California bans private prisons • Hacker News Board

Re: California bans private prisons

#301

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #139

dragonwriter wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

End of legislative session (so a lot of bills that need to either be passed or die are getting final action), the first legislative session under a new governor that is slightly more progressive and much less a believer in relatively narrow focus on policy change at any one time than his predecessor, and a Democratic supermajority.

> and a Democratic supermajority. This is the key. With Gov Brown, he still had a modicum of temperance that they couldn't override. Now the legislature has carte blanche to do whatever they want, because regardless of the governor, they can override his veto.

> This is the key.

No, it's not.

> With Gov Brown, he still had a modicum of temperance

That's a difference between Brown and Newsome, yes.

> that they couldn't override.

There was a Democratic supermajority for a session under Brown, too, but (both now and then) the Democrats in the legislature aren't marching in lockstep on the rare issues where there is a majority in conflict with the Democratic governor, so while the supermajority is significant, it's more because (1) it means swinging a few votes isn't enough to deny a majority, and (2) some legislation requires a supermajority even without a veto, not because of he possibility for veto overrides of a same-party governor.

Re: California bans private prisons

#302

Post by gerbilly » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

kenhwang wrote: post #285

arcticbull wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm also in favor of socialized medicine for basically exactly these reasons. Shocker, I know. The system works! I grew up in socialized medicine, and you get sick, you go to the hospital, they treat you and you leave. There's no step 4. Why Americans continue to willingly subject themselves to these torturous systems is beyond me. It's all in y'alls control.

There's a choice component to health. Sure, you can lose the genetic or environmental lottery and just be unhealthy. Or you can choose to be unhealthy. Smoking, drinking, drugs, poor diet, lack of exercise. These are by far the biggest contributors to healthcare cost and they cost absolutely nothing to prevent. Many people just don't take responsibility for their health, and many others in the US don't like the idea…

> many others in the US don't like the idea of subsidizing other people's healthcare for preventable or self-inflicted health complications.

Who cares really?

It costs a bit more to care for people in dollars and cents, but it fosters a better society, which everyone benefits from.

Another case of people wanting to be freeriders.

Re: California bans private prisons

#303

Post by tim333 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

archie2 wrote: post #287

arcticbull wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm also in favor of socialized medicine for basically exactly these reasons. Shocker, I know. The system works! I grew up in socialized medicine, and you get sick, you go to the hospital, they treat you and you leave. There's no step 4. Why Americans continue to willingly subject themselves to these torturous systems is beyond me. It's all in y'alls control.

There is a step 4: pay exorbitant tax rates.

Ok you have to pay tax but the cost is usually far less than the US system.

Re: California bans private prisons

#304

Post by gerbilly » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

archie2 wrote: post #287

arcticbull wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm also in favor of socialized medicine for basically exactly these reasons. Shocker, I know. The system works! I grew up in socialized medicine, and you get sick, you go to the hospital, they treat you and you leave. There's no step 4. Why Americans continue to willingly subject themselves to these torturous systems is beyond me. It's all in y'alls control.

There is a step 4: pay exorbitant tax rates.

Yeah sure.

I once worked in the US and in Canada (Connecticut) in the same year.

My tax rate was lower in Canada for the same salary.

Re: California bans private prisons

#305

Post by scj » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

chroma wrote: post #263

scj wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With private prisons, lobbying is likely cheaper and more reliable than innovation. I assume you didn't intend this in a sinister way, but exercise caution when speaking of experimenting with prisoners. Even with good intentions, remember that these people have limited choices, and will probably lack the ability to withdraw consent (assuming it was given in the first place).

Isn't my proposal giving prisoners more choice? Right now they have no choice which prison they are sent to. Are you worried that some private prisons might engage in sleazy marketing, convince convicts to choose them, and then treat them like crap? That can easily be fixed by letting prisoners switch after a certain period of time. Heck, the law could be that anyone in a private prison can at any time choose to serv…

To both of your points of having more choice and lobbying: Market considerations matter.

Re: California bans private prisons

#306

Post by fnord77 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

chroma wrote: post #109

I think private prisons could work if: - Convicts could choose whether to be sent to a public or private prison. - Private prisons had financial incentives for post-incarceration behavior. Eg: If their prisoner recidivism rate after 3 years was 10% lower than the average public prison, they would get a 20% bonus. Those changes would create enough competition and align incentives such that we could see some real innov…

then we'd have all sorts of ad campaigns from private prison aimed at at-risk communities and people, promising all sorts of things while still lobbying law enforcement for arrest quotas.

Re: California bans private prisons

#307

Post by jjeaff » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

Joakal wrote: post #299

archie2 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a step 4: pay exorbitant tax rates.

Is there a story of poor people getting bankrupted by taxes anywhere in the world that has socialized healthcare?

No, but there are stories of brain drain and capital flight as the wealthy move themselves and other businesses elsewhere to avoid exhorbitant taxes.

Re: California bans private prisons

#308

Post by sudoscript » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

csallen wrote: post #267

ako wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dogmas are a disease. We have different economic & market tools. We should use the right tool for the problem. Some markets are best served with a free market system, others with a single payer system, others with a monopoly. There are studies (no reference) which indicate that every euro spent by government on education has a 10 times return on investment: better educated people, have better jobs, pay more taxes, cr…

> Dogmas are a disease… We should use the right tool for the problem. It's bizarre to me how rare this stance is. I understand disagreement over what exactly the "right tool" is, because these things are complex. But people who believe there is only one right tool for every job -- big government, small government, free markets, more regulation, whatever -- strike me as intellectually lazy.

It's rare because it's hard. It's much easier to just pretend you have a hammer and treat everything like a nail.

Re: California bans private prisons

#309

Post by jjeaff » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:45 PM UTC

c0nducktr wrote: post #295

archie2 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a step 4: pay exorbitant tax rates.

Incorrect. Americans spend twice as much for healthcare as other first world countries.

So he's incorrect because you think if we socialize medicine what we spend now will go down?

Re: California bans private prisons

#310

Post by archie2 » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 10:45 PM UTC

Joakal wrote: post #299

archie2 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a step 4: pay exorbitant tax rates.

Is there a story of poor people getting bankrupted by taxes anywhere in the world that has socialized healthcare?

Different systems have different problems. In Canada, some people die due to wait times for treatable conditions, or are forced to wait so long that their condition worsens to be beyond repair and they are permanently debilitated. Over 50k people leave Canada per year to get their healthcare in the United States instead.