401–410 of 646 posts
Great news! Let's work on abolishing public prisons next.
So no prisons at all? So murders should be free, for example?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non violent drug offenses is the example you’re looking for.
All drug offenses are violent. Illegal drugs channel money into large organized crime syndicates that kill, torture, terrorize and maim people. Just because those people are brown, poor, and not Americans doesn't mean we should care less. If you ask me, we need substantially more drug enforcement. There are severe inequalities in how we police for drugs that often result in only the poor and marginalized locked up. W…
I watched a really great lecture online that was about how everything that rich countries criminalize (primarily prostitution and drugs) ends up becoming powerful industries in poorer countries because the demand from rich countries persists and creates a price floor higher than normal economically productive work in those poor countries. If rich people want something and it's banned in their country, it becomes an extremely profitable endeavor in poorer nations to meet this demand. Because profit margins are greater than normal economic activity, this enables criminal to gain political power within those countries. The speaker had a name for this idea which I can't remember, something like "hedonic exportation" - if anyone knows what I'm talking about I've been looking for this lecture for a few years.
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…
Ah I see you've never implemented an incentive program before. EVERY SINGLE SYSTEM GETS GAMED. NO MATTER WHAT YOU MEASURE. Every metric you could possible think of can be manipulated in ways you can't imagine. But give private companies the incentive and someone in them will figure it out. IMO the only way to run things like prisons is to hire people that strongly care about the public good to run them. Hire people w…
In contrast, you are putting forth a fully general counterargument to any incentive structure. But clearly financial incentives work in many cases. It's what sports teams use for their athletes and coaches. It's what businesses use for their leadership teams. When we need the best people possible to perform at their best, we tend to pay them money and pay them more money if they meet certain goals.
> IMO the only way to run things like prisons is to hire people that strongly care about the public good to run them. Hire people who want to run a good organization that accomplishes the organization's goals. Which for prisons should be rehabilitation and safety.
Yes, ideally we'd have every job staffed people who are wise, kind, competent, and hard working. But we don't have nearly enough of such people and we judge traits inaccurately. So instead we have to make do with less effective but more practical methods. Financial incentives are one of those options.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that's how a free market is supposed to work but no one's ever seen a free market in the wild.
Most agriculture markets are extremely competitive such that they are basically perfect competition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why does the healthcare discussion always regress to capitalism vs socialism? everyone cites canada as the ideal model of social healthcare but forget to mention the long wait times and the fact that their population is only a fraction of the US. i think our system could use some tweaks but throwing it out altogether for a socialist program is not it.
> the fact that their population is only a fraction of the US I don't understand why that matters. But if it does, couldn't the US implement social healthcare at the state level? Canada and California have roughly equal populations, for instance.
IMO, the federal government has been getting too large just like how they dangle interstate highway funds from states for enforcing the stupid 21 year old drinking age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In Canada, some people die due to wait times for treatable conditions Do you think this doesn't happen in the US? If you're about to say "but in the US we can pay for healthcare", well that's true everywhere. Anyone with enough money can pay for healthcare.
In Canada, conditions covered by the socialized plans are illegal to be treated by private practice. More than 50k people leave Canada every year to get treatment in the US to either avoid wait times or the government refuses to pay for the procedures.
Yes, like I said, anybody who can afford it can travel to get healthcare elsewhere.
Travelling from US to UK and paying 150% of the English tariff price for health care turns out to often be cheaper than getting care in the US, even if you include the travel costs.
I'm so happy about this. Private prisons are the scum of the earth. They're totally antithetical to a free society that values human life. They often lobby for minimum occupancy levels in law (effectively requiring by law a certain percentage of citizens to be marked as criminals). Any profit they skim off the top is money that should be spent rehabilitating criminals and making them functional members of society. Ne…
I'm not sure that any actually do that. The ones I've seen turned out to be misunderstandings of the contract. The contracts were of the form that the private prison would be paid a base amount of $B to house up to C prisoners, plus an additional amount of $V per prisoner for each prisoner over C. C is typically something like 90 or 95% of the maximum capacity of the prison.
The contract actually makes more profit for the private prison if it has fewer prisoners, with the total profit going down for each additional prisoner up to C. Whether profit goes up or down for additional prisoners beyond that depends on whether $V is less than or greater than $B/C. If it is greater, than profit will go up as the last 5 or 10% of the capacity is used, but it will still be lower than the profit when the prison was at around 80 to 85%.
From the state's point of view the total cost is $B to house anywhere from 0 to C prisoners, and $B + (n-C) $V if the number of prisoners, n, is > C. From the state's point of view, $B is essentially a sunk cost.
This does provide some incentive to politicians to keep the private prisons occupied up to at least C prisoners, because if they have n Also, note that this kind of incentive goes the same way with public prisons. A public prison also has a bunch of fixes costs, and so if you look at cost per prisoner you are going to see a lower cost per prisoner with higher occupancy because of those fixed costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Capitalism is great for some things, and awful for others. Capitalism works best when there's no power differential between customers and service providers because the goal is to maximize profit. If my choice is to pay for cancer treatment or die, you can (and do) charge me literally whatever you want in a capitalist system. If I get no choice in which prison I go to, well, I get bilked. Basically anywhere you have n…
> If my choice is to pay for cancer treatment or die In a socialized medicine system, someone else is making this choice for you. Medical costs (drugs, doctors' education and time, research costs, equipment) are unbounded, while resources are not (no matter what kind of insurance you have), so tradeoffs have to be made. ("What? My daughter is dying from an extremely rare disease and you're not having 1000 PhD researc…