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

361–370 of 391 posts

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

#361

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

alpha_squared wrote: post #115
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it immoral by default, or due to implementation? For example, consider a prison which forces (which I'll define as however the prisons currently gets inmates to work the jobs) it's inmates to attend classes to learn job skills and avoid behaviors that landed them in prison. Would this not also be a form of slavery given they are forced to attend? Slavery isn't defined by the slave doing something useful to the own…

> For example, consider a prison which forces ... it's [sic] inmates to attend classes to learn job skills and avoid behaviors that landed them in prison. Would this not also be a form of slavery given they are forced to attend? Slavery isn't defined by the slave doing something useful to the owner. A slave is still a slave even if they are doing nothing or if they are being commanded to improve themselves. And in th…

>Your redefinition of slavery is significantly broader than the accepted definition of it.

Please note this is not my redefinition of slavery as I was largely using the definition many other posts here assume, but only pointing out that it isn't limited just to hard labor on the enslaver's behalf.

If you think this definition of slavery is wrong, then this would apply to numerous other posts here and the core take away would be that prisoners aren't slaves. At which point we can just pick a different word or create a new word and continue to the point.

So, if you have an issue with the word slave, then I'll define a new word to capture what people in other posts are complaining about, praves (yes, just combining prisoners and slaves into as single word). Now, I repeat my point using praves instead of slaves.

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

#362

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

komali2 wrote: post #202
woah wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? > In a broader sense, however, the word slavery may also refer to any situation in which an individual is de facto forced to work against their own will. Seems like what they were saying fits well with this.

Well then we're all slaves to our stomachs because if we don't work, we don't eat, we don't eat, we die.

If prisoners are slaves, then it isn't that far a leap to the concept of wage slavery or being enslaved to nature. But please note that I am not the first post in this thread to use a definition that disagrees from the one you are suggesting.

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

#363

Post by danShumway »

liaukovv wrote: post #353
inetknght wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you "volunteer" to work you can get less time. So yes, if you physically refuse then you serve more time.

"Not giving something"(term reduction in this case) and "taking something away" are very-very different things. You would have to be incredibly entitled to confuse them.

The problem is that many "taking something away" cases in prison can be rephrased as "not giving something."

Am I taking away your visitation rights, or am I just not giving them to you? Am I taking away your food, or am I just not giving you food?

Expectation and norms play a role in this. Suppose a judge gives a prisoner a higher sentence under the expectation that they'll work it off. They assume the prisoner will work 7 days a week, so they give a prisoner 6 years instead of 3.

Now suppose another judge gives a prisoner the correct sentence (3 years), but then says, "for every day of your original sentence that you don't work, you will spend one additional day in prison."

You're arguing that there's a fundamental difference between these two scenarios, but what is it? It's certainly not a difference for the prisoners -- they have the exact same incentive structure, and their outcomes and choices are exactly the same. It's not any different for the people benefiting from their labor; the work that they produce will look exactly the same. It doesn't even reveal any compelling differences in the judges' motivations -- both judges might reach their decision for the exact same same reasons.

So where is the difference?

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

#364

Post by mikeash »

jobigoud wrote: post #352
mikeash wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think people are arguing that prisoners shouldn’t be allowed to work. They’re arguing that prisoners shouldn’t be forced.

He is saying they are not forced, that it's more complicated than that. They want to do it, but aren't compensated appropriately.

They said a lot of people want to, implying others don’t. And forced is forced even if you want to do it.

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

#365

Post by chimeracoder »

jaccarmac wrote: post #319
chimeracoder wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately, the 13th amendment allows it... The 13th Amendment doesn't prohibit it, the way it prohibits (most forms of) chattel slavery. But there's nothing preventing Congress (or state legislatures) from passing laws prohibiting it.

IANAL but the wording seems pretty straightforward. I feel relatively confident that laws outlawing prison slavery would be challenged by for-profit prisons instantly and easily be declared unconstitutional.

> IANAL but the wording seems pretty straightforward. I feel relatively confident that laws outlawing prison slavery would be challenged by for-profit prisons instantly and easily be declared unconstitutional.

It'd be pretty hard to extract from the 13th amendment a constitutional right to put prisoners to unpaid work.

Furthermore, it's a myth that only for-profit prisons that profit from it - state-owned prisons also profit off the system to the same extent.

