Finland Has Income-based Traffic Fines
Hmm...might just be my personal bias talking (I live in a city where people in the nicest, most expensive cars drive like assholes), but something about this sounds appealing.
I think there should be a limit to the fining however. 50,000 Euros for speeding is way too onerous. Maybe set a max of 5 or 10,000 for the richest of people, and then reduce it from there according to how much poorer you are.
"The thinking here is that if it stings for the little guy, it should sting for the big guy, too."
If there weren't other consequences*** in repeatedly getting traffic tickets, I'd agree that it's sound reasoning.
So while the $274.00 fine for going 15mph over the limit may not matter to the millionaire, losing his/her license will. Should they say **** it and speed every time they're out.
***I'm under the impression that X-amount of tickets = losing license, if this is wrong, then I have no real problem with this Finnish law
Re: Finland Has Income-based Traffic Fines
Originally posted by Omega Vision
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/world/europe/speeding-in-finland-can-cost-a-fortune-if-you-already-have-one.html?ref=worldHmm...might just be my personal bias talking (I live in a city where people in the nicest, most expensive cars drive like assholes), but something about this sounds appealing.
I think there should be a limit to the fining however. 50,000 Euros for speeding is way too onerous. Maybe set a max of 5 or 10,000 for the richest of people, and then reduce it from there according to how much poorer you are.
Socialism at its finest there.
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialProbably depends on how you are defining equally.
Isn't a flat ticket price the same for everyone, treating everyone equally?
You could define equality as being that the punishment should hurt all people equally.
I'm not saying I agree but you could make the argument that it is fair and equal to everyone.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Ok so how do you see it:Situation A: Guy drives 30 mph over the speed limit in a Ferrari.
Situation B: Guy drives 30 mph over in a Corolla.
Shouldn't the fine be the same?
His point is that a $485.00 ticket will adversely affect the life of someone who say makes $22,000 a year and has no savings and therefore it will serve as a deterrent. While someone who makes $750,000 a year and has a portfolio worth millions probably couldn't give two wet shits about a $485.00 fine and therefore it won't serve as a deterrent.
ie, it's allowing the rich to break the law in a sense
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialAnd they are saying the the punishment will be equal because they will have to both pay an equal percent of their income.
Ok so how do you see it:Situation A: Guy drives 30 mph over the speed limit in a Ferrari.
Situation B: Guy drives 30 mph over in a Corolla.
Shouldn't the fine be the same?
So say the fine is 10% of income.
Corolla person makes 10000 a year they will pay 1000
Ferrari makes 1000000 will 100000
They are being charged the same rate therefore it is still equal punishment when you approach it from that perspective.
The article isn't suggesting using car models as a metric- it's suggesting using income.
No, I wouldn't advocate giving someone a fatter ticket because they're driving a ferrari instead of a camry. I would advocate giving someone a fatter ticket for being a millionaire, though.
And,in the current set-up with flat-rate tickets, the fine really isn't the same. Brad Pitt and I both get pulled over tomorrow for doing 65 in a 50mph zone- we're both given a $70 ticket. That isn't an "equal" punishment, because $70 is 20% of my weekly income while Brad Pitt gives $70 tips at McDonalds.
edit- Wow. Got ninja'd super hard.
Double edit- I'd like to clarify that I only support this up to a point though. Something like 50,000 bucks for a speeding ticket is obscene even if you're Bill Gates. In addition to making citations a percentage, I'd also throw in a hard cap. So something like, "X% of your income, or up to $2000", etc
Originally posted by Robtard
His point is that a $485.00 ticket will adversely affect the life of someone who say makes $22,000 a year and has no savings and therefore it will serve as a deterrent. While someone who makes $750,000 a year and has a portfolio worth millions probably couldn't give two wet shits about a $485.00 fine and therefore it won't serve as a deterrent.ie, it's allowing the rich to break the law in a sense
Its a slippery slope.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
The article isn't suggesting using car models as a metric- it's suggesting using income.No, I wouldn't advocate giving someone a fatter ticket because they're driving a ferrari instead of a camry. I would advocate giving someone a fatter ticket for being a millionaire, though.
And,in the current set-up with flat-rate tickets, the fine really isn't the same. Brad Pitt and I both get pulled over tomorrow for doing 65 in a 50mph zone- we're both given a $70 ticket. That isn't an "equal" punishment, because $70 is 20% of my weekly income while Brad Pitt gives $70 tips at McDonalds.
edit- Wow. Got ninja'd super hard.
I was using the cars as quick way to provide income differential between the two people.
I agree with Blax. As I said in the OP, I think this could be a great system in America if we capped it. No one should pay 50 grand for as minor a crime as going 10 over the limit.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Isn't a flat ticket price the same for everyone, treating everyone equally?
A flat rate for fines is as idiotic as a flat tax.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Its a slippery slope.