Prison system A spends about $25,800 per prisoner, but has about 10 times as many prisoners as system B, which spends about $43,000 per prisoner and has a much lower recidivism rate. Which prison system do you prefer?
Prison only makes criminals worse. A very large percent will get released and do what they were doing before (drug using/selling, raping, robbing, etc..). Yes there may be a handful of people that might change, but not enough to waste a lot of money.
If the recidivism is the same % for any amount of prisoners, then B.
A if I'm the budget person.
B if I'm in the prison.
Prison A has ten times the inmates. It's overall more expensive.
Can't tell from this. Is the lower recidivism rate and higher cost of the gold-plated system because they keep them in there until they are too old to reoffend? The lower cost per prisoner is my preference.
The data is insufficient.
Is A simply more efficient due to greater quantities to absorb fixed costs?
Are people sent to prison for things in A that they aren't in B.
And lower recidivism likely means more ex-cons who meaningfully contribute to the economy. B is best!
How much does a bullet cost?
I'd rather spend more and end the crimes. It'll save a lot more people and money in the end.
The kicker here is the lower recidivism rate. If prisoners keep coming back, they keep wasting our money.
Heck, if a prisoner is there twice in system A, then we've already spent more on him than I'm system B on the prisoner who never comes back.
We're you able to do that because you're asian? Witchcraft I tell you!
Asian. (Didn't want to offend anyone)