If you mean the economic burden, yes, but I don't think they need to bear all the burden

My big complaint with private prisons, as they stand today, is that they tend to get paid based on heads and beds. As such, prisons are rewarded when prisoners behave badly (extending their stay), and when former prisoners reoffend (repeating their stay). There are no countervailing economic pressures.

If we want prisons to work, we need the economics to work in favor of societal goals. Everything else equal, a prison that generates low recidivism should get paid more than one that generates high recidivism, because they're eliminating future costs.

> If we want prisons to work, we need the economics to work in favor of societal goals.

This is true, but we already ignore that for our prison population. Otherwise, our system would be less punitive and more aimed to reformation and building productive citizens.

Proof that not only do individuals double down on beliefs in the face evidence against them, but so do groups/organizations/governments.

Yes, the economic burden but also the ethical burden of ensuring their sentence is administered fairly. Corporeal punishment at the hands of the guards is not a fair administration of the punishment.

I agree, legislators should add more budget as they expand the definition of criminal behavior. If you want to criminalize up-skirting, all the power but allocate money for the costs. Do not put the burden on corrections department to find money, because you have new prisoners coming your way. Much of the burden of costs move to prisoners was because politicians want to expand the definition of criminal behavior but not the burden of increasing prison population.

Then they came for the up-skirters, and there was no one left to speak...

I guess? I don't think that's why private prisons are wrong, though. Private prisons have an incentive to keep you incarcerated as long as possible, because that's how they make money. The government, on the other hand, has little incentive to keep you in prison; they'd rather you get back into society so you can start paying taxes again.

The government has many interests. Their goals are driven by politicians who need votes. The skyrocketing rate of imprisonment comes in large part from the public's seemingly insatiable demand for harsher sentences. The only things that voters seem to hate more are tax increases.

Perhaps "government" was too broad of a term.

Inmates sometimes end up staying prison longer than their original sentence because of crimes they commit in prison. The point I was making is that a private prison warden has much more of an incentive to punish those crimes severely than a public one does.

And should be responsible, including fines and jail terms, for any harm that happens to the individual while under their care.

OK, fine, I guess we'll privatize the courts too since you asked for it.

That's not what I meant but you could totally take it that way given how I worded what I said.

No, he didn't ask for it. Where did you read that?

It's a perfectly valid, though unintended, reading of what I wrote.

Sorry, forgot to include the surrounding <humor> tags.

Try to ignore what’s inside the parentheses and the headline.

be careful what you wish for because you missed (outsourced) from that list