Department of Justice to stop using private prisons

Donal · 18th August 2016, 11:04 AM

Due to years of documented negligence and violence, as well as countless safety and security incidents, the Department of Justice will start scaling back its use of private prisons. the goal is to compeltely end the federal government's use of private prisons.

The Feds won't pull out over night. Instead, when each prison contract comes up for renewal over the next 5 years, the DoJ will review them, with the goal of scaling back their use.

Personally, I think this a big step towards badly needed prison and justice reform. Maybe if recidivism stops being profitable, we'll see less of it.

BobTheCoward · 18th August 2016, 11:07 AM

The federal government uses only a small number. Also,are the immigrant detention centers DOJ or ICE?

Donal · 18th August 2016, 11:12 AM

Ya, the DoJ only uses 13 of the 81 private prison in the US. But, hey, gotta start somewhere. As for the immigrant detention centers, that is messy.

According to this, DHS runs 11% of the beds used for immigrant detention and directly contracts out 18%. 24% of them are left to the states and municipalities specifically used for immigration detention. The rest are in prisons that are under the control of other federal agencies or states (which are also possibly private).

LarianLeQuella · 18th August 2016, 11:47 AM

I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong.

marplots · 18th August 2016, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella

I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong.

I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either.

BStrong · 18th August 2016, 01:05 PM

It's about time.

Now if somebody with some sense can come to the conclusion that rehabilitation for addicts/alcoholics is less expensive and more effective than incarceration and back off from the WOSD (war on some drugs) we might get somewhere

quixotecoyote · 18th August 2016, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by marplots

I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either.

I can show you prisons promoting incarceration: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads...the_system.pdf

The incentives and economics are obviously different in your examples.

marplots · 18th August 2016, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

I can show you prisons promoting incarceration: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads...the_system.pdf

The incentives and economics are obviously different in your examples.

Perhaps it's not the systems that are different but the ability to exploit the mechanism without getting charged with a crime. Because shaping the marketplace to benefit my business is always available to me, and further, I don't think this falls along government/private lines - isn't it accepted wisdom that bureaucracies will tend to expand their own "markets"?

If it is fundamental, for both government and private institutions, then we should guard against both. Because, so long as the efforts are allowed, that's the rules of the game.

As to my examples, I wouldn't be the least surprised to find a funeral directors organization behind laws mandating embalming, licensing of cemeteries and other targeted legislation. I wouldn't necessarily think it nefarious either. I would expect doctors to try and influence legislation mandating certain types of healthcare or arguing for limits on malpractice suits. Again, recognizing vested interests is not, necessarily, the same as an accusation of malfeasance.

Do private prisons push more "law and order" legislation than government-run law enforcement organizations do? Your link suggests this is the case. And yet, the reason private prisons became a target for entrepreneurship is because the money was already there - the market existed before the private prison industry came calling.

Donal · 19th August 2016, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by marplots

Do private prisons push more "law and order" legislation than government-run law enforcement organizations do? Your link suggests this is the case. And yet, the reason private prisons became a target for entrepreneurship is because the money was already there - the market existed before the private prison industry came calling.

But did they start off as running a prison and the expansion happened organically? Or did they start running the prisons with the intention of pushing the legislation? Besides, at this point: so what?

Our outlook of the prison system is changing and they were caught manipulating the system for their own personal benefit.

BobTheCoward · 19th August 2016, 10:25 PM

Why were the government officials whose job was to care for prisoner welfare failed the prisoners in private facilities so badly?

twinstead · 20th August 2016, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Why were the government officials whose job was to care for prisoner welfare failed the prisoners in private facilities so badly?

I guess they just decided to step aside and let the Invisible Hand of the Free Market handle things for a bit. How'd that work out for them?

steve s · 20th August 2016, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by marplots

I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder?

They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison.

Steve S

BobTheCoward · 20th August 2016, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by twinstead

I guess they just decided to step aside and let the Invisible Hand of the Free Market handle things for a bit. How'd that work out for them?

Great actually. The DOJ did not say private prisons were in noncompliance. It seems the DOJ got what they signed up for.

psionl0 · 20th August 2016, 08:27 PM

If you are going to jail people for moral reasons (ie recreational drug use) then you need to find a way to pay for it.

Given that the two options are to either bill taxpayers for it or let private firms make a profit out of prisoners, I suspect that private prisons will be around for the foreseeable future.

The Great Zaganza · 20th August 2016, 09:55 PM

The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive.
They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates.
On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure.

marplots · 21st August 2016, 03:16 AM

Originally Posted by steve s

They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison.

Steve S

Good point, although cash flow matters. I suppose funeral directors would be anti-abortion then?

marplots · 21st August 2016, 03:17 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive.
They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates.
On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure.

