Quote:In most countries, taxes are progressive, so the more you make, the higher your taxes. In contrast, most parking and speeding tickets are about what you did, not about how much you earn. But in Finland, you might pay for speeding based on the size of your fortune. That is what happened to Mr. Reima Kuisla, a Finnish businessman who was fined 54,024 euros (about $58,000) for speeding. He wasn’t even going terribly fast, although his clocked 64 miles per hour did exceed the posted 50 mph limit. The whole idea of a progressive fine based on one’s income may seem odd. The $58,000 speeding ticket is reminiscent of a Chicago car parked at O’Hare airport that ran up a whopping $105,000 in tickets. It wasn’t one ticket, but an accumulated 678 tickets before the car was finally towed. Still, one good thing about a $105,000 parking ticket was fixing it for $4500. A lawsuit ended up whittling down the $105,000 to a much more modest $4,500.

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

I'm guessing that guy can afford a good lawyer.

(04-29-2015 08:10 AM)VA49er Wrote:  I'm guessing that guy can afford a good lawyer.

it would be fair to assume the guy knows 'people'....

I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

No, I want to ai to punish everyone who breaks the same law equally. If that's a liberal ideal, ok, but it's also the basis of our entire legal system.

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

Of course you do.

(04-29-2015 09:41 AM)Stick4489 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

Of course you do.

I guess more ideally income/wealth, though it becomes far too complicated to be accurate at that point I'd imagine. But I do because it makes logical sense from a perspective of these citations purpose.

(04-29-2015 09:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

No, I want to ai to punish everyone who breaks the same law equally. If that's a liberal ideal, ok, but it's also the basis of our entire legal system.

What the Finnish due is the exact opposite of what you say above.

(04-29-2015 09:56 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

No, I want to ai to punish everyone who breaks the same law equally. If that's a liberal ideal, ok, but it's also the basis of our entire legal system.

What the Finnish due is the exact opposite of what you say above.

No, it's the logical continuation of that principle. If the punishment is meant to be an economic one, fining a billionaire the same amount as a pauper is unequal punishment.

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

(04-29-2015 10:22 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:56 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

No, I want to ai to punish everyone who breaks the same law equally. If that's a liberal ideal, ok, but it's also the basis of our entire legal system.

What the Finnish due is the exact opposite of what you say above.

No, it's the logical continuation of that principle. If the punishment is meant to be an economic one, fining a billionaire the same amount as a pauper is unequal punishment.

However, that is not punishing everyone who breaks the law the same equally. Same crime, same fine. Seems pretty just to me. Of course, all this is avoidable if one just doesn't commit the crime in the first place. But, yes, I know, that's asking for personal responsibility and unacceptable.

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:24 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  I actually like the idea of fines like this being tied to income.

That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

(04-29-2015 11:17 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

And a $200 fine doesn't mitigate the action similarly between vastly different income/wealth levels. You're just tap-dancing around this issue.

(04-29-2015 11:17 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 09:36 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  That's a real shocker coming from a lib. Got to punish people who work hard and are successful. You probably want the government to pay those that are failures in life traffic tickets.

The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

Then why monetize the fine at all? Just make it points on a license?

But a 500 Euro fine isn't a big stick to a billionaire. Should they incur less of a penalty (relative to their wealth) for law breaking, simply by virtue of their wealth? If a poor person gets a 500 Euro fine, that's going to hurt their ability to spend. If a rich person gets a 500 Euro fine, who cares? Probably not the rich guy.

(04-29-2015 11:25 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:17 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

And a $200 fine doesn't mitigate the action similarly between vastly different income/wealth levels. You're just tap-dancing around this issue.

So you've got data that suggests that rich people speed more because they can afford the paltry fines?

(04-29-2015 11:25 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:17 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

Then why monetize the fine at all? Just make it points on a license?

Again, I'd have no problem with that. For me it's about obeying the rules of the road or you would be permitted to drive on them.

(04-29-2015 11:25 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:17 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The entire point of the fine is to provide a financial deterrent to lawbreaking. The Finns have done this correctly.

No, the fine is a deterrent period. Speeding is speeding and the amount of money one has does not influence whether or not why breaks that particular law.

You and I will have to disagree on that one. Why not make all fines $0.01 then.

You could make the fines a point on the driver's license. You could make it $0.01 contingent upon a court appearance. The real issue regarding speeding is not so much the law be the risk to public safety that speeding can induce. So the fine is a stick to mitigate that action and the size of the fine being determined by the risk posed (5 mph over vs. 30 mph over) is the appropriate governor IMO.

Then why monetize the fine at all? Just make it points on a license?

Works for me. But then we come back to the same point, don't we? I mean, wouldn't 3 points on a poor man's insurance hurt him more than a rich man by getting 3 points on his insurance?