Sean-Paul,

Can we be sure that more than one million people in prison for the victimless crimes would be effectively integrated in the work-force? I am theoretically all for what you seem to be suggesting but what would the up-tick in unemployment do for public perception, at least temporarily, should the "system" be changed? Will the requisite social services, from unemployment benefits to mid-way houses, to housing subsidies and of course parole officers and so on cost less? Admittedly, they will cost less on the long run as their need will be there for the gradual reintegration of this large number of people. In any case, there will be a period of "pain" early on. Or do I see it totally wrong. Anyways, the numbers are scary for a non-authoritarian regime. You can't have China having numerically fewer prisoners than the US (I think I got this right).

Dimik --- interesting political-economy angle. How about reducing the inflow of people into prison for non-violent behavior crimes through a combination of not arresting for low level possession charges, diversion towards social services for prosititution etc, and increased and significantly more effective probation/parole monitoring, while maintaining current outflow policies for a little while?

We are assuming that policy is supposed to generate local capital. The problem is that they are playing an entirely different game.

'Conservative patronage' is a great label. However if we are looking at the totality of the nexus between drugs, crime and the non-shadow economy, then the effect of geographic arbitrage (a ki of coke is worth more at different locations) along with how the liquidity generated by drug trafficking somehow ends up within the financial system, we find that the White Man Gets Paid Off All'a Dat.

So the illegal cocaine money benefits the street dealer, the distribution guy, the money laundering guy, the bank, Wall Street and their friends in the CIA, the people employed at the prison. Who loses? the guy caught with the bag, and wherever the wealth came from to pay for that bag.

How does the political economy of Afghanistan/Colombia/Kosovo work? The 'expense' of negative-ROI arrangements is really a payout somewhere else. You can multiply the value of running an inner city drug ring by laundering it through a publicly traded corporation: the power of drug money is the POP - Price/Earnings Ratio gives the stock a big bump if you can funnel in more earnings.

Thus the 'expense' of damaging Compton is only in balance to how much Wall Street is making by sucking the blood out of the area.

Then there is HUD-insured mortgage fraud, wherein the collapse of the area is actually incentivized for the federal insurance holders via foreclosure. Powerful players can constantly get the HUD writeoffs over and over. That's negative-ROI economic structuring. (this is how Harvard Endowment made millions by slumlording.)

Additionally lawyers profit from the money laundering and the legal machinery turning - this appears to be the ultimate ideological demand of HBO's The Wire, which concludes its run next week.

http://www.solari.com/learn/articles_risk.htm
hongpong.com -negative_return_investment_economy-katherine_austin_fitts_and_fake_war_drugs
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0408/S00277.htm
--
Hongpong.com

Fester thanks for your comments. I really buy the less arrests gradual increase in releases angle. It makes sense. Also your example from Pittsburgh makes so much sense. I wonder how much of the 20000 reintroduction in the correction system cost is legal fees as HongPong seems to be arguing. All in all the debate on this issue should be had at some point as other than the Bill Cosby "be responsible" angle, which of course covers only one aspect of the issue as it only addresses (if address it does) problems in the African American community there is little else discussed. Obama anything, Hillary?

A Wackenhut employee told me Dubya was a stockholder in the corporation. Rehabilitation is not the goal. The corporation recieves from 50 to 90 dollars a day per prisoner. This is biz people. If you work they tax your pay. You buy dope the CIA has smuggled into the country. You get busted they sell your house and car and then put you on ice, for a profit. We are their cattle on the street or locked up.
When we cease to be merchandise for the globes they will eliminate us.
Read Operation Garden Plot or Rex 84.

Since when was drugs and prostitution victimless crimes?

I see lots of dead crackheads who OD all the time in the news.
Just yesterday - San Diego news media was all abuze about the Preacher who went to TJ to shoot heroine and ended up dead.

And not single City Main Street Association will approve of prostitutes working in their neighborhood (except Vegas) because it scares away legitimate customers.

Many prostitutes are trying to support their crack habit - a double victim whammy.

This would be more than just adding up the current social costs of prostitution and drug trafficking since the proper counter-factual world would have to take into account the extra crimes that would occur if we got rid of the deterrent effect. Personally, I think prostitution should be legal, but I have no idea what the elasticity of prostitution is with respect to jail time....that might be an interesting paper however.

The cost/benefit factor is completely irrelevant in a profit driven corporate max security system.

When KBR is building prisons, when the money to build, run and fill them, comes from taxpayer money, the only concern is to keep it going. Lobby for more prisons. Lobby to create more criminals. Create more criminals. Incarcerate more criminals. Obtain more taxpayer money.. Profit. Repeat.

To those that say people should go to jail for personally destructive behavior like taking drugs, might I suggest jail time for eating too much and being fat.

Fuck you. [it] -ed.

I did inhale.