> These people are imprisoned, and I'm assuming forced to do this work
This is an incorrect assumption, at least in my state. It’s a job that they can apply for and opt in to do.
The debate is about their hourly wage.
There is a possibility of forced penal labor, as I understand it, but it’s mostly things like being forced to do cleaning duties, road cleanup, etc.
In many states it's, at the very least, coerced.
Having a prison job often comes with deals of better behavior and a shorter sentence (!!!). When you're being told that just working for 2 dollars an hour might lower your sentence from 20 years to 15, do you really have a choice?
For example, in Georgia, prisoners often work outside of the prison for well below minimum wage in order to earn "good time". This means they might get more visits to their family. It also increases their chances of parole. However, the labor is coerced as well. Showing up late or not coming in results in in-prison punishments. So, many prisoners work in cotton fields or McDonald's on the promise of an easier life, while most of their wages are siphoned away and businesses get to pay very little.
This is a mockery of the term "slavery". It is no more slavery to be coerced to work for a shorter sentence than it is slavery to be coerced to follow the law to avoid prison.
"Behave a certain way and you will be imprisoned for less/no amount of time" is not slavery unless the law is slavery. The full term imprisonment is just, and being able to shorten it is a privilege.
> The full term imprisonment is just
This is a contested assumption. Prisons and penal systems in US as I understand it are for profit.
Prisoners are charged rent. The hourly wages have no minimum wage and are usually cents on the dollar. Definitely not enough to pay their rent for their cell.
It's slavery. The South fought hard to include the "except as punishment for crime" clause in the 13th amendment. The US has never fully abolished slavery.
'The South fought hard to include the "except as punishment for crime" clause in the 13th amendment.'
I don't think that's historically accurate. The 13th amendment was passed in the Senate on April 8, 1864 and HoR on January 31, 1865.
At the time, the senate and congressional seats from the 10 southern states were vacant.
So the only fighting the south was doing was in the civil war, which didn't end until May 26, 1865.
The text itself is identical to the text in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which prohibited slavery (but allowed for the return of fugitive slaves) in what would later be Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.
Say what? Prisoners pay rent?
Yup!
> Fees for room and board—yes, literally for a thin mattress or even a plastic “boat” bed in a hallway, a toilet that may not flush, and scant, awful tasting food—are typically charged at a “per diem rate for the length of incarceration.” It is not uncommon for these fees to reach $20 to $80 a day for the entire period of incarceration.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/amer...
Holy hell I've read it's bad but this is horrible but very on brand for the capital of capitalism.
Prisoners cannot consent to many things, including labour.
It’s slave labour, whether you like it or not.
[flagged]