At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt • Hacker News Board

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#351

Post by candiodari » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 9:58 AM UTC

shakezula wrote: post #100

yeeyeeyee wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Supporters say the collections are a legitimate way for states to recoup millions of taxpayer dollars spent on prisons and jails. Wait there are supporters of this? You're telling me if I asked 100 people on the street, there'd be someone that said "oh yeah this is a pretty fair and reasonable law to charge the inmates 5-star hotel prices"??

This is a problem of Stated preference vs. Revealed preference. You ask them what they think and they'd tell you "that's awful, I can't believe that, that's so unfair" but you put them up on the ballot at the midterms and get them to repeal it and all of a sudden it's about being "tough on crime" and "keeping our streets clean".

Not really, you are assuming the people vote on a lot of decisions, which is not true. This is a problem related to permanence of executive power. The "cardinal Richelieu" problem (You know that while the government changes, he is above the government and stays. Most of the executive does not change at all when power changes hands at the legislative level).

Ever notice that executive power is the same everywhere? They think the laws are unfair to them, because they have to implement totally unrealistic laws, and get blamed harshly for "small" problems (you know, "harshly" except it doesn't carry any consequences for them, except, at best loss of face).

They respond by not following laws, refusing even to implement judicial directives and the like. Their own (sometimes personal) interest, for them, trumps laws and the directives of judges. They have largely made sure their names are never revealed to the people they serve, as they no longer have the support of the people, and they feel they cannot be replaced.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#352

Post by superchroma » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 11:20 AM UTC

tluyben2 wrote: post #222

etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking more about Japan, Singapore, China, Taiwan.

Outside Japan (I haven’t been there often enough to know), the others it’s definitely not true. It is easy to get, many people use, foreigners and natives. I got offered (I stick to beer) on many business meetings. It’s not so public probably, but what does that say?

I was definitely under the impression that some american fentanyl is coming from china.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#353

Post by trasz » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 11:23 AM UTC

selectodude wrote: post #282

trasz wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

French prisons use slave labour?

Oui.

Can you give me some reference, or a keyword? I can’t find much about it; what I found is that they can work and get paid, but I didn’t find anything about being forced to.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#354

Post by djbebs » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 12:44 PM UTC

1123581321 wrote: post #253

shakezula wrote: post #92

Years ago, I got a speeding ticket. I worked nights at the time, and the office to make the payment at had very strange hours because it was from a tiny town. My schedule made it difficult to make it over to the office during open hours, and one of the times I tried it was closed randomly over lunch because again, small town. (I learned later there was only one person who ran the whole office.) A day after my speedin…

That is frustrating, but when were you planning to pay? Couldn’t you have mailed it in? Suspended license driving is anti-social. Any law with a firm cutoff or deadline, and no gradual increase of penalty, sucks for those who barely miss complying with it. There needs to be some kind of consequence, though.

Sorry but isn't the purpose of such licensing requirements to ensure that the roads are safe?

If so, why would him having a debt to the state matter? Clearly him mailing the cash or not wouldn't change his risk profile for driving.

The anti-social thing here is to leverage what is ostensibly a safety concern into a tool of compliance.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#355

Post by psyc » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 2:23 PM UTC

illuminerdy wrote: post #332

psyc wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was detained for 20 minutes for cutting across what I perceived as some empty field, 300 meters down the street from my brother's house. Turns out it was private property, and we weren't in the UK. I presume some busibody at their window called the police. It's a pretty posh subdivision. The land is literally much more valuable than other people's, and I went and walked on it like a wild animal. But that leaves the…

It really has nothing to do with race and everything to do with upbringing. How come black people (specifically African-Americans) are the only people who seem to have these "racism" issues with police? What about other minorities? How many Indians do you see on TV fighting with police or getting shot? What about Hispanics or Asians? Hell, what about African immigrants? It seems quite strange to me that for all this…

That's exactly what I said to my ever-so-slightly conscious girlfriend 25 years ago. I still feel embarrassed about it to this day. Even my long gone grandparents wondered so, socratically.

A bit more constructively: I suppose if everyone everywhere taught their kids the police are there to help, the way the Electric Company taught me, then that specific problem might be alleviated. Perhaps with unintended consequences. But I basically had to unlearn it, and for them it would require a comfort with a level of cognitive dissonance that I'm sure no individual can sustain, let alone a whole community. At least if you accept their history is separate. Like, my ancestors on my dad's side came here in the 1600's too, but they were on the top of the boat.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#356

Post by illuminerdy » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 2:32 PM UTC

gspetr wrote: post #338

illuminerdy wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're aren't mind readers but they made a decision that he was commiting a crime or about to commit one. They escalated it, not him. No, actually that's not what they decided. They decided that, before they just walk away from their SWORN DUTY to investigate without knowing who he was or whether he actually belonged at that property, they would actually do their jobs and find that out that information by doing a…

>SWORN DUTY If they cannot be sued for a breach of it, do they have it? SCOTUS opined: “Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors.” (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1989) 489 U.S. 189). https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/489/189

I have no idea why you think what you posted has anything to do with what I said or the interaction that is being discussed. The Due Process clause is not the only source of the state's power to enact laws and regulate the conduct of citizens. The police powers of the government existed long before the Due Process clause was enacted.

But even if you take the position that the police are not REQUIRED to do anything (and I would disagree with that position), that does not mean that they CANNOT do anything. In this case, the police CHOSE (to use a term more suitable to your position) to investigate. And nothing precludes them from choosing to do so. Or do you take the position that the police are neither required to, nor can they choose to investigate when called?

