The loss of rights should be the payment for their crimes. Having volunteer job opportunities for reform or having them maintain their own facilities is the max that should be mandated.

It’s just slavery with all the perverse incentives that come with it, and I think we’d all be better off if this was a lever that no one in society had access to pull on

▲

malcolmgreaves 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Sounds nice, until you're robbed, they catch and prosecute the guy successfully, and then you're unable to be made whole again because the criminal doesn't have any money to pay you back.

What then? If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again? Does the state pay? If so, why do taxpayers who didn't commit a crime foot the bill? If it's insurance, then why do non-criminals paying insurance premiums foot the bill?

If there's nothing linking the action (_theft_) to the needed outcome (_restitution_), then there's this unmoored loop of perverse incentives wherein some folks can continue to commit crimes with very limited consequences.

Doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to work while in prison. But surely for any and all crimes that have a clearly defined dollar amount, shouldn't that criminal be forced to pay that amount back? Garnishing future wages can be circumvented (_just don't get a real job when you get out, keep stealing things to support yourself_). And even at best, it's very much _delayed_ restitution. Justice delayed is justice denied.

▲

margalabargala 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> What then? If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again?

To be clear, in the present day, when a prisoner works, how much money do you think they make, and who do you think keeps the value produced?

▲

WaltPurvis 16 hours ago | parent [-]

The article says the software developer is making a six-figure salary and the prison system withholds 10%.

	▲	margalabargala 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The prisoner in the article is so unusual someone wrote an article about them and it made headlines on a tech forum. The parent thread we're discussing is broadly about prisoner work in the US. So we should be considering the mean and median values, not the one guy making 4 orders of magnitude more than everyone else.

▲

ryoshoe 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again? Does the state pay? If so, why do taxpayers who didn't commit a crime foot the bill? If it's insurance, then why do non-criminals paying insurance premiums foot the bill?

Are any of these solutions that unreasonable when you consider that the state/taxpayers are already footing the bill to keep prisoners incarcerated?

▲

p_ing 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Sounds nice, until you're robbed, they catch and prosecute the guy successfully, and then you're unable to be made whole again because the criminal doesn't have any money to pay you back.

How do they pay you back when employers run background checks (not to mention housing)?

▲

mylifeandtimes 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> then how can you ever be made whole again?

by your insurance company.

Heck, this doesn't even require them to catch the perp.

▲

johnnyanmac 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>you're unable to be made whole again because the criminal doesn't have any money to pay you back.

What does that have to do with rehabilitation? That person can go to prison, realize the errors of their ways, and have a healthy life.I don't have to like nor forgive them. I'm not being "made whole again" no matter how long you lock them up.

> If they're not forced to produce something of value to give to you, then how can you ever be made whole again?

1) you generally don't get something "produced of value", unless suffering is a currency now. Probably is in 2025

2) insurance. not everything can be given back, but many material goods can be compensated.

>If it's insurance, then why do non-criminals paying insurance premiums foot the bill?

because that's how insurance works, in spirit. You're all pooling together a fund so that you help out some other person when they need it. The instigator is often not the one footing the bill to begin with. Shaking down a criminal with no money is as useful as yelling at a forest fire as it burns your place down.

>Doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to work while in prison. But surely for any and all crimes that have a clearly defined dollar amount, shouldn't that criminal be forced to pay that amount back?

if they have it, sure. As is, this isn't the model of the "justice" system, though. You're not getting paid back for anyone put behind bars.