82km/h in a 60km/h zone? That'll be €111,888.00 please

unkel

:rolleyes:

Only in Finland

Terra

Cool system

ArphaRima

I've heard of this before. All I can say is F3ck that!

As someone with a decent salary I can honestly say that I'd prefer to default and go to jail, or emigrate rather than pay that on principle. Ridiculous law! At the very least it should be capped at lets say 5,000.

peasant

yeah, I like that (sort of)

Why such a huge speeding ticket? In Finland fines are issued according to ones salary per day. As Mr. Bär was 2 km over the standard fine range he had to pay his 12 days income

robtri

now thsts the type of system we need here.....

1huge1

ya read that or something like it in the guinness world records book a few years back.

fluffer

fluffer wrote: »

I've heard of this before. All I can say is F3ck that!

As someone with a decent salary I can honestly say that I'd prefer to default and go to jail, or emigrate rather than pay that on principle. Ridiculous law! At the very least it should be capped at lets say 5,000.

Or, and this might be a mad idea, don't break the speed limit.


A system like this will never be brought in here where the people who make the laws are rich themselves.

JimmyCrackCorn!

I like the system the way it is.

Now if tits would pull in and let me overtake rather than hogging the right hand lane it would be greatly appreciated.

As for the Pc/High horse brigade/self appointed road safety experts. Please dont bother.

ArphaRima

Just did some quick maths. A fairly average salary of 50,000 would attract a fine of 1640 Euro!

Remember this isnt for dangerous or reckless driving, this is for a benign 22kph over the limit. My mother is the slowest driver I've ever encountered, and she has 4 points from a trip to galway 2 yrs ago. That wouldve been 3280 euro in the space of a week to pay! That'd bankrupt the average person.
Ridiculous law.
The people lauding it here either dont have cars or must have cars that take 20 minutes to accelerate from 60-80 kph.

Stark

Basing a fine off someone's salary makes sense in principle I think. Your standard €50 or whatever it is fine might act as a deterrant to someone who's struggling to buy groceries week on week, but is small change to someone on a high salary who probably saves at least that much by being at their destination 20 mins quicker. 12 days income is way over the top though.

BeardyGit

JimmyCrackCorn! wrote: »

I like the system the way it is.

Now if tits would pull in and let me overtake rather than hogging the right hand lane it would be greatly appreciated.

As for the Pc/High horse brigade/self appointed road safety experts. Please dont bother.

Your time would be better spent trying to jam more corn in your crack there lad than suggest we not bother. Sure, where's the fun in an argument if it's only one sided?

Finland are spot on with their policy. I've a friend who's husband was done for speeding a couple of times during a family holiday in Finland. He ignored the charges, thinking it would go away. Three years later or thereabouts he was taken aside to a room in HKI international airport and questioned about the outstanding penalties. He had to hand over his credit card to pay the fines there and then, or else wait for the next flight home.....

You have to applaud a system as efficient as that. On all major roads there, you'll hit a speed camera every couple of kilometers. It's impressive in terms of sheer scale alone. I can't wait until our roads are littered with speed cameras.... It'll do wonders for the public finances.

And you know what? Nobody would have to pay speeding fines if they simply didn't speed.

Zube

fluffer wrote: »

The people lauding it here either dont have cars or must have cars that take 20 minutes to accelerate from 60-80 kph.

In other words, you don't like this system because it would stop people driving fast, which is the idea.

markpb

fluffer wrote: »

I've heard of this before. All I can say is F3ck that!

As someone with a decent salary I can honestly say that I'd prefer to default and go to jail, or emigrate rather than pay that on principle. Ridiculous law! At the very least it should be capped at lets say 5,000.

You think a fine system based on wages is unfair?! Would you prefer if we ditched the tax bands and everyone paid €5,000 per year? Of course not, the rich wouldn't notice but the poor would be crippled. What's the difference between tax and fines - shouldn't both be fair?

Eoin

markpb wrote: »

You think a fine system based on wages is unfair?! Would you prefer if we ditched the tax bands and everyone paid €5,000 per year? Of course not, the rich wouldn't notice but the poor would be crippled. What's the difference between tax and fines - shouldn't both be fair?

