[damq]

Yes, it very much it is okay. They're living cost-free at the taxpayer's expense because of crimes they committed against society. It's absolutely okay to pay them nothing for their labor since the cost to society they've already incurred greatly dwarfs the value of any stolen wages.

[komali2]

They're not "living cost free at taxpayer's expense," they're being locked in a small room with a vast majority of their autonomy removed. That's the punishment.

They're not the only ones at fault. Society failed them as well, and must carry that burden as well. It would have been more efficient to do so by funding excellent education programs but instead we decided to do so by creating a bloated justice system. So it goes.

What cost to society did the man jailed with 3g of marijuana incur? The one that robbed a Walmart of a flat screen? Enough to justify all the things I illustrated above? Nope, because the jury and judge and legislators set down and handed down the sentence and have no visibility into a further form of punishment arbitrarily set by the prison in the form of lesser wages.

How about this: via what framework shall a prisoner's working hours and pay be set? Let's say the man jailed for a DWI, and the woman jailed for selling marijuana. Shall the DWI be paid 1$, or 2$ per hour, and the dealer 3$ because the "cost to society" was less? How did you calculate that? Oh also, can the prisoners be forced to work? How shall we fit that into sentencing?