This essay compares two alternative economic theories of crime, due to Becker (1968) and Adelstein (2017), which differ with respect to the purpose of punishment. Both models are based on the idea of rational offenders and punishments as prices, but they part company with respect to how the level of punishment is, or should be, determined. Whereas Becker’s approach is based on the normative goal of welfare maximization and optimal deterrence, Adelstein’s model emphasizes that the system actually pursues corrective justice in individual cases. This essay explicates these different perspectives and explores their implications for social welfare.