- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
ITT: Liberals who assume that evil Chinese MUST be lying about their statistics but the above board whites of the USA are not.
More creepy US prison statistics.
Your brain on for-profit prisons:
13th is a really good documentary. Indentured Survitude
1970 was during the cultural revolution. In that year, the world population was 3.68 billion, and the population if China was just shy of 830 million - China had 22% of the world’s population, so if they held (only) 20% of the world’s prisoners, they’d have a lower than average incarceration rate.
The same is not true for the US today, we have less than 5% of the world’s population today.
deleted by creator
The red army of china didn’t really take prisoners.
What are you talking about have you never heard of
emperorComrade Puyi?
deleted by creator
Instead of being in prison, they were dying out off hunger and concentration camps… There are idiots supporting US, and hypocrites supporting china…
This happened right before the cultural revolution https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine might have helped cut down the potential prison population…
Edit, digging this up from 5 threads deep:
…I understand what per-100,000 means, but I also understand that not all groups of 100,000 people are the same; removing a large sub-population of people that doesn’t exactly match the overall population’s average will result in a change to the overall population average.
If you have a total population (T), and you are measuring the rate of an event (E), then E / T gives your average event rate for the total population, which you can then normalize to a per-X number. For example: T = 1000 people E = 10 incarcerations. 10 / 1000 = .01, normalized to per 100 capita would be 1 per 100 people on average, from the total population.
If you have a sub-demographic in that population (Ts), and it has a different rate of an event (Es) then its rate is also Es / Ts. For example: Ts = 100 poor-people Es = 5 incarcerations. 5 / 100 = .05, normalized to a per 100 capita would be 5 people per 100 on average, for that sub-population.
If you suddenly remove that sub-population, what happens to the rate of the overall population? That’s easy to calculate: (E - Es) / (T - Ts) (10 - 5) / (1000 - 100) = 5 / 900 = .0055, normalized to a per 100 capita would be .55.
Suggesting that a sub-demographic doesn’t perfectly match the per-capita average of an entire population and that removing them would change the overall per-capita rate isn’t nonsense.
You can read the chart: incarceration rate per 100,000.
Yeah but everyone knows the US has more people per capita than anywhere else
My brain had to do a hard reset after reading that. Thanks, I hate it, lol
maybe they really mean it, where companies are people but not capita
More people…per capita…🤯
Nicely done, I approve.
Let me address a few things. First, I didn’t post my response because I think the incarceration rate in the U. S. is OK. It’s not. Incarceration of non-violent criminals is especially aggregeous. Private for profit prisons are a horrible idea.
I responded because the OP posted an image comparing the incarceration rates of the CCP’s cultural revolution to the current U.S. incarceratiom rate. The implication is that because the per-capita incarceration rate was lower in China during that time, it was a nicer place to live than current-day America. That ignores the part where the Chinese government starved to death 15,000,000 - 55,000,000 people, or put in Americanized terms: somewhere between the entire population of Pennsylvania to the entire populations of California AND Pennsylvania.
Claiming that a per-capita measurement normalizes all factors, makes a sampling error based on survivorship bias. It is highly unlikely that the overlap of people who starved to death during the CCP’s famine had the same incarceration rate of those who did not. I’m guessing rich and party aligned individuals had a much lower rate of both starvation and incarceration.
This would certainly be true in the U.S; Incarceration rates are much higher for low-income individuals: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/income.html. Low income individuals are also more likely to starve to death in a famine* (*citation needed). Now imagine if the United States government starved to death the poorest 10,000,000 people in the U.S. and then started bragging about how much it’s per-capita incarceration rates have improved!
The CPC did not starve to death millions of people. There was famine in China from natural causes, and the CPC did their best to alleviate that as best they could, even if millions ended up starving despite their best efforts. The PRC is still a developing country, and this was ever more true during the Cultural Revolution. The Cultural Revolution had its fair share of issues, the modern CPC doesn’t look fondly upon it, but the famine would have happened even without Communists in charge, and in fact it did! Famine was common in China before it industrialized under the CPC.
There was famine in China from natural causes
From: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
It is widely regarded as the deadliest famine and one of the greatest man-made disasters in human history
(Emphasis mine.)
Also, regardless of the reason my other points stand: having millions of poor people starve to death will reduce you incarceration rate, and people might choose to live in a country with a higher incarceration rate if it means they don’t starve to death.
The Great Chinese Famine was caused by a combination of radical agricultural policies, social pressure, economic mismanagement, and natural disasters such as droughts and floods in farming regions.
From Wikipedia. Western scholars exaggerate the human factors and minimize the environmental, which were the cause.
From Prolewiki:
It is true that agricultural production decreased in five years between 1949 and 1978 due to “natural calamities and mistakes in the work.” However, during 1949 and 1978, the per hectare yield of land sown with food crops increased by 145.9% and total food production rose 169.6%. During this period China’s population grew by 77.7%. On these figures, China’s per capita food production grew from 204 kilograms to 328 kilograms in the period in question.
China did not have a famine because of communism. China had a natural famine and while some policies strengthened it, others minimized it.
To be perfectly clear, I don’t subscribe to the notion that communism is bad and capitalism is good. I think every socio-economic system has pros and cons and are prone different forms of degredation and usurption.
I think the people leading a country and the people that comprise its society have a larger impact on life than their system of government.
With that said, a government is ultimately responsible for the safety and well-being of its people.
It’s the system that determines how its run, not the people at the top. Your analysis is teetering into Great Man Theory territory, which is derived from Idealism, not Materialism. The mode of production is primary.
Secondly, yes, the government is responsible. Is the government also responsible for drought, though? What should be judged is that, as I stated, food production was dramatically improved, and the government eliminated famine in a country where famine was common prior to Socialism.
For what it’s worth, capitalism is progressive compared to feudalism, but regressive as compared to socialism.
Interesting how it’s southern states at the top eh?
Can’t have anything to do with the fact that the US legally allows prisoner slavery right?
Winder what the race ratio of the prison population is.
This is the country routinely accusing other countries of having “prison camps.”
Interesting how it’s southern states at the top eh?
Legit amazed California wasn’t higher on the list. They’ve been doing mass-incarceration at an industrial scale since the 70s. But I guess the population is big enough that the per-capita statistics work out.
States like Alabama, Louisiana, and Oklahoma have such small and anemic populations and dedicate so much of their domestic budget to incarceration that they’re basically giant publicly subsidized slave plantations.
LOL just calculated for my country and we’re at 100 per 100000
Worthwhile note to people too lazy to click on the link is that this is the 2021 version. In June 2024 (which is linked at the top of the linked article) the numbers look a little different but not much better for the US.