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

#366

Post by pmarreck »

solveit wrote: post #267
mpax wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... sure, but it depends on how you look at it. In a monetary society (as opposed to credit or barter (intermediary like you suggest) — monetary circuitist terminology), money is created as a debt/credit tuple to facilitate an intertemporal private contract (tit-for-tat), of which cash is a physical token representation. The etymology of “credit” is “faith”, “honor”, “merit” etc. That of debt, at least in some ge…

I don't think arguments from etymology are of much relevance in modern economics, to put it mildly.

All value derives from subjective meanings, so you actually couldn't be more wrong

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

#367

Post by pmarreck »

oathbreaker wrote: post #185
pmarreck wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t disagree but just wanted to say something: The whole point of money was to make it possible for 2+ good actors to do legal (and different) work/goods/services for each other while profiting. Most people who end up in prison were “bad actors” by definition. The system was not benefiting from them. And thus I can’t help thinking that they don’t really deserve any of the system’s monetary medium of exchange.

> Most people who end up in prison were “bad actors” by definition. Disagree. Majority of the offenders are there for non-violent drug offenses. It is also possible some of them are serving sentences for crimes that are no more crimes. California has liberalized marijuana but the prisoners are still in jail for the crimes that no more crimes.

False.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/releasing-drug-offender...

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

#368

Post by pmarreck »

GW150914 wrote: post #307
hnaccy wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Majority of the offenders are there for non-violent drug offenses. I don't believe this is true.

If only we had access to some kind of worldwide network which would allows us t- -found it. https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offen... 46% drug offenses, 6.8% immigration and we’re already past the 50% mark. That as they say, is a majority. Edit: Looking at all populations state, federal, local yields: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2018.html Note: But the offense data oversimplifies how…

Why does this data disagree hugely with that?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/releasing-drug-offender...

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

#369

Post by MandieD »

kiliantics wrote: post #308
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what about cases where the penalty is a fine instead of (or in addition to) prison time? If I get a ticket, I have to pay. For the majority of people, that money comes through doing work of some form, which I'm now being required to do or else face possible prison time.

Yes, fines are far more punitive to poor people than they are for the rich. They're effectively just a small expense which allows them to commit crimes. The fact that society forces us to work harder and harder in order just to live, when it could easily sustain a dignified standard of living for all at minimal cost, is the fundamental problem that people on the left are against.

That's why I love how Finland does at least some of their fines: set at X days' income for each given offense. Granted, my losing a week's income would be a lot less painful for me than it would be for a single mother working as a home health aide, but it at least approaches fairness (we both lose the benefit of a week of our own work, but without the complete upheaval that a week in jail would have caused us)

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

#370

Post by gammateam »

acomar wrote: post #340
gammateam wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, this isn't news to me and also doesn't answer the question Criminal justice reform has lobbyists against it, and also has a culture that is obsessed with punishment and bloodlust. I think prisoner wages or the duties of prisoners can be addressed in some capacity, without maintaining a massive slave labor force. The circumstances around wording of the 13th Amendment, and subsequent case law may allow for redre…

Your analysis completely ignores power structures inside the US. Try to oppose the prison industry, in reality not theory, and get back to me. This is a fight I'm actively involved in. I'm literally an activist and trying to end this mistreatment. You're wrong, but the reason you're wrong isn't your intent. It's the way people assume you're right and ignore the darker sides of capitalism. The truth is that it doesn't…

I've offered perspectives to many causes that weren't considered by the people most invested in their cause.

I've offered perspectives to John Jay College of Criminal Justice on what arguments they should attempt in the courts, even though that approach was uncharted territory.

I'm not a lawyer.

I also don't care what the public thinks, I care about influence and outcomes that I like, and the public is VERY far removed from that process except in circumstances where the public coincidentally was already aligned with influential interests.

Thats why I start with simple questions such as "can this reach consensus necessary", that "consensus" can come from a Federal District Judge in Guam for all I care. Sometimes "consensus" is "we - the government - don't find it prudent to appeal this case" such as you saw with the stop and frisk federal appeals case in NYC.

I know the lawyers that came up the Citizens United arguments on some arbitrary first amendment grounds just because they could. Guess what, they ALWAYS go for first amendment. They practically pick the judges to hear their cases too.

And when I look at the 13th Amendment and power structures inside the US, I think there is plenty of room to get closer to the outcome you are interested in.

Post reply on HN