We really need to get rid of the exception in the 13th amendment.
If you're interested in doing hard federal time, I would suggest you consider interstate trafficking of distribution quantities of drugs.
If you're white, maybe. There's still stories of some states having the book thrown at recreational drug usage.
There are always stories, but the majority are the above. If you have a state in mind we can look at the data together.
...there are two million people in prison. Several million more in various stages of the carceral cycle who be be easily subbed in when more labor is required.
Slavery of this variety is alive and well.
It’s just slavery with all the perverse incentives that come with it, and I think we’d all be better off if this was a lever that no one in society had access to pull on
What then? If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again? Does the state pay? If so, why do taxpayers who didn't commit a crime foot the bill? If it's insurance, then why do non-criminals paying insurance premiums foot the bill?
If there's nothing linking the action (_theft_) to the needed outcome (_restitution_), then there's this unmoored loop of perverse incentives wherein some folks can continue to commit crimes with very limited consequences.
Doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to work while in prison. But surely for any and all crimes that have a clearly defined dollar amount, shouldn't that criminal be forced to pay that amount back? Garnishing future wages can be circumvented (_just don't get a real job when you get out, keep stealing things to support yourself_). And even at best, it's very much _delayed_ restitution. Justice delayed is justice denied.
To be clear, in the present day, when a prisoner works, how much money do you think they make, and who do you think keeps the value produced?
The parent thread we're discussing is broadly about prisoner work in the US. So we should be considering the mean and median values, not the one guy making 4 orders of magnitude more than everyone else.
Are any of these solutions that unreasonable when you consider that the state/taxpayers are already footing the bill to keep prisoners incarcerated?
How do they pay you back when employers run background checks (not to mention housing)?
by your insurance company.
Heck, this doesn't even require them to catch the perp.
What does that have to do with rehabilitation? That person can go to prison, realize the errors of their ways, and have a healthy life.I don't have to like nor forgive them. I'm not being "made whole again" no matter how long you lock them up.
> If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again?
1) you generally don't get something "produced of value", unless suffering is a currency now. Probably is in 2025
2) insurance. not everything can be given back, but many material goods can be compensated.
>If it's insurance, then why do non-criminals paying insurance premiums foot the bill?
because that's how insurance works, in spirit. You're all pooling together a fund so that you help out some other person when they need it. The instigator is often not the one footing the bill to begin with. Shaking down a criminal with no money is as useful as yelling at a forest fire as it burns your place down.
>Doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to work while in prison. But surely for any and all crimes that have a clearly defined dollar amount, shouldn't that criminal be forced to pay that amount back?
if they have it, sure. As is, this isn't the model of the "justice" system, though. You're not getting paid back for anyone put behind bars.
That's a different problem, for different inmates -- the inmates covered in this story are paid market rates. It mentions the software developer has a six-figure salary.
Why would the prison / prisoner charge below market rates for their labor?
The prisoner doesn't really get too much choice in the matter other than taking/rejecting the offer.