A fine should be related to the offence that was made, not a person's ability to pay it. I don't think you can equate taxes and fines.

markpb

eoin wrote: »

A fine should be related to the offence that was made, not a person's ability to pay it. I don't think you can equate taxes and fines.

A fine is a punishment for breaking the law and should be a deterrent from breaking it again in the future. A small fine for a rich person isn't much of a deterrent.

Zube

eoin wrote: »

A fine should be related to the offence that was made, not a person's ability to pay it.

So if I drive a €250,000 car, do you think a fine of €80 will deter me from speeding, in the same way it would a student in her Seicento?

This is why we needed a points system, because a fine worth one tank of petrol just isn't a deterrent for a lot of people.

ArphaRima

You think a fine system based on wages is unfair?! Would you prefer if we ditched the tax bands and everyone paid €5,000 per year? Of course not, the rich wouldn't notice but the poor would be crippled. What's the difference between tax and fines - shouldn't both be fair?

Yes I believe THAT system is unfair. You are discounting speeding offences for people with lower salaries. If I am a citizen of a state. I want to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of my income.

I will not debate taxation, wrong forum. But what I will say is that the rich do pay far more taxes than the poor. 40% of the population dont pay any! Yet I technically benefit less from the state. I have no issue there, I support the weak.
But to say that charging one person 3000 euro, and another 130,000 for a civil or criminal offence is fair is quite frankly beyond me. My income should be of no consequence to the application of these kinds of laws. I should be an equal in the eyes of the state legal system to any other citizen.

edit: And as already mentioned we have an effective deterrent: points. Regardless of income, status or background it applies to all.

Eoin

markpb wrote: »

A fine is a punishment for breaking the law and should be a deterrent from breaking it again in the future. A small fine for a rich person isn't much of a deterrent.

No, but penalty points can be a deterrent. The only relevant thing, in my opinion, is how safely (or not) the person was driving. Should richer people also pay more car tax for exactly the same car for example?

Stark

Gil_Dub wrote:

It's impressive in terms of sheer scale alone. I can't wait until our roads are littered with speed cameras.... It's do wonders for the public finances.

This being Ireland, they'd probably end up contracting to a private company who'll reap most of the profits.

Zube

fluffer wrote: »

If I am a citizen of a state. I want to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of my income.

But you are: everyone pays x weeks income, regardless of what income they are on, unlike here, where a guy on €500,000 p.a. pays .8% of a weeks wage, and a guy on €20,000 pays 20%.

markpb

eoin wrote: »

Should richer people also pay more car tax for exactly the same car for example?

No because car tax should not be a deterrent to driving. Speeding fines should be a deterrent to speeding. In any event, car tax is inherently progressive because rich people tend to buy more expensive cars and automatically pay more tax.

Stark

fluffer wrote: »

Yes I believe THAT system is unfair. You are discounting speeding offences for people with lower salaries. If I am a citizen of a state. I want to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of my income.

I will not debate taxation, wrong forum. But what I will say is that the rich do pay far more taxes than the poor. 40% of the population dont pay any! Yet I technically benefit less from the state. I have no issue there, I support the weak.
But to say that charging one person 3000 euro, and another 130,000 for a civil or criminal offence is fair is quite frankly beyond me. My income should be of no consequence to the application of these kinds of laws. I should be an equal in the eyes of the state legal system to any other citizen.

edit: And as already mentioned we have an effective deterrent: points. Regardless of income, status or background it applies to all.

Your issue is that at the moment you can afford to speed, whereas if they brought in a salary-based fine system, then the fines would act as a deterrent. Which shock horror, is their purpose.

biko

In Finland fines are issued according to ones salary per day. As Mr. Bär was 2 km over the standard fine range he had to pay his 12 days income. If his income in 2007 had been 50 euros a day, then the ticket would have been 600 euros.

It turns out that in 2007 he sold a majority stake in his company and in average made an impressive 9300 euros a day, which translates to a 111,888 euros speeding ticket. Of course Mr. Bär is not happy as his real income today is not that big.

In Finland tax records are public and there is no such thing as maximum fines. The more you make the more you pay!

I've heard of this before "day fine". It does makes sense but should allow for interpretation, which of course would be a legal loophole for the rich...

ArphaRima

Quote:
Originally Posted by fluffer
If I am a citizen of a state. I want to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of my income.