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#357

Post by illuminerdy » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 2:34 PM UTC

TomSwirly wrote: post #350

illuminerdy wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're aren't mind readers but they made a decision that he was commiting a crime or about to commit one. They escalated it, not him. No, actually that's not what they decided. They decided that, before they just walk away from their SWORN DUTY to investigate without knowing who he was or whether he actually belonged at that property, they would actually do their jobs and find that out that information by doing a…

> walk away from their SWORN DUTY to investigate No, police have no "sworn duty" to investigate - you literally made this up out of your head. “I, (state name), do solemnly swear or affirm that I will faithfully execute the duties of (state position) of the State of Texas, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of Texas, so help me God.” "I d…

> "I do solemnly affirm that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the position of..."

So I assume those "duties" they're referring to don't include investigating when they are assigned a call. Perhaps you think "duties" just refers to sitting in their car eating donuts?

> "No, seeing a black guy watering flowers is not grounds for anything, even if they are someone else's flowers. I cannot believe I have to make this point."

Again, you have to pay attention to the actual facts when you participate in these discussions.

The police were not just driving down the street and, upon seeing a black man watering some flowers, say to themselves "he must be up to no good". They were specifically CALLED by a neighbor to the property to investigate a suspicious person on their neighbor's property (you know, the typical 'looking out for your neighbor' thing). Your position seems to be that the police should not have done anything. Simple looked at him, shrugged their shoulders and walked away.

Because that's exactly what you would want the police to do if YOU were away and your neighbor saw someone on your property and called the police to investigate. You'd absolutely want them to not find out who that person was or why he was on your property.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#358

Post by kortilla » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 2:59 PM UTC

sillystuff wrote: post #250

kortilla wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn’t enough profit there though for that to be the driving force. Prisons as an industry make far less than industries with little to no political sway for even trivial protectionist policies.

> There isn’t enough profit... Some private prison corporations and judges both felt it was profitable enough. Two Pennsylvania judges received $2.8M in bribes from private prisons to send 4,000 kids to the private prisons with long sentences; apparently ruining 4,000 kids lives was profitable enough to justify $2.8M in bribes. One of the judges has managed to get released early. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w…

Right, you’ll see pockets of individual corruption but that doesn’t account for why there is a systemic overpopulation. Unless you are suggesting every judge is on the take, in which case no amount of law reform will matter without first removing all of the judges.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#359

Post by kortilla » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 3:00 PM UTC

dgeiser13 wrote: post #238

kortilla wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn’t enough profit there though for that to be the driving force. Prisons as an industry make far less than industries with little to no political sway for even trivial protectionist policies.

I believe you are wrong about for-profit prisons. It is 100% the reason that the US has so many incarcerated. Any time you can get government to foot the bill for something cottage industries will spring up around it.

> It is 100% the reason that the US has so many incarcerated. Any time you can get government to foot the bill for something cottage industries will spring up around it.

That doesn’t make sense. Building a prison in itself doesn’t induce crime nor does it induce prison sentences. Judges and juries have no quotas to fill based on vacancy.

Re: At $249 per day, prison stays leave ex-inmates deep in debt

#360

Post by illuminerdy » Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 3:03 PM UTC

wizofaus wrote: post #335

illuminerdy wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really has nothing to do with race and everything to do with upbringing. How come black people (specifically African-Americans) are the only people who seem to have these "racism" issues with police? What about other minorities? How many Indians do you see on TV fighting with police or getting shot? What about Hispanics or Asians? Hell, what about African immigrants? It seems quite strange to me that for all this…

I get the feeling you don't really understand how racism works. It doesn't mean "I think everyone from a different ethnic background is somehow a worse person". It's often completely subconscious - your reaction to the observed behaviour of another person is nearly always coloured to some extent by the degree you consider them part of some category largely based on their superficial physical appearance (skin colour,…

Well, I actually agree with you to some extent. I've been saying for a long time that everyone is prejudiced in some way. But that is never going to change. Human beings are, by nature, tribal. Even if we do it only on a subconscious level.

To that point, some of the most racist people I know are black people. Growing up as a black person myself in Brooklyn, and hearing it spoken often, I can tell you that there is no one that black people around here dislike more than Jews. It's an irrational kind of hatred based on the normal nonsense "they own all the banks, they own all the property", etc. If you messed up your credit and can't get a loan, it's the Jews fault. If someone gets evicted because they didn't pay their rent for 6 months, its' the Jews fault. That kind of thing. Racism and prejudice exists in all of us.

But you're right, I probably don't really understand how racism works. Because I have never actually experienced real racism. But, to be fair, neither has 99.9% of the people you see on your TV, social media or in the streets screaming about racism because a white person put their hair in dreadlocks or some other such nonsense. What was the most recent one, Drew Barrymore frolicking in the rain was somehow "erasing black people"?

Look, no one denies that there are actual racist people in the world. But the current state of discourse on this topic is a complete joke. REAL racism is largely a thing of the past. The problem is that what people are trying to classify as real racism these days are just wildly over exaggerated claims based on there being a racist boogeyman around every corner.

The truth is that the 'everything is racist' mantra, or the overexaggerated claims of racism, is actually funded and promoted by global elites and politicians who would very much like to create as much division as possible to keep us focused on non-issues like race instead of the fact that every time one of these "crises" occurs, their net income doubles. We are sadly being played as pawns.