For-Profit Prisons: Eight Statistics That Show the Problems

ChezC3 said:

Abso-freakin-lutely.

This is one of the biggest disagreement's I had with Gary Johnson.

You don't make the dollar an incentive for imprisoning people. This really should be a no-brainer...

Click to expand...

Last I remember the legislators make the laws, people break the law, juries and judges send them to jail for a specific amount of time. And most get out before their time is up.

Now if what you are saying in "bold" I take you are suggesting their are bribes to legislators, judges, lawyers and juries to get more people in jail. That is a crime.

Born Free said:

Now to the above, the report you quoted made no recommendations what so ever regarding private run corrections. If there had been recommendations regrading the private run companies then we would have something talk about. You can spend all your time going through the report and quote this and that, but in the end their own report came up with NO RECOMMENDATIONS to do anything regarding the private companies. Zip zero, nada, nothing, period.

So yeah, I rest my case on the Recommendations. There was none regarding private companies.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if they recommended anything or not. That does not change the facts outlined in the report, whether you like it or not.

Private prisons lobby lawmakers for conditions favorable to private prisons, including harsher penalties. Fact. Print it.

Born Free said:

Last I remember the legislators make the laws, people break the law, juries and judges send them to jail for a specific amount of time. And most get out before their time is up.

Now if what you are saying in "bold" I take you are suggesting their are bribes to legislators, judges, lawyers and juries to get more people in jail. That is a crime.

Click to expand...

The investigations into this I've conducted has shown me that part of the contract these prison's negotiate is for 80% (or somewhere abouts) guaranteed capacity.

How do you guarantee a prison's capacity?

Kobie said:

The LOBBYING isn't correctable. They could just end all of this by BANNING PRIVATE PRISONS, but that wasn't the intent of the report.

Click to expand...

Is LOBBYING a crime? Is LOBBYING for you're vote a crime? Are all the thousands of Lobbyist criminals? Or are lobbyist committing a crime? Does anyone have to do what a lobbyist says?

It sure tell me you want to pick and chose who can lobby, how about doing away with lobbyist and leave the private run corrections alone.

Kobie said:

It doesn't matter if they recommended anything or not. That does not change the facts outlined in the report, whether you like it or not.

Private prisons lobby lawmakers for conditions favorable to private prisons, including harsher penalties. Fact. Print it.

Click to expand...

BF has to be acting obtuse on purpose. I don't want to believe that anyone is that blind naturally. Corporations spend money on lobbying expecting a return on their "investment". They continue to spend money on lobbying only if they do indeed get a return on their "investment". I mean... DUH!!!

ChezC3 said:

The investigations into this I've conducted has shown me that part of the contract these prison's negotiate is for 80% (or somewhere abouts) guaranteed capacity.

How do you guarantee a prison's capacity?

Click to expand...

Easy, don't build more prisons, in fact most prisons are over crowed. And a state can always shut down a prison to keep others full. Anyone private or government does not want to run a prison as half speed. That is a losing proposition for the private company or government run facility and the tax payer.

radcen said:

BF has to be acting obtuse on purpose. I don't want to believe that anyone is that blind naturally. Corporations spend money on lobbying expecting a return on their "investment". They continue to spend money on lobbying only if they do indeed get a return on their "investment". I mean... DUH!!!

Click to expand...

Try reading my post 79

Born Free said:

Try reading my post 79

Click to expand...

I did. I stand by my assessment.

Born Free said:

Easy, don't build more prisons, in fact most prisons are over crowed. And a state can always shut down a prison to keep others full. Anyone private or government does not want to run a prison as half speed. That is a losing proposition for the private company or government run facility and the tax payer.

Click to expand...

This sounds allot like people I come across who believe gold isn't manipulated. That it just so happens that supply meets demand to the gram, every, single, year....

Don't believe it...

When you have to make quotas people go to jail when they shouldn't have to...

but, here, look for yourself...

www.inthepublicinterest.org/sites/default/files/Criminal-Lockup Quota-Report.pdf

radcen said:

I did. I stand by my assessment.

Click to expand...

What assessment. That lobbyist are criminals? Or is it that lobbyist are legal in this country. Here is my assessment, with all you that are against private run corrections it's not that at all, but it's all about lobbyist. You want to pick and choose what lobbyist can be allowed in this country.

