Unpaid Prison Labor

[Kfox]

Because they can still strike? What does that have to do with the point I was making?

If they were slaves, they would be beaten and tortured for disobeying.

Slaves can revolt or refuse to work, too. It doesn't make them not slaves.

Slaves did not have rights, they were owned as property, and the owner could beat them into compliance.

So, it doesn't matter if they're forced to AND paid significantly below minimum wage for their labour?

Because the cost of products are not the same in prison as it is in the outside world. that's why minimum wage laws don't apply to prisons.

 

[Kfox]

If prisons are for profit, it provides incentive for the government to lock more people up.

Prisons are paid by the Government. Why would the Government want to lock more people up resulting in them having to pay more to the prisons?

 

[libre]

Prisons are paid by the Government. Why would the Government want to lock more people up resulting in them having to pay more to the prisons?

Not entirely true, some states like Montana have half of their prison population in private prisons. These prisons are paid by the government to keep people in prison, there is no economic incentive to eliminate recidivism.

"incarceration not only upholds the justice system, but also subsidizes construction companies, companies that operate prison food services and medical facilities,[5] surveillance and corrections technology vendors, corporations that contract cheap prison labor, correctional officers unions,[6] private probation companies,[5] criminal lawyers, and the lobby groups that represent them. The term also refers more generally to interest groups who, in their interactions with the prison system, prioritize financial gain over rehabilitating criminals."

While the government may not be directly profiting in public prisons, this interest bloc is capable of lobbying and does do so.

Prison–industrial complex - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[ADigitalArtist]

If they were slaves, they would be beaten and tortured for disobeying.

Slaves did not have rights, they were owned as property, and the owner could beat them into compliance.

Because the cost of products are not the same in prison as it is in the outside world. that's why minimum wage laws don't apply to prisons.

It should be completely obvious to say that chattel slavery is only one form of slavery, and not the most prolific through history nor only what the 13th amendment of the constitution of the United States was discussing. All that was required to be a slave was compulsory labor and restricted liberties. So slavery as indentured servitude or involuntary servitude is also still slavery.

You can even confirm it within the 13th amendment because a special exception to the ban on slavery was made specifically as punishment for crimes. The convicts in question are slaves.

 

[Kfox]

Not entirely true, some states like Montana have half of their prison population in private prisons. These prisons are paid by the government to keep people in prison, there is no economic incentive to eliminate recidivism.

"incarceration not only upholds the justice system, but also subsidizes construction companies, companies that operate prison food services and medical facilities,[5] surveillance and corrections technology vendors, corporations that contract cheap prison labor, correctional officers unions,[6] private probation companies,[5] criminal lawyers, and the lobby groups that represent them. The term also refers more generally to interest groups who, in their interactions with the prison system, prioritize financial gain over rehabilitating criminals."

While the government may not be directly profiting in public prisons, this interest bloc is capable of lobbying and does do so.

Prison–industrial complex - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If the Government has to pay Private Prisons for each person they lock up, what is the incentive for the Government to lock up more people resulting in them having to pay these prisons more money?

 

[Kfox]

It should be completely obvious to say that chattel slavery is only one form of slavery, and not the most prolific through history nor only what the 13th amendment of the constitution of the United States was discussing. All that was required to be a slave was compulsory labor and restricted liberties. So slavery as indentured servitude or involuntary servitude is also still slavery.

You can even confirm it within the 13th amendment because a special exception to the ban on slavery was made specifically as punishment for crimes. The convicts in question are slaves.

Slavery is a loaded term. If you gonna go with all the other terms put under the umbrella of slavery, they say Prostitution is white slavery; yet many women choose to become prostitutes rather than working regular jobs. Does this mean some people choose to become slaves instead of regular jobs? What about people in the military? Are they slaves too? Compulsory labor; right?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Slavery is a loaded term. If you gonna go with all the other terms put under the umbrella of slavery, they say Prostitution is white slavery; yet many women choose to become prostitutes rather than working regular jobs. Does this mean some people choose to become slaves instead of regular jobs? What about people in the military? Are they slaves too? Compulsory labor; right?

