There are countless factors that contribute to the poverty cycle in America.  Most often, this issue is attributed to a lack of resources available in order for people who are impoverished to find their way out.  This lack of resources leads to a critical condition in which those below the poverty threshold are not able to do anything to prevent the worsening of the situation, therefore perpetuating and increasing the severity of the cycle.

Research and reported data has repeatedly shown that there is a strong relationship between poverty and incarceration in the United States.  In fact, this correlation is rising as prison populations continue to increase, and currently, fifty seven percent of incarcerated men and seventy two percent of incarcerated women have reported incomes of less than twenty two thousand dollars prior to imprisonment (Rabury, Kopf).  This figure serves as proof that the prison system in America is largely occupied by people who are below the poverty threshold.  The implications of this pattern in conjunction with the financial disadvantage associated with being involved in the judicial system and fighting a case have prompted the public to respond with the suggestion that the justice system is essentially punishing people simply for being poor.

This statement is not entirely untrue; the financial implications of arrest is extremely detrimental to those who are at a financial disadvantage as opposed to more wealthy people.  The culprit of these assumptions is often in the hands of public officials who set bail, as well as those involved in the private prison systems who encourage bail prices. Because of the bail system in America, in which a person accused of a crime can essentially pay for his or her freedom until a trial is held and a verdict is reached, those who begin the process at a financial disadvantage are often at a more serious pit by the time a verdict is reached, regardless of the outcome of the trial. The effect of being unable to make bail is dramatic: those who cannot pay cannot return to work, leaving them at risk of losing a job, family, a home, etc. Even when people in prison are able to retain a job through a rehabilitation program in the prison, these jobs have low wages and do not serve to replace the lost income as a result of the time spent incarcerated. As a result, formerly incarcerated people are almost ten times more likely to be homeless than the general public (Bryan, et. al.). This contributes heavily to the “revolving door” effect, in which those in prison leave, enter poverty, and return to prison to continue the cycle. Often times, the financial disadvantage becomes increasingly severe as the person goes through the system more frequently.

The business of prison is not affected by the fact that reincarceration accounts for a large portion of people involved in the prison systems; in fact, they make a profit.  The high turnover rates of these people, regardless of the negative effect it may have on their lives, gives the richest administrators an average income of nine million dollars annually (Cohen).  This fact exists alongside the increasing population of people who are losing basic living commodities and experiencing a deplorable quality of life over the broken system.  Because of the privatization of prison systems, an increased incentive exists to get people into prisons, and more importantly, keep them coming back.  The business aspect of the system suggests that the more people inside the walls, the better the system operates.  However, this ideal has caused considerable damage to the people affected by the system as well as the communities who suffer as a result of the revolving door effect.  While this operation may be in bad taste, it is the most effective way to ensure a steady profit among the few whose quality of life depends on the high occupancy of private prison systems.  Therefore, a system known as the “poverty to prison pipeline” has been coined to describe the monetary advantage the directors of privately-owned prisons experience in the system which systematically disables poor people who are statistically more at risk of entering prison than those in the upper class (Levere).  This system suggests that the prison business is strictly that; there is not a large enough monetary incentive to bring impoverished people out of prison in order to improve the greater society.

It seems that in the current state of things, impoverished people are not at liberty to escape the revolving door or otherwise poverty to prison pipeline which has been established among decades of systematic oppression of those who are at the bottom of the capitalist food chain.  It order to avoid exploitation of people based on their financial disposition, major reform in policy regarding the bail system and rehabilitation system for prisoners must be implemented.

Works Cited:

Bryan, Isaac, et al. “THE PRICE FOR FREEDOM: BAIL IN THE CITY OF L.A.” Milliondollarhoods.org, UCLA: Bunche, milliondollarhoods.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/MDH_Bail-Report_Dec-4-2017.pdf.

Cohen, Donald, and Donald Cohen. “Private Prison Corporation’s Executive Pay Nearly Doubled during First Year of Trump Administration.” Medium, In the Public Interest, 29 Mar. 2018, medium.com/in-the-public-interest/private-prison-corporations-executive-pay-nearly-doubled-during-first-year-of-trump-administration-c2a59ee64763.

Initiative, Prison Policy. “Prisons of Poverty: Uncovering the Pre-Incarceration Incomes of the Imprisoned.” Prisons of Poverty: Uncovering the Pre-Incarceration Incomes of the Imprisoned | Prison Policy Initiative, www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/income.html.

“The New Pipeline: Poverty to Prison.” The New Pipeline: Poverty to Prison | Prosperity Now, prosperitynow.org/blog/new-pipeline-poverty-prison.