So this is an issue when you have privatized prisons. Lets say a prison can hold 1000 prisoners. They need 800 prisoners to make a decent profit and 650 to break even. Now lets say we have less prisoners say 450. Now the privatized prison can't afford to stay open so they ask for more prisoners to stay open and still make some profit. However, while it's good that there are less inmates it also leaves the government in a lurch. If they do close where do the 450 inmates go? So it's not the lack of criminals that's the issue it's what to do with the criminals they do have if the prison closes.
While I believe your analysis is fundamentally sound and points out the oversimplification of the premise- but if we go further we ask why are the private prisons open to begin with? Well.... to save costs and relive crowding of the prison system. Ok. Makes sense- now we can delve into the ethics of for profit companies which are based around maximization of profits above any other principal running public services let alone a component of the justice system- or how poorly workers who have full rights and some empathy from the mass public are treated even with legal protections by said companies in the attempts to maximize profit- and then infer what they might do to prisoners who neither have the legal rights or even the weak public support of the average low wage worker... but that’s a huge debate that might take us off topic. Ultimately...
While oversimplified the intent of the meme is mostly on the nose I’d say. Why were prisons so crowded to begin with? Low level and reappear offenders make a bulk of the prison population. So why did we pay companies to run prisons and not something like say.... rehabilitation programs for low level offenders and those with high recidivism?
Why is the profit model based on heads and beds and not some results driven metric- it’s common in fitness clubs and the like for instance to only pay a bonus on head counts after a 1 or 2 year retention- so why not apply that model and say that they only get paid if the person doesn’t repeat offend or get convicted again? It’s true that without private prisons we would have no where to put convicts over capacity- but we created that system and it’s a system that feeds itself. That’s where the profit is and why a private concern would take on the liability and overhead of such a risky task.
When you build a system that requires convicts to function then convicts you will have. There’s no profit incentive for private prisons to rehabilitate- it’s storage for people. What’s more- so long as “more prisons” is an option- and the easiest option- that’s what judges and the law will take. If all you have to discipline or inspire compliance is a stick then you will use the stick. Private prisons provide an easy solution to an otherwise complex problem. What “changes” in prison?
Most people don’t want to go to prison- even those who have never been, so we can’t logically or based on imperial data say that going to prison makes a person not want to return so much as to avoid crime. If your crime was one of economic basis- are you more or less economically secure after serving a prison sentence and having a conviction on your background check to block employment? If it was an inability to follow social norms does removing you from society and placing you in a brutal and foreign environment instill those skills?
If you were mentally or emotionally disturbed does that just go away? Most of the time not. It’s also been shown that preventing an addict from getting their fix- even when its long enough for withdrawal- doesn’t serve statistically to cure them- and once they are able to access their fix they tend to relapse because being forced to be unable to do the behavior isn’t the same as developing the mechanisms to resist it of your free will. So addiction and related crimes aren’t really served by prisons either.
So another controversial solution might be... to stop locking people up for crimes that don’t actually warrant being removed from the public. Where the safety and well being of others isn’t endangered by their presence in society in a meaningful way. To provide alternate programs and opportunities to low level criminals and types of therapy etc. for behavioral correction. But yes- private prisons serve a purpose in the system we built because that’s how we built it. It’s a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.
This is a news article from my home state of New Mexico. NM is lousy with private prisons, with former governor Gary Johnson once having a scandal involving bid rigging. The private prison system is a menace, and actually more expensive to run than state prisons, but they create a layer of deniability that insulates the state.
Yes. That’s a major part of their existence. It’s actually quite scary and we see it more and more in other areas where governments hand things over to private companies. Not only corruption of the system by those seeking to make personal gain, but even more importantly that insulation. The government largely isn’t responsible for what its contractors do- but contractors acting for the government are largely protected by many do the legal immunities of a government agency.
Contractors to the government often have access to government powers and resources, but they aren’t bound to the rules of a government agency because they are private entities and so have private freedoms. They are a contractor and not a government arm even when acting as one- so they are not accountable or controllable by the public. All corporations have a legal obligation to put their shareholders interests first- whereas a governments obligation is to put its people and laws first. It’s very scary because it creates an easy loophole for the government to empower a private entity to use means a government could not to reach goals- to almost completely if not completely circumvent the systems of checks and balances to government powers and overreach which exist for the protection of private citizens and democracy.
A perfect example are PMC’s- private military contractors. A PMC does NOT get paid by the us government or work for the government. They do not get military benefits or hold an actual military rank or even report into the chain of command. They are an employee- if they obey a chain of command it’s because their company has told them to. They often work on bases, jointly with military forces and often in operations employing military equipment. But they aren’t mercenaries and they aren’t military- so except where laws have been enacted to curtail this- their use and deployment is subject to congressional or other oversight beyond budget allocation.
PMCs can be used and allocated the way a ball point pen or any other standard tool is with some exception, but can act in a military capacity. The transparency and checks and restrictions which apply to government agents and agencies do not apply to them or their companies. When we introduce private corporations to public works we open a can of worms- either they exist in a gray fog between laws that gives the organizations considerable powers and anonymity, or we pass laws that can restrict the rights of private businesses and individuals in unconstitutional and prohibitive ways. It’s not a good solution.
As all the pride month memes about corporate “pride” illustrate- the human rights care about by corporations are the ones that people notice and the ones that profit them. From numerous fatal auto and airline and medical and food and etc. defects that were known ahead of time but calculated to either cost less to litigate than fix- or they simply thought wouldn’t become known- we see corporations operate on a principal that if you don’t know or don’t care how something works and only the result- they will do what they think they can get away with if it’s profitable. That’s not a good basis for public services.
Just depends on which side you are on.
So fucked up.