How about not picking on private companies of any business model and be against lobbyist. Period. My assessment is you don't want to do that, because you want to pick and choose.

ChezC3 said:

This sounds allot like people I come across who believe gold isn't manipulated. That it just so happens that supply meets demand to the gram, every, single, year....

Don't believe it...

When you have to make quotas people go to jail when they shouldn't have to...

but, here, look for yourself...

www.inthepublicinterest.org/sites/default/files/Criminal-Lockup Quota-Report.pdf

Click to expand...

I already answered your question, read post 81. Sorry you're claim in bold is not a proven fact. To run a prison or any hotel etc. you as a operator need a guarantee by the owner of a certain ocupency rate to break even. This is standard in so many operators of hotels, prisons, cruise lines, theme parks, you name it.

I repeat the state or the fed can shut down a prison to keep the capacity of the other prisons near full capacity making for a private or government run facility economical for the tax payer. This is a fact. You can find litature to support your cause at every turn. But because it is written somewhere does not make it SO.

You make the word "quota" sound like a nasty word. Forget "quota" for a second and say "occupancy rate" to run a facility to be efficient it has to have a certain occupancy rate. And to do that the state can close other facilities to guarantee the occupancy rate.

Born Free said:

Is LOBBYING a crime? Is LOBBYING for you're vote a crime? Are all the thousands of Lobbyist criminals? Or are lobbyist committing a crime? Does anyone have to do what a lobbyist says?

It sure tell me you want to pick and chose who can lobby, how about doing away with lobbyist and leave the private run corrections alone.

Click to expand...

Of course lobbying's not a crime. Good lord, could you be more obtuse?

Do you feel the incarceration of our citizens should be a for-profit industry, even if that comes at the expense of people being given harsher sentences due to laws created by politicians who are on the dole of the very companies being paid to house these inmates? Yes or no question.

Kobie said:

Of course lobbying's not a crime. Good lord, could you be more obtuse?

Click to expand...

So good, lobbying is not a crime and is done by many many companies.

Do you feel the incarceration of our citizens should be a for-profit industry

Click to expand...

The incarceration of our citizens is because they committed a crime. Period. Who runs the facility makes no difference to me as long as it is run in accordance with the specifications. And that goes to government or private run.

even if that comes at the expense of people being given harsher sentences due to laws created by politicians who are on the dole of the very companies being paid to house these inmates?

Click to expand...

That is a crime and those that are on the dole should be prosecuted. In our history there have been many politicians taking bribes and have been prosecuted because of it.

Criminal cavity is just that, criminal, and whoever commits a crime should be prosecuted.

Kobie said:

Of course lobbying's not a crime. Good lord, could you be more obtuse?

Click to expand...

Obtuse, the only reason that you don't like private run corrections is because of lobbyist. Period. So do away with the lobbyist for any and all companies, problem solved. Is it not?

Born Free said:

Obtuse, the only reason that you don't like private run corrections is because of lobbyist. Period. So do away with the lobbyist for any and all companies, problem solved. Is it not?

Click to expand...

Um, no it's not.

Born Free said:

War on Drugs, interesting, the world is full of drugs, most all drugs are illegal, even prescription drugs without a Dr. subscription. Illegal drugs can range from blood pressure pills, pain pills, to raw heroin, to pot. However this is not the thread to debate this issue. Start a thread, I'll look for it.

Click to expand...

How do you separate the biggest reason for overcrowded prisons from a discussion of prisons? The two issues are inseparable.

Born Free said:

I already answered your question, read post 81. Sorry you're claim in bold is not a proven fact. To run a prison or any hotel etc. you as a operator need a guarantee by the owner of a certain ocupency rate to break even. This is standard in so many operators of hotels, prisons, cruise lines, theme parks, you name it.

I repeat the state or the fed can shut down a prison to keep the capacity of the other prisons near full capacity making for a private or government run facility economical for the tax payer. This is a fact. You can find litature to support your cause at every turn. But because it is written somewhere does not make it SO.

You make the word "quota" sound like a nasty word. Forget "quota" for a second and say "occupancy rate" to run a facility to be efficient it has to have a certain occupancy rate. And to do that the state can close other facilities to guarantee the occupancy rate.

Click to expand...

Except we ain't talking about taking the family for weekend getaway. We're talking about people's lives. Further, I suppose you're under the impression that shutting down a prison facility is as simple as turning around the sign on the door to say CLOSED and just sending the cook on home early...

I suppose you're also under the impression all prisons are created equal. Level 1 prisoners can just as easily serve their time in a Level 4 or 5, and vice versa. That the employees of these facilities are just pawns in the game and you know, their livelihood, the livelihood of the surrounding communities which are directly effected by the presence of these facilities, they too have to just suck it up when the State, County, or Federal government decide that occupancy rates just can't meet contractual obligations, and who pays for the breach of contract? That don't cost money neither I suppose?

I know how hard our representatives work for us in State and Federal legislatures, they'll go through the whole ordeal of opening and closing facilities, creating inter-state agreements of transfer, negotiations of reimbursement, the whole nine yards, instead of just passing along sentencing guidelines that ensure quotas are met and the money keeps flowing... What money? The money that goes to the contractors, to the lawyers, the lobbyists, the politicians, the judges, you know the money...

See, you're thinking plausible deniability when you should be thinking conflict of interest.

I don't believe the government should be doing much, but this should be theirs exclusively.

ChezC3 said:

Except we ain't talking about taking the family for weekend getaway. We're talking about people's lives. Further, I suppose you're under the impression that shutting down a prison facility is as simple as turning around the sign on the door to say CLOSED and just sending the cook on home early...

I suppose you're also under the impression all prisons are created equal. Level 1 prisoners can just as easily serve their time in a Level 4 or 5, and vice versa. That the employees of these facilities are just pawns in the game and you know, their livelihood, the livelihood of the surrounding communities which are directly effected by the presence of these facilities, they too have to just suck it up when the State, County, or Federal government decide that occupancy rates just can't meet contractual obligations, and who pays for the breach of contract? That don't cost money neither I suppose?

I know how hard our representatives work for us in State and Federal legislatures, they'll go through the whole ordeal of opening and closing facilities, creating inter-state agreements of transfer, negotiations of reimbursement, the whole nine yards, instead of just passing along sentencing guidelines that ensure quotas are met and the money keeps flowing... What money? The money that goes to the contractors, to the lawyers, the lobbyists, the politicians, the judges, you know the money...

See, you're thinking plausible deniability when you should be thinking conflict of interest.

I don't believe the government should be doing much, but this should be theirs exclusively.

Click to expand...

You are hung up on this ocupency rate for a company or a government run prison. A facility is built, which no one wants to build, and someone has to run it. The reason the states or the fed outsource the management of some of these prisons is it is more economical for the tax payer. Period. That is a good thing. Outsourcing is done all the time by governments and your argument is there is a conflict of interest. There is not. If there was a conflict of interest then outsourcing would be banned. Governments contract for services daily.

In bold, that statement is bogus and BS. You make false statements and accusations that you have no proof. Hey guys our prisons are falling shot on occupancy, we have to hurry up and increase our sentencing standards to get our prisons full again. What BS. I'm done. Have a good day.

Dittohead not! said:

How do you separate the biggest reason for overcrowded prisons from a discussion of prisons? The two issues are inseparable.

Click to expand...

I have not. You would have to go back a read one of my post.

Born Free said:

You are hung up on this ocupency rate for a company or a government run prison. A facility is built, which no one wants to build, and someone has to run it. The reason the states or the fed outsource the management of some of these prisons is it is more economical for the tax payer. Period. That is a good thing. Outsourcing is done all the time by governments and your argument is there is a conflict of interest. There is not. If there was a conflict of interest then outsourcing would be banned. Governments contract for services daily.

In bold, that statement is bogus and BS. You make false statements and accusations that you have no proof. Hey guys our prisons are falling shot on occupancy, we have to hurry up and increase our sentencing standards to get our prisons full again. What BS. I'm done. Have a good day.

Click to expand...

I'm hung up on occupancy rates for privately owned prisons. Government's aren't suppose to be taking a profit, so therefore, I have no concern about quotas in public institutions. When did anyone anywhere at any time spend millions on something they didn't want? (in the private sector, in the public this is a non-issue, they do it all the time to create jobs, it's asinine, but hey, what can I tell ya...)

Come now. More economical?

Colorado: Though crime has dropped by a third in the past decade, an occupancy requirement covering three for-profit prisons has forced taxpayers to pay an additional $2 million.