But you are: everyone pays x weeks income, regardless of what income they are on, unlike here, where a guy on €500,000 p.a. pays .8% of a weeks wage, and a guy on €20,000 pays 20%.
Today 15:52

Eh.. What? I said regardless of my income. That's directly proportional to my income.

Your issue is that at the moment you can afford to speed, whereas if they brought in a salary-based fine system, then the fines would act as a deterrent.

Actually we should bring in the death penalty for speeding. Because it's THAT bad an offence. Appropriate deterrents already exist for speeding. They are points, standardised fines and imprisonment.
I can think of a million deterrents. But what we in society have to do is enforce appropriate ones. I dont think a 130,000 fine for operating a vehicle at 22kph above the speed limit is appropriate. Do you? Really?

Stark

12 days salary might be excessive, but there's nothing wrong with the idea of a fine being proportional to income. There's absolutely no point in fining someone on a 6 figure salary the sum of €50.

fluffer wrote:

Actually we should bring in the death penalty for speeding. Because it's THAT bad an offence.

Did I make a judgement call on the offence? All I suggested was that the punishment should be imposed in a fair way. The current punishment only affects people on low incomes.

Eoin

markpb wrote: »

No because car tax should not be a deterrent to driving. Speeding fines should be a deterrent to speeding. In any event, car tax is inherently progressive because rich people tend to buy more expensive cars and automatically pay more tax.

Does this not mean that unemployed people can do 50 over the limit and pay with a food voucher or something?

Again, this is what penalty points are for. The crime should be punished, not the salary.

ArphaRima

the punishment should be imposed in a fair way. The current punishment only affects people on low incomes.

As Eoin said. Penalty points already address this.

This is the kind of ill-considered, populist, hair-brained policy I would expect a Green Party or Sinn Fein rep to come up with.

Caliden

Nice system, the guy was even given 20km/h over the limit to which a standard fine applied.

Stark

fluffer wrote: »

As Eoin said. Penalty points already address this.

Penalty points don't address the issue of the fines themselves being unfair.

Eoin

Stark wrote: »

Penalty points don't address the issue of the fines themselves being unfair.

They do address the issue of having a punishment that equally affects all people. Fines are fair - everyone should pay the same. Life isn't fair, and some people make more money. Why not go the whole hog and have richer people pay for poorer peoples speeding tickets.

Stark

eoin wrote: »

They do address the issue of having a punishment that equally affects all people. Fines are fair - everyone should pay the same.

It's only fair if the impact of paying the fine is the same.

eoin wrote: »

Life isn't fair, and some people make more money. Why not go the whole hog and have richer people pay for poorer peoples speeding tickets.

Because that would be a slippery slope fallacy.

Eoin

I still completely disagree, but we're just going to go around in circles at this stage.

Voodoomelon

That's almost as much as one of Nokia's directors got fined, he got done for €116,000.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1759791.stm

ArphaRima

I think rich people should pay more for everything. Price should be proportional to income. That's the way to a free, productive and fair society. :rolleyes:

Stark

You can't compare fines to standard pricing models. It's meant to act as a deterrent so you don't commit the crime that would require you to pay the fine in the first place. If the fine isn't sufficient to act as a deterrent, then the system has failed.

I suppose you'll be arguing that rich people should pay the same income tax as everyone else next because god knows we can't have a middle ground between rich pepole paying more for nothing and paying more for everything :rolleyes:

that's a disgrace.. the guy could be bankrupt this year but because he made alot last year, gets hit for that.

people praise that place for bein efficient or something but that is ridiculous.. i'd say most people who make serious money in that country, leave it. i wouldn't stay ta then get caught over the speed limit.

should be capped at 5k.

Eoin

Stark wrote: »

I suppose you'll be arguing that rich people should pay the same income tax as everyone else next because god knows we can't have a middle ground between rich pepole paying more for nothing and paying more for everything :rolleyes:

Would that be a slippery slope fallacy?

Stark

Suggesting that asking for fines to be proportionate to income is akin to everything being proportionate to income? Yes.

Eoin

Stark wrote: »

Suggesting that asking for fines to be proportionate to income is akin to everything being proportionate to income? Yes.

Ah, I can't be bothered - should have bit my tongue in the first place.

