At 8 cents an hour, you can almost buy a candy bar after 2 days of hard labor! If you would like to know more about the continuation of slavery after the emancipation proclamation, check out this...
At 8 cents an hour, you can almost buy a candy bar after 2 days of hard labor!
If you would like to know more about the continuation of slavery after the emancipation proclamation, check out this fantastic video.
Just remember, when it comes to abolishing slavery, both Democrats and Republicans voted no (abstaining == voting no, when injustice is on the line). Even in one of the most liberal states, indentured servitude is seen as either a good thing, or a thing that is just too expensive to get rid of.
Allowing criminals to be used as slaves results in additional criminalization to meet demand for slaves.
It says here that it costs $106,000 a year to incarcerate an inmate in California, of which $33k is health care. There's no way the state is making money on putting people in prison. So, while I...
It says here that it costs $106,000 a year to incarcerate an inmate in California, of which $33k is health care. There's no way the state is making money on putting people in prison. So, while I doubt the criminal justice system decides to sentence people based on money, if anything the incentives run the other way, to free people.
However, the article says it would cost even more without the prison labor. Total spending by California by California on state corrections is $12.7 billion and the article says that it would cost $1.5 billion to pay minimum wage. So, a 12% increase.
Context: California had a $97 billion surplus this year. It probably won't last (California revenue goes up and down a lot), but this seems affordable.
The thing is...I generally don't care about the cost or the economics for this. It's about the morality of forcing people to labor against their will. The Gulag was one such place, but most would...
The thing is...I generally don't care about the cost or the economics for this. It's about the morality of forcing people to labor against their will. The Gulag was one such place, but most would agree that was deplorable. Prisons across the US are increasingly terrible because we still focus too much on the punitive aspects of crime and not the rehabilitation ones. If we want less crime, we need to treat prisoners with the same dignity we afford everyone else. That means not stripping their voting rights and paying them living wages. So that upon completion of their punishment they can transition into being a functional member of society and not just a criminal 'back on the streets.'
Even if pay were raised to $15/hour....that's less than $35k per year, or about what they're paying for healthcare. I'd say its disengenuous to include healthcare costs because CA probably pays close to that to support non-incarcerated people too.
Another major reason to actually pay a prisoner a legitimate wage: It lets them exit prison without being completely destitute. If you go to prison and have less than $500 in the bank when you do... how do you avoid being homeless and feeding yourself if you have no savings and no job?
I would even consider it fair to charge a 50% tax on their private-market-equivalent wages to account for the equivalent housing/food/medicine they get. But it should be the prisoner's choice to work or not as well.
The question would be who pays the costs and who makes the profit? I was under the impression that the government paid for the costs almost entirely, and private prison companies take in the...
The question would be who pays the costs and who makes the profit? I was under the impression that the government paid for the costs almost entirely, and private prison companies take in the profits of prison labor. If this is true, then it is certainly profitable to put more people in prison. At least for everyone except the taxpayer.
Correctional officer and police unions make up the bulk of the "prison-industrial complex" lobbying parties, and private prisons house a vast minority of inmates in the US. One, out of the 35...
Correctional officer and police unions make up the bulk of the "prison-industrial complex" lobbying parties, and private prisons house a vast minority of inmates in the US. One, out of the 35 prisons in California, is privately owned. It's less of a single industry making big bucks, and more like a hellish version of a jobs program.
For decades, California used that involuntary servitude exception to make money from its prison population by leasing inmates — mostly Black men — to private companies for work.
That “convict lease” system doesn’t exist anymore. But California prison inmates are required to either work or participate in education or rehabilitative programs. Inmate jobs — which include things like clerks, painters and carpenters — pay salaries as low of 8 cents per hour.
Under state law, most California prisoners are required to work. Like many other states, California forbids slavery but allows involuntary servitude to punish someone for a crime. That distinction allows state prisoners and people in jail to work without many of the same protections — minimum wage and benefits — as other California workers.
Brown and some state legislators have been trying to change that through a constitutional amendment that would outlaw involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime.
But they failed to muster enough votes before the deadline to put the proposed constitutional amendment, ACA 3, in front of voters in November.
The constitutional amendment, passed by the Assembly in March, had turned into a legislative nail-biter. But today the Assembly adjourned before the Senate voted on it, effectively killing it.
Crafted by Brown while he was in prison and introduced in 2020 by then-Los Angeles Assemblymember Sydney Kamlager, the “End Slavery in California Act” had been sailing through the Legislature. For about a year, the proposal had no registered opposition or a single no vote in committees or on the Assembly floor.
Last week, though, the amendment faced its first formidable challenge. The California Department of Finance opposed the plan — estimating it would cost $1.5 billion to pay prisoners minimum wage — and some Democrat and Republican lawmakers became wary. The amendment failed to pass the Senate when six lawmakers voted against it June 23 while another 13 did not record a vote.
At 8 cents an hour, you can almost buy a candy bar after 2 days of hard labor!
If you would like to know more about the continuation of slavery after the emancipation proclamation, check out this fantastic video.
Just remember, when it comes to abolishing slavery, both Democrats and Republicans voted no (abstaining == voting no, when injustice is on the line). Even in one of the most liberal states, indentured servitude is seen as either a good thing, or a thing that is just too expensive to get rid of.
Allowing criminals to be used as slaves results in additional criminalization to meet demand for slaves.
It says here that it costs $106,000 a year to incarcerate an inmate in California, of which $33k is health care. There's no way the state is making money on putting people in prison. So, while I doubt the criminal justice system decides to sentence people based on money, if anything the incentives run the other way, to free people.
However, the article says it would cost even more without the prison labor. Total spending by California by California on state corrections is $12.7 billion and the article says that it would cost $1.5 billion to pay minimum wage. So, a 12% increase.
Context: California had a $97 billion surplus this year. It probably won't last (California revenue goes up and down a lot), but this seems affordable.
The thing is...I generally don't care about the cost or the economics for this. It's about the morality of forcing people to labor against their will. The Gulag was one such place, but most would agree that was deplorable. Prisons across the US are increasingly terrible because we still focus too much on the punitive aspects of crime and not the rehabilitation ones. If we want less crime, we need to treat prisoners with the same dignity we afford everyone else. That means not stripping their voting rights and paying them living wages. So that upon completion of their punishment they can transition into being a functional member of society and not just a criminal 'back on the streets.'
Even if pay were raised to $15/hour....that's less than $35k per year, or about what they're paying for healthcare. I'd say its disengenuous to include healthcare costs because CA probably pays close to that to support non-incarcerated people too.
Another major reason to actually pay a prisoner a legitimate wage: It lets them exit prison without being completely destitute. If you go to prison and have less than $500 in the bank when you do... how do you avoid being homeless and feeding yourself if you have no savings and no job?
I would even consider it fair to charge a 50% tax on their private-market-equivalent wages to account for the equivalent housing/food/medicine they get. But it should be the prisoner's choice to work or not as well.
The question would be who pays the costs and who makes the profit? I was under the impression that the government paid for the costs almost entirely, and private prison companies take in the profits of prison labor. If this is true, then it is certainly profitable to put more people in prison. At least for everyone except the taxpayer.
Correctional officer and police unions make up the bulk of the "prison-industrial complex" lobbying parties, and private prisons house a vast minority of inmates in the US. One, out of the 35 prisons in California, is privately owned. It's less of a single industry making big bucks, and more like a hellish version of a jobs program.
From California Senate rejects involuntary servitude amendment (AP):
From the article: