There are a number of prisons in the United States that are currently run by private, for-profit companies. This is a trend that has sparked a debate on whether or not the control of a public service as sensitive and important as a nation’s prison systems should be placed in the hands of private corporations. This essay explores the issue and argues for the value of prison privatization, forwarding the thesis that the rise of private prisons in the United States has generated greater good than harm.

The first argument for the value of prison privatization is that it has helped solved the problem of overcrowding in United States prisons. Overcrowding makes inmates more agitated and make escapes more possible. Accepting private prisons lessen overcrowding because countries have limited resources to build and maintain entire prisons regularly. It is more cost-effective to pay a private company to construct and manage such institutions.

Secondly, the private prisons are usually constructed in isolated areas that are easier to secure. These are areas that usually have low economies. The establishment of such prisons can give the people of that area a new industry that they can benefit from. This also helps the nation develop areas that it would not be able to on its own.

Thirdly, the rise of several companies that offer to build and/or manage prisons for the country means greater competition. As such, these companies are likely to outdo one another in terms of developing programs that can reform inmates faster and more effectively.

Conclusively, the benefits that private prisons provide outweigh the concern of handing over control of a sensitive service for public order to a private entity. So long as that entity abides by the laws of the land, the country will benefit mutually with it in the arrangement on several fronts.