If the retarded green party or whoever try and bring this in over here, I'll rant about it - but it's just not worth arguing over.

TheNog

fluffer wrote: »

Yes I believe THAT system is unfair. You are discounting speeding offences for people with lower salaries. If I am a citizen of a state. I want to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of my income.

So you think a person on €200 a week and would struggle to pay a €80 fine compared to your €1000 a week ( a guesstimate only) and paying the same amount is equal??

come on for gods sake. The only fairness should be in the penalty points. Current fines are not a deterant for the wealthy

But what I will say is that the rich do pay far more taxes than the poor. 40% of the population dont pay any! Yet I technically benefit less from the state. I have no issue there, I support the weak.

So how far up your own arse are you?

Unbelievable arrogance

ArphaRima

Current fines are not a deterant for the wealthy

Agreed. But thats why I keep saying this - the points are! A mild point; their car will cost a little bit more to insure too.

So how far up your own arse are you?

I'm not quite sure what insult you are drawing from me saying that my tax money supports the weak in society. I think it's the basic premise of the welfare system. Perhaps you think I thought people who are unemployed are somehow weak. Not so.

I sense a lot of resentment towards people who have higher incomes here. Is it really the speeding you want to punish, or do you think that the state should stick it to them for your benefit at the same time?

Answer me this. Is it fair for the man who drove 22kph (13mph)over the limit to pay 111,888 Euro in fines?

Eoin

So, ignoring the sliding scale for a second - 2 and a half working weeks pay for this offence? Does that seem reasonable? People have, and will, go on strike for less in Ireland, even if it's to help save the economy...

Zube

(Fines aren't fair)

fluffer wrote: »

the points are!

That [edited] Piers Morgan is writing in CAR magazine for no discernable reason these days, and he lost his license for a spell last year. It was a big nuisance for him to go back to using a driver until the ban elapsed. So the points aren't much of a deterrrent to mega-wealthy people, either.

Stark

eoin wrote: »

So, ignoring the sliding scale for a second - 2 and a half working weeks pay for this offence? Does that seem reasonable? People have, and will, go on strike for less in Ireland, even if it's to help save the economy...

fluffer wrote:

Answer me this. Is it fair for the man who drove 22kph (13mph)over the limit to pay 111,888 Euro in fines?

You seem to forget that I said 12 days was unreasonable in my first post.

peasant

If I understand the opening article correctly, in Finland the first 20 km/h of speeding above the limit are dealt with a fine (the same for everybody) and/or points.
Only over 20 extra km/h does the punitive salary based fine kick in.

I think that's fair enough.

Eoin

Stark wrote: »

You seem to forget that I said 12 days was unreasonable in my first post.

I wasn't just asking you.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

that's a disgrace.. the guy could be bankrupt this year but because he made alot last year, gets hit for that.

The cops have access to the latest income database which is naturally from the previous year. If the offender's economical circumstances have changed dramatically in the current year they can contest the fine which will then be applied based on the current income.

They are quite flexible with this. I think it is a great system.

Dartz

Isnt this the whole reason we have the Penalty points system. So that, in the end, regardless of income and ability to pay fines. If you get caught breaking the limit enough times, you lose your license same as everyone.

Doesn't matter if you drive a Mini, or a Mercedes. Although the Mini will probably be going faster (Dont ask for my logic on this)

Stark

It's practically impossible to get 12 points on your license. According to the stats, only 183 drivers managed to clock up 12 points vs 600,000 who were given points. And even when you clock up 12 points, there are still practical issues with getting people to actually surrender their licenses meaning most people stay on the road once they get to 12 points. It's certainly no wonder solution.

Dartz

Getting 12 penalty points is:

*Getting caught speeding 6 times.
+Any similar 2-pointers

Or arguing about it 3 times.

The thing with penalty points though, is that the more points you have, to more your insurer is entitled to load your premium. IIRC. You might not pay the fine to the state, but you pay it elsewhere. Some insurers even offer discounts for No points, or for only having the two.

Nuts to fines, there's your incentive right there.

Stark

In practice, most people rarely get more than 4 despite habitually speeding. They just change some habits like being more careful around the more obvious speed trap zones. And the insurance loading for 4 points is usually fairly insignificant if the particular insurance company even applies a loading in the first place.