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

At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 457 posts

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#311

Post by mikeash »

sethammons wrote: post #189
digianarchist wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7 years for something that would have probably gotten him 6-12 months in Europe/Canada. When are the Americans going to realise you can't punitively punish someone and not reap of profound negative consequences (re-offending, home-breaking etc.).

Most crime is likely related to being poor, but this case shows someone who chronically chooses crime, even when they had a job. How do you "fix" that? There are people who will work hard to avoid being good. There are people who enjoy being bad, who enjoy hurting others, who enjoy screwing over others. How do you fix that? I'd contend that the best thing to do is remove those people from society. The American system…

I don’t know how you fix someone who chooses crime, but giving them free tuition for several years at crime university is probably not the way.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#312

Post by brewdad »

conanbatt wrote: post #260
kybernetikos wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do find it interesting that probably many of these people would not commit crime if they were paid $50k per year to not commit crime (which would save money!). Unfortunately you could never do this as an actual policy because of the incentives, it's just interesting that they end up forcing us to spend so much money so unproductively. I absolutely believe that there is room for something innovative to be done here,…

Yes, you cant pre-pay specific people not to commit a crime. I do think a UBI (basic income) would reduce crime enormously, if it were confiscated when they are in prison. It would be a powerful economic incentive.

I have no doubt it would be used to "pay" for ones incarceration. Thus adding more fuel to the dumpster fire that is the for-profit prison system in the US.

Done properly, it could provide a strong incentive not to commit crimes. I have little faith that it would ever be done properly.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#313

Post by thinkloop »

ghomrassen wrote: post #300
lukeschlather wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of the system (including punishing probation) is designed to give racists a lot of discretion to oppress ethnic groups they dislike. Intention of rank-and-file may be to rehabilitate, but that doesn't matter if the intention of the lawmakers and higher-ups is to keep certain ethnic groups in jail (while maintaining a pretense of impartiality.)

What racists?

Nixon, the drug war, and lots of little laws that aim to harass and incarcerate blacks were enacted, and still exist, purely out of racism. There are audio recordings that prove the intention. Many more recent policies do the same as well, but less overtly.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#314

Post by lern_too_spel »

cheesymuffin wrote: post #185
bluedino wrote: post #166

I have a cousin 2 years younger than me who's getting out of prison today . He just finished a 2 year stint for violating probation. When you get caught drunk driving with a gun in the car, then tend to send you back behind bars. In reality, he had two other offenses in the time before that, which should have been enough. His first sentence was 7 years for theft. He was part of a group of ~ 20 year olds that were bre…

Article: prisons cost a lot, and this is why Your comment: I really don't like my cousin

GP's actual comment: his cousin costs the state even more when he's out of prison.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#315

Post by massivecali »

lukeschlather wrote: post #291
rtpg wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the intention to rehabilitate in the US isn’t sincere? Frontline did a report on people on parole. It’s a punishing system, even when you’re out of the systems you’re usually one drink away from being thrown back in It’s a very good example of something where all the individual players are trying, but so much of how the system works makes results be harsh and cruel

Much of the system (including punishing probation) is designed to give racists a lot of discretion to oppress ethnic groups they dislike. Intention of rank-and-file may be to rehabilitate, but that doesn't matter if the intention of the lawmakers and higher-ups is to keep certain ethnic groups in jail (while maintaining a pretense of impartiality.)

Horseshit. Cite some facts.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#316

Post by vkhorikov »

anilakar wrote: post #112
vkhorikov wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that you can point to cases where free market does work.

Whoosh. Luckily I have karma to burn. If there is a real free market where consumers have a real choice, it can be argued that the system works, even if it's a race to the bottom. Even you indirectly admitted that most markets aren't free. There are numerous cases where "socialism" (as laissez-faire Americans like to define it) achieves its goals better and cheaper, like healthcare and pretty much all natural monopol…

>Look at the results of the privatization of European national railways.

I don't know enough about (Western) European railways but I have data about American and Russian railways. Russian railways are controlled by a single government entity and they are a corrupted disaster. Americans tried to nationalize their railways in 1800s and all it led to was higher costs and worse quality.

My observation is that everywhere where markets are let free people get better results. It's true that most markets aren't free but it's not because of the markets themselves but rather because of the government staying on the way.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#317

Post by kerbalspacepro »

maxehmookau wrote: post #25
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #7

Prop 47 reduced incarceration for small crimes. There are less prisoners than earlier. The cost comes from unfunded pension liabilities for prison guards. Most of whom retire by 50-55. And can draw their last salary as pension until they die. Because. Unions. This is for the state of CA. Don’t know about other states.

Retirement at 55 and drawing a full salary until death is more than fair for the level of stress being a prison guard involves. It's dangerous work. Thank goodness for unions!

Why does the pension have to exist? Why don't they just get a 401k and get off the books.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#318

Post by trevyn »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #204
dragonwriter wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By "an activist group" I mean people who confuse work with slavery. You mean, people who confuse forced work with slavery.

I think that depends on definition of "forced". If I stop working, I'll get kicked out of my house and will probably die of hunger. Does it mean I am forced to work?

>will probably die of hunger

It looks like you’re in the US. You’d have to try quite hard to die of malnutrition here.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#319

Post by DannyB2 »

Reading the article, a takeaway message seems to be that overcrowing in prisons made the per inmate cost lower.

Example: there were four prisoners to each guard. Now there are two.

That just increased the per inmate cost.

Harvard probably has fewer guards per inmate.

Maybe more prison automation could help? But I wouldn't know.

Re: At $75K, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

#320

Post by joyeuse6701 »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #198
dalbasal wrote: post #126

I think it's worth thinking about the history of incarceration, for context. Until fairly recently, prison wasn't really the way most punishments worked. They did hangings, beatings, shaming, banishment... Imprisoning people long term is expensive, and kings probably couldn't have afforded anything like a modern scale prison system. The closest thing was more slavery than imprisonment, and economically self-sufficien…

In Britain under the Bloody Code, you could (and would) be hanged, or deported for the most trivial offences. The prevailing view was very much of the pour encourager les autres mould. Steal items worth 12 pence? Hanged. Lesser amount? Cut a hand off. If lucky, commuted and deported for indentured servitude in the colonies. Treason? Hanged, drawn and quartered. As we remember from history classes, stealing, murder an…

Punishment (discipline) works as long as their is a chance to reform. A child or anyone for that matter, will think twice before putting his hand to the flame, but only if they have the option not to. Society in the U.S. does not offer many options for the ex-criminal to live an honest life, which I suppose, is where your idea of rehabilitation fits. Let's not pretend that nature, the ultimate punisher, fails to teach. Sticks and carrots are both effective ways of driving a horse.
Post reply on HN