For the purpose of this discussion we're talking about legal terms and application of the law. If you think you can use the legal definition of slavery to argue against prostitution I'd love to see you try. Because it is not that vague in actual law practice

 

[Revoltingest]

Slavery is a loaded term. If you gonna go with all the other terms put under the umbrella of slavery, they say Prostitution is white slavery; yet many women choose to become prostitutes rather than working regular jobs. Does this mean some people choose to become slaves instead of regular jobs? What about people in the military? Are they slaves too? Compulsory labor; right?

The military draft is indeed slavery.
And unlike prison inmates, involuntary
servitude without being convicted of
a crime is unconstitutional.
Of course, SCOTUS has some tortured
rationale to ignore the explicit language
of 13th Amendment.

 

[Shaul]

"R​

The Federal Bureau of Prisons disagrees:

​

Sentenced inmates are required to work if they are medically able. Institution work assignments include employment in areas like food service or the warehouse, or work as an inmate orderly, plumber, painter, or groundskeeper. Inmates earn 12¢ to 40¢ per hour for these work assignments.​

​

BOP: Work Programs

www.bop.gov

That citation doesn't say prisoners are forced to work. Required doesn't mean forced.

 

[Shaul]

No it's not. It's compulsory at the discretion of the prison system. People are forced to work or suffer the consequences. At least inside the United States.

No, they are not forced to work. A prisoner can refuse to work. Refusing comes with natural consequences. But being forced isn't one of the natural consequences.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, they are not forced to work. A prisoner can refuse to work. Refusing comes with natural consequences. But being forced isn't one of the natural consequences.

That is simply not true. Not without punitive consequences.

 

[Firenze]

No, they are not forced to work. A prisoner can refuse to work. Refusing comes with natural consequences. But being forced isn't one of the natural consequences.

Your equivalent argument:

"I have this gun to your head and I demand your wallet or I will shoot you in the head. Of course, you are free to refuse, and refusal only comes with natural consequences..." Yikes.

 

[Firenze]

Prisoners are paid, if at all, pennies. Way less than minimum wage. As a result, they come out of prison with little to no money, little to no job prospects, many have lost homes, property, family. In the US repeat offense is so high in part because we don't give prisoners the tools to actually reform. Just worse and worse prospects.

Also, framing all prisoners effected by slave labor as rapists and killers is a narrative designed to remove empathy. There are far more people who couldn't afford medication or counseling which turned to illegal drugs. Drugs are the number one highest incarceration resulting crime in the US. After that is overwhelmingly nonviolent theft and property damage. The amount of people arrested for vagrancy is astonishing alone.

Do you feel all prisoners should be treated identically with regard to benefits, or the lack of them, regardless of the nature of their crimes?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Do you feel all prisoners should be treated identically with regard to benefits, or the lack of them, regardless of the nature of their crimes?

Do I believe all sentencing should be the same? No.
Do I believe that there are lines that shouldn't be crossed as far as sentencing for all criminals regardless of the nature of their crimes? Yes.

 

[McBell]

That citation doesn't say prisoners are forced to work. Required doesn't mean forced.

Fair enough.
Though it seems to me you are splitting hairs.

 

[Shaul]

Fair enough.
Though it seems to me you are splitting hairs.

The Constitution makes the same distinction in Amendment XIII by differentiating between slavery and involuntary servitude.

 

[Shaul]

Your equivalent argument:

"I have this gun to your head and I demand your wallet or I will shoot you in the head. Of course, you are free to refuse, and refusal only comes with natural consequences..." Yikes.

That is nowhere near an equivalent argument. It is outrageous that you would make the moral equivalency between the penal system and an armed robber.

 

[Firenze]

That is nowhere near an equivalent argument. It is outrageous that you would make the moral equivalency between the penal system and an armed robber.

Your outrage doesn’t have any impact on the validity of the analogy.

 

[Shaul]

Your outrage doesn’t have any impact on the validity of the analogy.

You are right but not in the way you think. My outrage can't impact the validity of an analogy that doesn't have any.

 

[Firenze]

You are right but not in the way you think. My outrage can't impact the validity of an analogy that doesn't have any.

And yet you can’t show where the analogy fails.