Arizona: Three Arizona for-profit prison contracts have a staggering 100% quota, even though a 2012 analysis from Tucson Citizen shows that the company’s per-day charge for each prisoner has increased an average of 13.9% over the life of the contracts.

Ohio: A 20-year deal to privately operate the Lake Erie Correctional Institution includes a 90% quota, and has contributed to cutting corners on safety, including overcrowding, areas without secure doors and an increase in crime both inside the prison and the surrounding community.

Click to expand...

Lockup Quotas and


Oh, yeah, look at the savings, the savings...:roll:

Shall we get into these companies suing States for not meeting quotas?


My statements are dead on.

I have ample proof, I do not make false statements, just because you for some reason wish to turn a blind eye to what's clearly a problem, don't go making up things.

Pa. judge gets 28 years in 'kids for cash' case - US news - Crime & courts | NBC News

You're done? good, and with all your free time try googling this issue and go through some of the 25 million sites on what this topic brings up...

There's ample proof, you've just got to open your eyes.

but a good day to you...

ChezC3 said:

I'm hung up on occupancy rates for privately owned prisons. Government's aren't suppose to be taking a profit, so therefore, I have no concern about quotas in public institutions. When did anyone anywhere at any time spend millions on something they didn't want? (in the private sector, in the public this is a non-issue, they do it all the time to create jobs, it's asinine, but hey, what can I tell ya...)

Come now. More economical?


Lockup Quotas and


Oh, yeah, look at the savings, the savings...:roll:

Shall we get into these companies suing States for not meeting quotas?


My statements are dead on.

I have ample proof, I do not make false statements, just because you for some reason wish to turn a blind eye to what's clearly a problem, don't go making up things.

Pa. judge gets 28 years in 'kids for cash' case - US news - Crime & courts | NBC News

You're done? good, and with all your free time try googling this issue and go through some of the 25 million sites on what this topic brings up...

There's ample proof, you've just got to open your eyes.

but a good day to you...

Click to expand...

If there absolutely must be private contracts... and no there is no 'must', but this is for the sake of conversation and presenting possible options... then the contract should be a flat fee with absolutely zero minimum or maximum quotas. This would effectively eliminate the corporation's need for "customers" and might even induce them to allow for reasonable release, etc.

radcen said:

If there absolutely must be private contracts... and no there is no 'must', but this is for the sake of conversation and presenting possible options... then the contract should be a flat fee with absolutely zero minimum or maximum quotas. This would effectively eliminate the corporation's need for "customers" and might even induce them to allow for reasonable release, etc.

Click to expand...

For argument's sake, I'm not above doing hypotheticals, for argument sake, without the quota it wouldn't be a viable business model...

ChezC3 said:

For argument's sake, I'm not above doing hypotheticals, for argument sake, without the quota it wouldn't be a viable business model...

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It could still be profitable, it would just be limited.

Having said that, I still would not advocate it. The incentive to cut corners would be even more important to them, and who knows what we'd get as a result?

radcen said:

Not necessarily. It could still be profitable, it would just be limited.

Having said that, I still would not advocate it. The incentive to cut corners would be even more important to them, and who knows what we'd get as a result?

Click to expand...

Narrow margins would be a detractor for going into it in the first place in my opinion, essentially you're running a "cost plus" operation. Couple that with no guaranteed revenue streams, a no cyclic, not simply a non cyclic business model, the regulations and guidelines, the PR to keep all the advocacy groups from completely running a muck, the liability insurance -- nah, there are many better (and more profitable) ways to make use of that money...

Any way you cut it, it's just ill conceived...

ChezC3 said:

Narrow margins would be a detractor for going into it in the first place in my opinion, essentially you're running a "cost plus" operation. Couple that with no guaranteed revenue streams, a no cyclic, not simply a non cyclic business model, the regulations and guidelines, the PR to keep all the advocacy groups from completely running a muck, the liability insurance -- nah, there are many better (and more profitable) ways to make use of that money...

Any way you cut it, it's just ill conceived...

Click to expand...

Not sure I'm reading this right. The flat fee would be guaranteed, so they'd get the same if 10 beds were filled or 100 beds. There would actually be an incentive to NOT have them all filled, hence no incentive to advocate all the crap laws we have now.

Note: I do NOT advocate this as an ideal alternative, just a better one. Ideally, profit motive should be eliminated entirely.