On Feb 17, 9:16*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
DGDevin wrote:

Besides, if the rehab works (and sometimes it doesn't) then you're
looking at a one-time expense. *For the same money you get to lock up
someone for just a year of perhaps a multi-year sentence, and the
odds of them returning to prison are high. *So which approach seems
like a better use of the taxpayer's dollar? *Half of all federal
prison inmates are there for drug offenses, and prisons cost the
American taxpayer over $60 billion a year--I think exploring
alternatives is at least worth trying.

Put 'em to work. They earn money while in jail, and it's paid out
when they're released if there have been no problems. Some of the
money goes directly to their family if the family is on support. If
there's a victim, a percentage, based on the severity of the crime,
goes to the victim.

Plus, putting people in prison for extended terms actually SAVES the
taxpayer money in reduced crime.

And every man is an island, right? Who's supporting the
incarcerated's family while they're in the pokey? Oh, right - you and
me.

You are a Jedi Master at cherry picking data and ignoring variables.

R