Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 391 posts

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#21

Post by mikeash »

troupe wrote: post #6
prolikewh0a wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically not illegal under the 13th amendment. > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Not saying I agree with that part of the 13th amendment, I abhor it personally.

> It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Do you think it is reasonable for people in prison to work to offset some of the cost of their room and board or do you think it should all be paid for by taxpayers? (I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison, but less of a problem with giving people something to do that helps pay for their food.)

I think reasonable for them to work, as long as it’s voluntary and subject to the same protections afforded to any other worker, such as minimum wage.

The problem isn’t prison work, it’s prison slavery.

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#22

Post by craftyguy »

lightbyte wrote: post #12
jbob2000 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation. The prison system should be structured around reducing costs by getting people out of the system, not reducing costs by getting those in the system to do work.

>Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation That would be nice, but our current justice system is not even remotely close to being anything like this. That will take generations of change. You're trying to say we should be at step Z when we haven't even gotten to A yet.

Well, for one, we can rename the "Department of Corrections" to reflect what it really is since 'corrections' is not part of their charter. Step A should be "stop lying to ourselves and face the truth".

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#23

Post by kiliantics »

lightbyte wrote: post #12
jbob2000 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation. The prison system should be structured around reducing costs by getting people out of the system, not reducing costs by getting those in the system to do work.

>Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation That would be nice, but our current justice system is not even remotely close to being anything like this. That will take generations of change. You're trying to say we should be at step Z when we haven't even gotten to A yet.

That kind of argument is used to justify a lack of action towards progress though. Similar arguments were made by many about slavery at the time:

"It would be nice to abolish slavery but our current economic system isn't even remotely close to being anything like this. It would take generations of change..."

So we should prefer generations more people be subjected to these horrors than take a risk and make an effort to do better?

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#24

Post by bbarn »

AcerbicZero wrote: post #5
prolikewh0a wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically not illegal under the 13th amendment. > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Not saying I agree with that part of the 13th amendment, I abhor it personally.

The only time I heard anyone being sentenced to "hard labor" was in the military, so it seems like if you're given incarceration at your sentencing then that shouldn't automatically mean you're being sentenced to work while you're there? The punishment is incarceration, not labor, right? I guess this is an area where I'm exceptionally under-educated, so if you've got any good suggestions for reading on the topic I'd…

It may not be "hard labor" but isn't this what getting sentenced to community service is, in effect? Involuntary labor as a punishment for a crime.

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#25

Post by whatshisface »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #7
troupe wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Do you think it is reasonable for people in prison to work to offset some of the cost of their room and board or do you think it should all be paid for by taxpayers? (I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison, but less of a problem with giving people something to do that helps pay for their food.)

I do not believe anyone should be compelled to work against their will. If we want to lock them up, we pay for it.

If a non-incarcerated person finds it necessary to work in order to pay for their food and housing, are they being forced to work against their will?

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#26

Post by lightbyte »

kiliantics wrote: post #23
lightbyte wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation That would be nice, but our current justice system is not even remotely close to being anything like this. That will take generations of change. You're trying to say we should be at step Z when we haven't even gotten to A yet.

That kind of argument is used to justify a lack of action towards progress though. Similar arguments were made by many about slavery at the time: "It would be nice to abolish slavery but our current economic system isn't even remotely close to being anything like this. It would take generations of change..." So we should prefer generations more people be subjected to these horrors than take a risk and make an effort…

You misunderstand. I'm not saying you can't try and change things, that's exactly what I am saying. You can't demand everything has to perfect right now, you need to actually start the change somewhere.

>"It would be nice to abolish slavery but our current economic system isn't even remotely close to being anything like this. It would take generations of change..."

This is more like you saying we need to have equal rights for everyone in 1800 before you start working on abolishing slavery in the first place.

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#27

Post by aggronn »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #10

A relevant snippet: “California inmates were sent off to fight what has become the largest wildfire in the state’s history for just $1 an hour. These firefighters, who volunteered for a vocational training program offered by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, are often disqualified from the work after release because a required credential is denied to anyone with a criminal record. Hundreds…

While we're talking about slavery, it might be important to mention that the constitution specifically allows slavery in this context:

> "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." - 13th amendment

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#28

Post by aseipp »

troupe wrote: post #6
prolikewh0a wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically not illegal under the 13th amendment. > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Not saying I agree with that part of the 13th amendment, I abhor it personally.

> It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Do you think it is reasonable for people in prison to work to offset some of the cost of their room and board or do you think it should all be paid for by taxpayers? (I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison, but less of a problem with giving people something to do that helps pay for their food.)

