Came across this article in the Detroit Free Press the other day. What Gerrit is advocating is putting the prison population to work, he believes that the opportunity to have a job while imprisoned has socially beneficial effects on recidivism. I do not meant to dispute the social benefit of giving inmates a sense of accomplishment, or responsibility, but prison labor like many things, although I don’t take unfettered exception to it, I think there are several obvious problems with such policies. Gerrit proclaims that the prisoners will be paid “prevailing wages,” in an environment that fosters competition. His opinion is drawn largely from conjecture, and from a Department of Corrections study that determined there would be “little to no effect to outside industries or workers,” in part because most of the clothing that would be manufactured by inmates is made abroad.

For starters, I’m alwasy sceptical of a study that is sponsored by the very organization that stands to benefit from the policy it is studying. But to those of you who are socially conscious, I’d pose the following question: Is it right to use inmate labor domestically, to satisfy our desire for “Made in the USA” goods, when it comes at probably expense of 3rd worlders?

Additionally, I don’t buy the agrument that people will be inclined to support Prison Labor, because the products are “Made in the USA.” On the contrary, I think that if the population is not kept largely in the dark about the origins of such products (they are often sold under pseudonyms) the consume will be aversive towards them: If it’s bad to buy products from China & Malaysia, and I’m not saying it is, but just voicing a popular sentiment, isn’t it also bad, if not worse, to buy products that are created by convicted murderers, rapists, and felons? And what about the plight of the already jobless in this nation? They not only have to compete with one another, but they now must compete with prison labor?

That people are willing to purchase these products says alot about the attitude of consumers in general, with regard to a preferred locale of origin: they just don’t give a shit. In any regard, if people are inclined to buy these products, like the Prison Blues example suggests, I think it will be based on the same merits that go into most every rational consideration: quality of the product, availabilty of subsititutes, and imporantly, the price such products command at the market.

In light of recent scandals (Abramoff), if we don’t have enough problems with the politics of pull, and cronyism as it is, the “competition” between inmates for jobs is far from free and open. Granted, the prisoners don’t have to work, yet, so there is certainly some competition between them for the available positions. However, the positions, and industries available will be extremely limited by the State’s bureaucracy. Any business that is granted permission to use prison labor will benefit from legislative favors over its competitors – for instance, pensions will be non-existent. Health care, lodging, meals, are all provided by the taxpayers. Companies that enjoy such favor will be at an immediate advantage from a cost perspective, and one which their compeititors cannot match through innovation or entrepreneurship.

Courtesy of the UCLA “Daily Bruin,” TechNews gives another side of the story in this article. TechNews provides some curious statistics, regarding the prison population, notably, that 85% in California are non-violent (mostly drug) offenders.

But TechNews also brings up the problem of mandatory sentencing, the three-strike rule, and such legislation, which virtually provides for an unlimited resource of prison laborers. Compounded with the cronyism effect – the possibility of rent-seeking with regard to inmates, that is, there would be incentives to flood the prison population, and to keep them there for as long as possible. They also reiterate my point about “benefits,” which would be moved from the businesses coffers, to the general fund, i.e., your tax dollars.

I’ll leave you with some historical instight about Slavery in the Ottoman Empire, from David Friedman, and my final thought: A nation that becomes dependent on slaves eventually finds a way to create indenture.