Capitalism is always better, innit?

[Markle]

A well built watch that goes too fast sometimes and at other times too slow? Hmmmmmmmm

Just like it is supposed to work.

 

[Markle]

Not at all. Ever heard of boom and bust? What happened in 2008? What happened in 1929?

So what?

 

[Markle]

Study finds private prisons keep inmates longer, without reducing future crime

Furthermore, any suggestion that recidivism is restricted to prison experience, versus the other underlying causes that lead to crime (in any circumstance), would be an attempt to associate blame where it may not be due.

I am not saying that someone could not come to that conclusion if they choose to make that association, just that it is a poor association.

How many crimes do they commit during that additional time the criminal was behind bars?

 

[Markle]

Mate, you are a fucking tool. What are these "government unions" you are on about. If you cant get basic facts right then I cant see how you can converse with adults. I would ask you for a link to back up your shit but really, I think you are just on a wind up mission.

Are you saying that public (government) unions don't exist?

 

[Markle]

Perhaps you have a link to these "government unions" ?

You're being facetious,...aren't you?

 

[Hiryuu]

How many crimes do they commit during that additional time the criminal was behind bars?

I'll disregard the fact you may be trying to make a point that doesn't address the fact that crimes occur behind bars.

Since your question specifically asks how many crimes the prisoners commit during additional time behind bars, that would be asking if the number of crimes committed behind bars was different between private and public prisons (since the difference is based on additional time or private prisons).

Whereas you cannot necessarily find a specific answer to that question, you can however find an answer as to the difference in crimes committed behind bars at public facilities versus private facilities and likewise assume that not only do the crimes occur more often behind private prison bars, they would in turn occur more often during additional time, that isn't even calculated in the time not spent behind bars in a public facility.

To answer your question (as best as it can be answered)...
Crimes committed behind bars in the private facilities during additional time, are 46% more often for violent incidents, and 65% more often for inmate on inmate assault, than if they had dome the same additional time in a public facility.

Private vs. Public Prisons: Differences & Statistics - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

 

[frigidweirdo]

[

Oh piss off. I'm not one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together.

What I'm looking for is evidence that I could use in FORMULATING AN ARGUMENT and this article does NOT show me enough to be able to do so.

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

Point in case, your opinion of yourself is irrelevant to any argument you could make.

You asked for a study, and I provided you with one quickly (addressing the fact there are more), You didn't debate the ideas in the study, you debated the fact the study must be flawed because you didn't like what it studied, and it didn't represent your desired outcome.

You are correct, that you are not, "one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together". Unfortunately you have mistaken your abilities to make an argument, with the idea it makes your argument worth anything.

Actually what I asked for was

I've struggled to find recidivism rates between states, especially involving Louisiana to compare. Do you have anything that shows this in detail?

Then you show me a study without Louisiana, that doesn't compare recidivism rates between states, and then you accuse me of not liking this study because "it doesn't support your desired conclusion", which if you look at the original post, you'll see if complete rubbish.

As for "Unfortunately you have mistaken your abilities to make an argument, with the idea it makes your argument worth anything." what am I supposed to do with what you've posted?

I told you, I need certain facts before I can even try to make an argument, and I don't have these facts.

 

[Markle]

How many crimes do they commit during that additional time the criminal was behind bars?

I'll disregard the fact you may be trying to make a point that doesn't address the fact that crimes occur behind bars.

Since your question specifically asks how many crimes the prisoners commit during additional time behind bars, that would be asking if the number of crimes committed behind bars was different between private and public prisons (since the difference is based on additional time or private prisons).

Whereas you cannot necessarily find a specific answer to that question, you can however find an answer as to the difference in crimes committed behind bars at public facilities versus private facilities and likewise assume that not only do the crimes occur more often behind private prison bars, they would in turn occur more often during additional time, that isn't even calculated in the time not spent behind bars in a public facility.

To answer your question (as best as it can be answered)...
Crimes committed behind bars in the private facilities during additional time, are 46% more often for violent incidents, and 65% more often for inmate on inmate assault, than if they had dome the same additional time in a public facility.

Private vs. Public Prisons: Differences & Statistics - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Yep, no innocent civilians are victims. Thank you.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Perhaps you have a link to these "government unions" ?

You're being facetious,...aren't you?

Nope. Maybe you have these in the US but the very concept is alien to the way we operate in the UK. There are unions that represent government workers but they are independent of the government.
Without tracking back I think that this clown was suggesting that the unions,egged on by the government ,conspired to bring down a private business.
You would have to be on crack to believe that could happen.

I am waiting for Mrs T to decide what to wear when we go out later so I will explain it to you.

Firstly we have a government that is right wing and totally wedded to privatisation. They sold off the railways and have a political interest in making it work.
Train privatisation has failed us: it’s time to do things differently
They would pretty much do anything to keep the trains in private hands. The alternative is to lose face and political capital.

The RMT are a reasonably militant union who are dealing with the out fall of privatisation. They oppose the governments position totally. The idea that they would work with the government is ludicrous.
Their current beef with Southern is about safety. Southern want to cut costs by removing guards from the trains. The RMT oppose this on safety grounds and also for the purposes of protecting its members.

So the RMT are actually on a collision course with the government backed rail company and the government.

Southern is the worst performing railways in the UK.
Southern rail 'is worst train service'

It has a monopoly,government backing and the reasurance of a safety net if it screws up. It is a failure of capitalism.

And I still dont understand the concept of "government unions".

 

[Hiryuu]

Yep, no innocent civilians are victims. Thank you.

The statistics in no way suggested that. Although most crimes at prisons (public or private) that involve civilians (I would assume you mean people not inmates or guards) are committed by civilians (smuggling is number one on that list), there are also crimes that involve inmates and civilians (mostly assault).