Is this something you found in that article or elsewhere?

BobTheCoward · 21st August 2016, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive.
They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates.
On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure.

Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach?

Beerina · 21st August 2016, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella

I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong.

All government is is a gigantic crime creation (and see? I caught them for you reelect me!) system from that point of view.

If you are truly concerned, look into efforts to roll back government proliferation of de facto highway robbery and debtor's prisons, as ticketing for minor crimes explodes to satisfy local government monetary needs. People who cannot pay the fines are imprisoned without trials.

I have a tough time seeing how prisons create crime, aside from doing a poor job at rehabilitation. Would like to see standard measures applied to both kinds of prisons.

psionl0 · 21st August 2016, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach?

Politicians have shares in these companies?

Minoosh · 21st August 2016, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

Given that the two options are to either bill taxpayers for it or let private firms make a profit out of prisoners, I suspect that private prisons will be around for the foreseeable future.

Taxpayers are billed either way.

Navigator · 21st August 2016, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella

I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong.

This is not a new thing - it evolved from slavery in the south...

Slavery by Another Name

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

ehcks · 21st August 2016, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by marplots

I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either.

Funeral homes have a permanent inevitable demand. The way to increase their income is to actually increase the birth rate, not increase the death rate.

But for-profit prisons only make more money if there are more prisoners. The way to do this is to increase the crime rate, such as by increasing recidivism, or by making up new laws criminalizing common behavior.

twinstead · 21st August 2016, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by ehcks

Funeral homes have a permanent inevitable demand. The way to increase their income is to actually increase the birth rate, not increase the death rate.

Yup.

Quote:

But for-profit prisons only make more money if there are more prisoners. The way to do this is to increase the crime rate, such as by increasing recidivism, or by making up new laws criminalizing common behavior.

It really is a classic case of conflict of interest, and the longer it goes the less chance it will ever get better.

psionl0 · 21st August 2016, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Taxpayers are billed either way.

I should have realized that earlier.

The Great Zaganza · 21st August 2016, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach?

Because it makes governors sound weak to admit mistakes. Also, prison companies love funding the campaigns of their supporters

Originally Posted by marplots

Is this something you found in that article or elsewhere?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pz3syET3DY

psionl0 · 21st August 2016, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pz3syET3DY

yt;dw

ponderingturtle · 22nd August 2016, 04:59 AM

Originally Posted by marplots

I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either.

How many cases have we seen of funeral directors paying to get people killed? We do have cases of private prisons bribing judges to make sure they get more of the juicy juicy juvenile offender market.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome...ww.google.com/

And how much does the funeral industry put into lobbying to make sure more people die? Or have contracts with the goverment to make sure they get enough corpses on a regular basis to maintain their occupancy?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3953483.html

ponderingturtle · 22nd August 2016, 05:04 AM

Originally Posted by steve s

They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison.

Steve S

Well wait to see how effective their occupancy requirements in contracts become. That might change.

ponderingturtle · 22nd August 2016, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Because it makes governors sound weak to admit mistakes. Also, prison companies love funding the campaigns of their supporters

Also it is ideologically unacceptable for some american political parties to think that government can ever be more efficient than for profit companies.

pgwenthold · 22nd August 2016, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

How many cases have we seen of funeral directors paying to get people killed?

Ferryman Funeral Homes might have gone that far...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Beerina · 25th August 2016, 09:21 AM

Let's cut out the middle man. One side enjoys bigger government, with its attendant union workers, who in turn vote for bigger government. The other side does not, so wants to privatize, i.e. get rid of the union hires.

As B.F. Skinner said, look at their actions, not their words. It's all memeplex domination.

Donal · 25th August 2016, 12:03 PM

I don't think you know what a "middle man" is. In this instance, the private prison companies would be that and they are being removed. And what do unions have to do with this?

PhantomWolf · 25th August 2016, 03:01 PM

We figured out it was a bad idea after 6 years....

18th August 2016, 11:04 AM	#1
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705	Department of Justice to stop using private prisons Due to years of documented negligence and violence, as well as countless safety and security incidents, the Department of Justice will start scaling back its use of private prisons. the goal is to compeltely end the federal government's use of private prisons. The Feds won't pull out over night. Instead, when each prison contract comes up for renewal over the next 5 years, the DoJ will review them, with the goal of scaling back their use. Personally, I think this a big step towards badly needed prison and justice reform. Maybe if recidivism stops being profitable, we'll see less of it.
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705

18th August 2016, 11:07 AM	#2
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266	The federal government uses only a small number. Also,are the immigrant detention centers DOJ or ICE?
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266

18th August 2016, 11:12 AM	#3
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705	Ya, the DoJ only uses 13 of the 81 private prison in the US. But, hey, gotta start somewhere. As for the immigrant detention centers, that is messy. According to this, DHS runs 11% of the beds used for immigrant detention and directly contracts out 18%. 24% of them are left to the states and municipalities specifically used for immigration detention. The rest are in prisons that are under the control of other federal agencies or states (which are also possibly private).
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705	Last edited by Donal; 18th August 2016 at 11:18 AM.