> I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison

You're going to be in for a real surprise when you learn why they get paid a $1/hr to do life-threatening work (that they're banned from afterwords), and where the rest of the money goes. Do you think corrections departments who sell these services charge $1/hr? Do you think them buying an overpriced toothbrush at over $20 and being price gouged by a prison actually saves the ever-deified "taxpayers" any money? Or that prisons don't pocket that and want more of it?

Of course, historically, some slaves got paid by their masters, too. Unsurprisingly, it was a very popular argument (by slave owners and apologists) against their freedom (from being enslaved) because at least they got something (besides being a slave) instead of nothing (from the slave owners who got everything) and hey -- we're all making a buck, so that's their fair share.

It's almost like.... slavery -- of all forms -- is really economically effective and has really, really good margins, and can make lots of money. Super weird. Can't imagine why people got rid of it.

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#29

Post by throwawayjava »

jbob2000 wrote: post #8
troupe wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Do you think it is reasonable for people in prison to work to offset some of the cost of their room and board or do you think it should all be paid for by taxpayers? (I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison, but less of a problem with giving people something to do that helps pay for their food.)

Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation. The prison system should be structured around reducing costs by getting people out of the system, not reducing costs by getting those in the system to do work.

> Nobody should be in prison longer than their rehabilitation takes and the focus of their stay should 100% be rehabilitation.

1. "Rehabilitation" -- the actual implementation, not the abstract idea -- is insidious. How can anyone ever know for sure whether someone is truly rehabilitated? Especially given that prisons don't typically attract that best and brightest of the medical profession.

If you've ever talked to someone who spent time in prison, you'll realize that "rehabilitation" in US prisons mostly means "parrot what they tell you to say and don't be stupid enough to seriously engage. Just. Repeat. Your. Lines."

E.g., claiming you have no spiritual belief can result in denied parole [1]. Too often, "rehabilitation" is just short-hand for "brainwashing". In those cases, bodily punishment without the pretense of "rehabilitation" is actually a far kinder and just system.

Far from truly fixing the underlying problem, modern rehabilitation often amounts to an exercise in honing one's inner psychopath: lie without remorse or guilt, and lie well enough that you don't get caught, or be denied parole on the basis of your lack of religious faith.

2. What do we do with people who cannot be rehabilitated, but whose crimes do not justify a lifetime prison sentence?

3. what do we do about criminals who are very unlikely to re-offend but are not rehabilitated? I.e., what is the purpose of rehabilitation? A common answer is "limiting future damage to society". But this justification fails to explain why we should jail a bank robber who managed to hide $1 billion on a remote island and who we honestly believe will be happy living off of that $1 billion on some remote island in peace for the rest of his life.

4. What about people who commit heinous crimes but are easy to rehabilitate (e.g., due to a treatable mental illness)? How do we deal with vindictive families of victims who might want to take justice into their own hands?

Prison sentences serve many purposes: rehabilitation, protection of society, punishment, and a disincentive for criminal activity.

Rehabilitation is certainly the most in-line with enlightenment values (but can become draconian in the case where the crime is relatively small but rehabilitation proves impossible, or in the case where rehabilitation means "learn how to lie about your inner self").

And I will certainly agree that the US prison system does not come even remotely close to striking a good balance between these multiple purposes. But the other roles are also important, and "rehabilitation" isn't always all it's cracked up to be.

[1] http://www.kcur.org/post/court-says-atheist-inmate-s-religio...

Re: National prison strike launches over underpaid labor and prison conditions

#30

Post by bilbo0s »

troupe wrote: post #6
prolikewh0a wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically not illegal under the 13th amendment. > Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Not saying I agree with that part of the 13th amendment, I abhor it personally.

> It's immoral and unethical, but it's legal. Do you think it is reasonable for people in prison to work to offset some of the cost of their room and board or do you think it should all be paid for by taxpayers? (I have a problem with creating an economic incentive to keep people in prison, but less of a problem with giving people something to do that helps pay for their food.)

I know this will sound pretty simplistic, but a prisoner is either a threat to society or they are not.

If they are a threat to society, why are they given access to computers, the internet and programming tools? (The security implications should be obvious there.) Even better, why are they let outside the prison at all?

If they are not a threat to society, why am I paying any amount of tax money to keep them in prison? We should pay zero dollars for any offender who is so little of a threat that we can let him/her outside of the prison. (Or, indeed, give him/her hacking tools.)

Any prisoner qualifying for these work release programs, should probably be released. And the money paid incarcerating them can be saved, or at least put to better uses.

Post reply on HN