A: Because it comes up with stuff like this, which, to give you the spoiler, recommends that the prison population be reduced, not by 25% or 50% or 75%, but by 100%. Yes, we should abolish prison, and come up with......uh, something.
This "analysis" stems from -- have you heard this before? -- a "data driven" approach, specifically that taken by the law and economics side of the house, much in vogue at the University of Chicago. Law and economics is insightful in many ways, and I teach components of it in my course at Georgetown Law. At some point, however, a sense of modesty must be allowed to intrude.
One of the author's concluding paragraphs leads off with this sentence:
Rather than being locked away to rot, bad actors could be employed productively in the workforce. The gains of that employment could be transferred to victims and governments, while simultaneously serving as a deterrent cost. And to the extent that monetary transfers cannot achieve optimal deterrence, humankind is capable of inventing alternative nonmonetary sanctions to fill the gap.
Just so. The usual name for these "alternative nonmonetary sanctions" is "jail."