18th August 2016, 11:47 AM	#4
LarianLeQuella Elf Wino Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 2,084	I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong.
LarianLeQuella Elf Wino Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 2,084	__________________ My crappy blog that no one should be forced to read. Ever... But I like traffic and comments, so have at it if you please. Larian LeQuella Armyn ab Treanid

18th August 2016, 01:05 PM	#6
BStrong Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 13,087	It's about time. Now if somebody with some sense can come to the conclusion that rehabilitation for addicts/alcoholics is less expensive and more effective than incarceration and back off from the WOSD (war on some drugs) we might get somewhere
	__________________ Music is what feelings sound like "Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

18th August 2016, 01:01 PM	#5
marplots Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 29,167	Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong. I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either.

18th August 2016, 01:27 PM	#7
quixotecoyote Howling to glory I go Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 10,379	Originally Posted by marplots I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either. I can show you prisons promoting incarceration: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads...the_system.pdf The incentives and economics are obviously different in your examples.
	__________________ If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.

18th August 2016, 01:54 PM	#8
marplots Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 29,167	Originally Posted by quixotecoyote I can show you prisons promoting incarceration: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads...the_system.pdf The incentives and economics are obviously different in your examples. Perhaps it's not the systems that are different but the ability to exploit the mechanism without getting charged with a crime. Because shaping the marketplace to benefit my business is always available to me, and further, I don't think this falls along government/private lines - isn't it accepted wisdom that bureaucracies will tend to expand their own "markets"? If it is fundamental, for both government and private institutions, then we should guard against both. Because, so long as the efforts are allowed, that's the rules of the game. As to my examples, I wouldn't be the least surprised to find a funeral directors organization behind laws mandating embalming, licensing of cemeteries and other targeted legislation. I wouldn't necessarily think it nefarious either. I would expect doctors to try and influence legislation mandating certain types of healthcare or arguing for limits on malpractice suits. Again, recognizing vested interests is not, necessarily, the same as an accusation of malfeasance. Do private prisons push more "law and order" legislation than government-run law enforcement organizations do? Your link suggests this is the case. And yet, the reason private prisons became a target for entrepreneurship is because the money was already there - the market existed before the private prison industry came calling.
	Last edited by marplots; 18th August 2016 at 02:00 PM.

19th August 2016, 09:43 AM	#9
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705	Originally Posted by marplots Do private prisons push more "law and order" legislation than government-run law enforcement organizations do? Your link suggests this is the case. And yet, the reason private prisons became a target for entrepreneurship is because the money was already there - the market existed before the private prison industry came calling. But did they start off as running a prison and the expansion happened organically? Or did they start running the prisons with the intention of pushing the legislation? Besides, at this point: so what? Our outlook of the prison system is changing and they were caught manipulating the system for their own personal benefit.
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705

19th August 2016, 10:25 PM	#10
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266	Why were the government officials whose job was to care for prisoner welfare failed the prisoners in private facilities so badly?
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266

20th August 2016, 08:05 AM	#11
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 12,374	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Why were the government officials whose job was to care for prisoner welfare failed the prisoners in private facilities so badly? I guess they just decided to step aside and let the Invisible Hand of the Free Market handle things for a bit. How'd that work out for them?
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

20th August 2016, 08:08 AM	#12
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	Originally Posted by marplots I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison. Steve S
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	__________________ "Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken

20th August 2016, 09:22 AM	#13
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266	Originally Posted by twinstead I guess they just decided to step aside and let the Invisible Hand of the Free Market handle things for a bit. How'd that work out for them? Great actually. The DOJ did not say private prisons were in noncompliance. It seems the DOJ got what they signed up for.
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266

20th August 2016, 08:27 PM	#14
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,042	If you are going to jail people for moral reasons (ie recreational drug use) then you need to find a way to pay for it. Given that the two options are to either bill taxpayers for it or let private firms make a profit out of prisoners, I suspect that private prisons will be around for the foreseeable future.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

20th August 2016, 09:55 PM	#15
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 18,033	The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive. They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates. On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure.

21st August 2016, 03:16 AM	#16
marplots Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 29,167	Originally Posted by steve s They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison. Steve S Good point, although cash flow matters. I suppose funeral directors would be anti-abortion then?

