On 30/01/2012 20:45, Steve Walker wrote:
On 30/01/2012 01:39, Clive George wrote:
On 29/01/2012 23:07, Steve Walker wrote:
On 25/01/2012 17:44, Clive George wrote:
On 25/01/2012 17:19, harry wrote:

My prisons would be cheap. They would work and pay for their keep.
They would remain there working until they had paid (in cash)
full compensation for their crimes to their victims.
They would not be a nice place to be in either.

Where would you get the money from? We've already got an oversupply of
labour - how would yours be any better? Would you undercut normal
working people to get your work?

On the simple point of undercutting labour, that is not a problem -
China is already doing that. As we already have to pay for imprisoning
people, getting them to work for no pay would simply be repatriating
work that has been outsourced and would produce "profit" (reducing
prison costs) at no cost to UK jobs.

Have a harder think about what you're proposing. Think about the sort of
work it's practical to get prisoners doing, and think about the sort of
work which has been sent abroad - there's a very small intersection, and
it's not going to make any economic sense to do it.

A lot of assembly and simple manufacturing work has been sent abroad. As
the prisoners already have to be housed and supervised, the cost of
getting them doing something is not great and therefore their labour
could be costed out to companies as a very low rate. IIRC Volex dimmer
switches used to be assembled at Styal Prison.

The overheads of employing prisoners will mean this is never
cost-effective. Chinese labour is insanely cheap, and doesn't require
extra security.

However, it may be more cost effective overall to get prisoners
perfoming work that is more likely to be useful in getting a job after
release.

Agreed - but that's just part of normal rehabilitation, not punishment.
And doing that is not going to do what Harry desires, which is turn
enough of a profit to pay for the prisoner's keep.

He may be suggesting that, but I am not. I simply think that keeping the
prisoners occupied and maybe earning a small amount towards the prison
service is better than nothing. No way would it pay even a reasonbable
proportion of the cost of imprisoning people, but it would make a small
contribution and, possibly more importantly, keep them occupied.

TV keeps them occupied.

Getting them doing positive work is a good plan, but it'll cost more
than it makes and it won't satisfy those who want chain gangs. Harry is
one of those people.