come out of a 6 year prison sentence (without working a day) and then start working and be a productive member of society?
In the old days in my country there was a sentence called "hard labour" - which meant that criminals got a shorter sentence and learned valuable life skills (if they were co-operative) or learned how to make big rocks smaller (if they were uncooperative).
Seeing as there was this article which said that keeping busy makes us happy, the least the downvoters can do is state as to why prisoners should not be made to work?
If you are going to compare prison with slavery, how about starting with the one thing they have in common, they both are denied their right to liberty!
Sorry, I'm not clear what you're ashamed of? That there are people that would want to wash in the sinks or that they are not allowed to?
I don't think it would be a fair description of all homeless people to say they belong to an underclass.
Your comment is being downvoted because if this statement is true (and you reckon it's BS), then it provides a strong incentive to lock more people up, and lock them up for longer - i.e. political and economic motives to lock people up, rather than reasons tied to justice. Reminds me of 'The Shawshank Redemption':
"Warden Norton eventually creates a scheme to use prison labor for public works, undercutting the cost of skilled labor and receiving kickbacks for it. Norton has Andy launder the money under a false identity, in exchange for allowing Andy to keep his private cell and to continue maintaining the library. Brooks, freed on parole, is unable to adjust to the outside world, and hangs himself; Andy dedicates the expanded library to him. In 1965, Tommy Williams (Gil Bellows) is incarcerated on robbery charges. He is brought into Andy and Red's circle of friends, and Andy assists him in getting his GED. Upon learning of the crime of which Andy was convicted, Tommy reveals that one of his old prison-mates, Elmo Blatch (Bill Bolender) had claimed to have committed a nearly identical murder. Norton, fearing what Andy might do if released, puts him into solitary confinement and has Tommy killed by Hadley, claiming he was an escapee."
In other words, the warden killed a prisoner who had information that would have freed the main character. The warden had the prisoner with that information killed, as he wanted the main character around as he was a former banker who was helping him to commit bank fraud.
That makes sense if you look at one as related directly to the other or vice versa (aka mostly not), but if you look at both as symptoms of a bigger issue then it becomes readily apparent that they are highly related: Americans don't want to deal with 'undesirables'. Lock em up or make them homeless, whatever, just as long as we don't have to deal with them.
It doesn't bother you to be a citizen of a country that has allowed so many people to lose their homes that bathing in a public restroom is now a nuisance frequent enough to warrant official signage?
I agree they should be paid a fair wage. They should be given a bill for their housing and their debt to society and their victims which they can pay off with their wage. The vast majority of prisoners owe society (and their victims) more than they could ever hope to earn in a lifetime.
The whole idea of being a prisoner is to take away rights of someone who have done harm to others. This is done by taking away his freedom (i.e. by locking him up in a prison cell), taking away his right to vote (in many countries) and removing his right to freedom of association.
Locking a prisoner up is not the same as kidnapping (since you make false equivalences). Since a prisoner’s time is already wasted (by locking up in a cell), that time could just as well be used for something productive.
---
You know what is slavery though? Forcing the taxpayer to pay for the housing and maintenance of a criminal. The taxpayer doesn’t have any say in the matter and doesn’t have a choice. Each person in jail had a choice.
How would taxpayers foot the bill if the prisoner's wage is used to finance his stay? At worst, it would lessen the cost of his stay.
> You're turning this into a prisoner
You turned it into a prisoner's rights issue by claiming that forcing a criminal to do some actual work (like every taxpayer does) amounts to slavery. Your opposition to letting criminals work is therefore due to moral and not practical considerations.
I have never claimed that forcing prisoners to work is slavery. What I did say is that forcing prisoners to work without fairly compensating them is slavery. I also do not oppose letting criminals work; I don't even know where you pulled the "moral and not practical considerations" from.
Are you reading my posts before you respond to them? Are you confusing my posts with somebody else's? What's going on here?