21st August 2016, 03:17 AM	#17
marplots Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 29,167	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive. They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates. On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure. Is this something you found in that article or elsewhere?

21st August 2016, 07:15 AM	#18
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza The reason why privately run prisons were promoted was that they were supposed to be cheaper - but in fact they are much more expensive. They also care less well for the safety and health of the inmates. On every measures but corporate profit they are a failure. Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach?
BobTheCoward Suspended Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,266

21st August 2016, 07:48 AM	#19
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 31,267	Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella I've always considered the use of for profit prison corporations as immoral and reprehensible. Not because they are businesses per se, but that as a business model, they have a vested interest in creating a demand for prisoners. This seems inhumane, unethical, and just plain wrong. All government is is a gigantic crime creation (and see? I caught them for you reelect me!) system from that point of view. If you are truly concerned, look into efforts to roll back government proliferation of de facto highway robbery and debtor's prisons, as ticketing for minor crimes explodes to satisfy local government monetary needs. People who cannot pay the fines are imprisoned without trials. I have a tough time seeing how prisons create crime, aside from doing a poor job at rehabilitation. Would like to see standard measures applied to both kinds of prisons.
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

21st August 2016, 09:21 AM	#20
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,042	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach? Politicians have shares in these companies?
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

21st August 2016, 10:01 AM	#21
Minoosh Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 12,469	Originally Posted by psionl0 Given that the two options are to either bill taxpayers for it or let private firms make a profit out of prisoners, I suspect that private prisons will be around for the foreseeable future. Taxpayers are billed either way.

21st August 2016, 10:05 AM	#23
ehcks Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,302	Originally Posted by marplots I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either. Funeral homes have a permanent inevitable demand. The way to increase their income is to actually increase the birth rate, not increase the death rate. But for-profit prisons only make more money if there are more prisoners. The way to do this is to increase the crime rate, such as by increasing recidivism, or by making up new laws criminalizing common behavior.
ehcks Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,302	__________________ Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

21st August 2016, 11:42 AM	#24
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 12,374	Originally Posted by ehcks Funeral homes have a permanent inevitable demand. The way to increase their income is to actually increase the birth rate, not increase the death rate. Yup. Quote: But for-profit prisons only make more money if there are more prisoners. The way to do this is to increase the crime rate, such as by increasing recidivism, or by making up new laws criminalizing common behavior. It really is a classic case of conflict of interest, and the longer it goes the less chance it will ever get better.
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

21st August 2016, 12:23 PM	#25
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,042	Originally Posted by Minoosh Taxpayers are billed either way. I should have realized that earlier.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

21st August 2016, 12:29 PM	#26
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 18,033	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Then why isn't the federal government suing for contract breach? Because it makes governors sound weak to admit mistakes. Also, prison companies love funding the campaigns of their supporters Originally Posted by marplots Is this something you found in that article or elsewhere? http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pz3syET3DY

21st August 2016, 02:14 PM	#27
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,042	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pz3syET3DY yt;dw
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

22nd August 2016, 04:59 AM	#28
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 52,543	Originally Posted by marplots I understand the argument, but it doesn't have much heft to me. Do funeral directors have a vested interest in promoting murder? There are other ways to expand your business. Doctors promoting disease never flew for me either. How many cases have we seen of funeral directors paying to get people killed? We do have cases of private prisons bribing judges to make sure they get more of the juicy juicy juvenile offender market. http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome...ww.google.com/ And how much does the funeral industry put into lobbying to make sure more people die? Or have contracts with the goverment to make sure they get enough corpses on a regular basis to maintain their occupancy? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3953483.html
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

22nd August 2016, 05:04 AM	#29
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 52,543	Originally Posted by steve s They don't have to. Everybody dies eventually. Not everyone will end up in prison. Steve S Well wait to see how effective their occupancy requirements in contracts become. That might change.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

22nd August 2016, 05:06 AM	#30
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 52,543	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza Because it makes governors sound weak to admit mistakes. Also, prison companies love funding the campaigns of their supporters Also it is ideologically unacceptable for some american political parties to think that government can ever be more efficient than for profit companies.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

25th August 2016, 09:21 AM	#32
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 31,267	Let's cut out the middle man. One side enjoys bigger government, with its attendant union workers, who in turn vote for bigger government. The other side does not, so wants to privatize, i.e. get rid of the union hires. As B.F. Skinner said, look at their actions, not their words. It's all memeplex domination.
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

25th August 2016, 12:03 PM	#33
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705	I don't think you know what a "middle man" is. In this instance, the private prison companies would be that and they are being removed. And what do unions have to do with this?
Donal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,705

25th August 2016, 03:01 PM	#34
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 21,203	We figured out it was a bad idea after 6 years....
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)