[LadyCailin]

Unless you’re handing out life sentences for every little crime, the point of incarceration must be rehabilitation. If you fail in that goal, then you’re just putting the burden on future society, when they get back out in some years. Part of rehabilitation might include punishment, but when you start with that, rather than rehabilitation, you’ve already screwed up your national moral compass.

[newaccount74]

Probably the best way to get a prisoner ready for life after prison is to let them work, pay them a normal salary, and let them put it in a savings account.

That way they have enough money for a deposit to rent a place to live and can cover their expenses for some time until they find a job.

If you force them to work, and don't give them money, then they have no way to start a normal life after prison, will depend on money from the government in the best case, and get back to crime in the worst case.

We need to treat prisoners well. Not just because it's the morally right thing to do, but also because it's the best thing we can do if we want a society with low crime rates, where you can walk through the city at night without being scared that an ex-convict mugs you because they don't have any other options.

[s1artibartfast]

Possible goals for incarceration are:

Punishment

Deterrence

Rehabilitation

Protecting the general public

You can debate the relative merits of each, but rehabilitation is not the only possible goal. If you lock up a repeat violent offender for X years without rehabilitation, the other factors are still relevant.

[TheFreim]

> Unless you’re handing out life sentences for every little crime, the point of incarceration must be rehabilitation

I would take issue with the usage of the words "the point". There can in fact be multiple ends or goals of incarceration. Whether you think retributive justice or rehabilitation should be primary or secondary would be up for debate, but I primarily mean to say that you don't necessarily have to pick one or the other in the grand scheme of things (I'd say you'd also have a sliding scale of which is more important).

[curiousgeorgio]

Working without monetary compensation is the punishment part. But work itself is rehabilitating. I can't think of a better way to help people feel empowered and able, preparing them to be positive members of society when they're released.

[meheleventyone]

Then this should be supported by evidence that forced labor is rehabilitating. Show us it’s true if it is.

[curiousgeorgio]

A quick search brings up quite a few academic articles supporting it, e.g.:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12122-016-9229-0

https://academic.oup.com/aler/article-abstract/19/2/391/3066...

Like many things, there's substantial evidence on both sides of the argument. The devil is usually in the details, and this is a case where success or failure seems to be greatly affected by the quality of the programs themselves and the people who administer them.