Oh, you are welcome, and glad I could help you better understand that.

 

[Hiryuu]

[

Oh piss off. I'm not one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together.

What I'm looking for is evidence that I could use in FORMULATING AN ARGUMENT and this article does NOT show me enough to be able to do so.

I'm sorry if you think one state in the US can show you all you need to know on a topic.

Point in case, your opinion of yourself is irrelevant to any argument you could make.

You asked for a study, and I provided you with one quickly (addressing the fact there are more), You didn't debate the ideas in the study, you debated the fact the study must be flawed because you didn't like what it studied, and it didn't represent your desired outcome.

You are correct, that you are not, "one of these lame fuckers on this board who couldn't string an argument together". Unfortunately you have mistaken your abilities to make an argument, with the idea it makes your argument worth anything.

Actually what I asked for was

I've struggled to find recidivism rates between states, especially involving Louisiana to compare. Do you have anything that shows this in detail?

Then you show me a study without Louisiana, that doesn't compare recidivism rates between states, and then you accuse me of not liking this study because "it doesn't support your desired conclusion", which if you look at the original post, you'll see if complete rubbish.

As for "Unfortunately you have mistaken your abilities to make an argument, with the idea it makes your argument worth anything." what am I supposed to do with what you've posted?

I told you, I need certain facts before I can even try to make an argument, and I don't have these facts.

I never debated you needed certain facts to come to your false conclusions. I just suggested that it doesn't matter how long you look for them, you aren't going to find them. If you have to paint yourself in a corner to say you cannot see what is outside ... well, duh. You aren't going to find a study that proves your faulty conclusion, because the answer you are looking for doesn't exist.

Feel free to keep running from the facts that are available, but you still haven't provided anything that would suggest your conclusion is warranted from anywhere.


Edit:
If you review the article you posted (regarding Louisiana and private prisons) the focus isn't on what the private prisons do other than the fact they are paid to house prisoners.

The problems identified in the article regarding why the private prisons are paid, involve incarceration rates, mandatory sentencing, crime rates outside the prison, and recidivism. None of those are the fault of the private prison, unless you want to suggest the fact they have a place to house the prisoner creates the crime.

If you want to address the capital gains of private prisons in Louisiana as associated with how the state chooses to prosecute crime, then you need to talk to the people who are responsible for that. They are in the government, and not a function of capitalism (unless of course you want to include that the state of Louisiana actually has a balanced budget amendment in their constitution, so if the state wants to house prisoners, it is required to pay for them without going into debt).

If you have a problem with incarceration rates, mandatory sentencing, recidivism, and crime in Louisiana, you need to talk to the governor (Democrat) and probably the mayors of the 3 largest cities in the state that provide the bulk of the prisoners (all three Democrat, all three female, all three African American).

If you want suggest the incarceration rates in Louisiana has a negative affect on the ability of the community to actually enjoy where they live, then here is a study from professors at Harvard and Vancouver (using data from the CDC) that suggests the 5 Happiest Cities in the United States were ALL in Louisiana (at least during the study).

The 5 Happiest Cities in America Are in the State You'd Least Expect
(There are more links from multiple sources that cover the same study and you can take your pick)

 

[Hiryuu]

Better than trying to figure out what you've been smoking, for sure.

You're welcome to continue to make remarks irrelevant to anything you suggest in the OP, but that's never going to support your position. If you are left with nothing more than vapid responses, I'll entertain your ignorance.

Go ahead chief, what do you have to offer in response to the topic. The quote above certainly isn't an argument or debate based in any factual content.

 

[Hiryuu]

Same old fucking attacks.

Boring.

That's what you wanted to do. I'm still waiting for you to offer something else. If you don't like it, please offer something consistent with the topic of the thread you started.

 

[bripat9643]

Perhaps you have a link to these "government unions" ?

You're being facetious,...aren't you?

Nope. Maybe you have these in the US but the very concept is alien to the way we operate in the UK. There are unions that represent government workers but they are independent of the government.
Without tracking back I think that this clown was suggesting that the unions,egged on by the government ,conspired to bring down a private business.
You would have to be on crack to believe that could happen.

That isn't what I said, you brain damaged retard. Union membership is government enforced. The employer doesn't have the option of negotiating with employees individually. That means the union has the power to shut the company down. It wouldn't have that power otherwise. Government gave unions the power to destroy that company. That fact is irrefutable.

I am waiting for Mrs T to decide what to wear when we go out later so I will explain it to you.

Firstly we have a government that is right wing and totally wedded to privatisation. They sold off the railways and have a political interest in making it work.
Train privatisation has failed us: it’s time to do things differently
They would pretty much do anything to keep the trains in private hands. The alternative is to lose face and political capital.

Passenger rail is pretty much obsolete, so why do you think a private company should make it work? Government has already failed at it. There is no passenger rail system in the U.S. that makes money.

The RMT are a reasonably militant union who are dealing with the out fall of privatisation. They oppose the governments position totally. The idea that they would work with the government is ludicrous. Their current beef with Southern is about safety. Southern want to cut costs by removing guards from the trains. The RMT oppose this on safety grounds and also for the purposes of protecting its members.

If they don't like it, then let them quit. The railroad will replace them with employees who are more reasonable.

So the RMT are actually on a collision course with the government backed rail company and the government.

Southern is the worst performing railways in the UK.
Southern rail 'is worst train service'

It has a monopoly,government backing and the reasurance of a safety net if it screws up. It is a failure of capitalism.

And I still dont understand the concept of "government unions".

Wrong, moron, it's a product of government enforced unions. It's also due to the fact that passenger rail is obsolete. It doesn't matter who runs it. It won't make money.

 

[flacaltenn]

Got seven posts marked for deletion in the last 3 pages. Not much topical discussion left here. Thread closed.