While I find the conversations in here interesting from an economics perspective they are not solutions to the real problem. This is not a function of cost between inmate, provider, and family alone. These phone systems have a real and tangible cost on society as a whole. An enormous body of research [1] showing that offenders with better&#x2F;more familial contact while incarcerated have vastly lower recidivism rates.<p>This is literally companies causing harm (and not just economic) harm to societies citizens at large. I respect jlafon&#x27;s point of view but I can&#x27;t agree. The fact that a system you create is difficult to adminster should not mean that the cost of dealing with it should be passed along to your &#x27;customers&#x27; (gagging as I use that word). When a group of people chooses to put others in a position of limited power they have a responsibility to protect them from harm. Treating prisoners as a revenue stream at all is immoral and I believe unconstitutional. The argument that they should pay or do anything to contribute to their imprisonment is vapid and ugly. If we aren&#x27;t willing to shoulder the burden of imprisoning them then we shouldn&#x27;t do it. We absolutely should not be charging them or their families usury amounts of money to satisfy rules and situations we created.<p>Letting prisoners use the phone is labor intensive? Why? because you created rules and a system where it is. To spin it as more complicated or containing &#x27;reasons&#x27; is post hoc justification nonsense and should be treated as such.<p>[1] Summarized here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.prisonlegalnews.org&#x2F;news&#x2F;2014&#x2F;apr&#x2F;15&#x2F;lowering-recidivism-through-family-communication&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.prisonlegalnews.org&#x2F;news&#x2F;2014&#x2F;apr&#x2F;15&#x2F;lowering-re...</a>