You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Social Policy’ tag.
Tag Archive
“Why Would You Ever Spend Money on the Death Penalty?” – Words from an Executioner
December 6, 2013 in Rant | Tags: Executions, Social Costs, Social Policy | by The Arbourist | 2 comments
The entire article is available on Alternet.org, but I found this section in particular very moving.
“Even when I was on the job, I was always asking, what can I do to prevent these guys before they get there? I used to bring kids down from schools. I would allow the kids to sit in the chair and explain that I want to see kids get an education and remove themselves from violence or you’ll end up here. I know it helped. I used to get letters. They would write back saying thank you for steering them in the right direction. I also never understood why we would spend money on the death penalty instead of spending money to try to prevent these people from getting in the system in the first place.”
How do you impress upon people the idea that social spending up front – welfare, schools, healthcare – is cheaper than the alternative.? The insurance industry, the police and prison systems are all significantly less cost effective than doing the work up front and taking care of people before the problems start. But no, that’s the welfare state, that’s coddling the poor that is denying them personal responsibility.
We certainly, cannot undertake programs that well help people before they enter the systems of punishment in our society. It only makes sense and is cost effective…
Share this:
Long Jail Sentences are Stupid
August 24, 2009 in Canada, Politics | Tags: Conservative Policy, Jail, Long Term Sentences, Punishment, Social Policy | by Mystro | 2 comments
This post is dedicated to debunking the whole “harsh punishment on criminals is good” mentality. This post will have nothing to do about ‘prisoner rights’ or ‘criminal coddling’, but rather it will look at the efficacy of ‘harsh punishment’ on crime in general and how efficient longer jail sentences would be. Does it actually work? To what degree? Is that degree of success worth what it costs to citizens? Lets take a look.
For as long as there have been communities, murderers and thieves have been seen as criminals. Indeed, non-human primates share this with us as they will also punish, banish or kill deviants of this kind. And since the birth of the community, punishment for these crimes has been vast, varied, ingenuitive, brutally painful, and many have been fatal. So what we have is a near perfect case study. Thousands of years worth of experiments where two specific crimes have met with the pinnacle exemplars of the object of our study, harsh punishment. If harsh punishment really had any effect whatsoever on deterring or reducing crime, after those many thousands of years of diligent application we should find that the social problems of murder and theft are all but solved, strange memories of an era long past away. As we don’t seem to be any closer to a crime free utopia than early communities (indeed, most would argue we are further away) the only conclusion is that harsh punishment is contending for the rank of ‘most ineffective idea ever actualized by any government’, which is a highly competitive race. But for those that find this thought experiment a bit too neat, lets break it down a bit and look at our system of imprisonment.




Your opinions…