Should the rich pay higher fines ?

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 05:31PM

I thought wealthy people were above the law? Or is that a myth perpetuated by the left?

FTGFOP · 10-01-2012 05:37PM

seamus wrote: »

Because in absolute terms a higher fine is a greater punishment, therefore you are not treating a rich person equally before the law.

Is it? How so? In the case of the poor person an 80 euro fine is a considerable punishment, in the case of a wealthy person it is not. So while the currency amount is equal the burden of the fine -surely the more important consideration with regard to justice- is very different depending on your income.

Tax amounts are different for different incomes, and as it stands now judges hand down different sentences for similar crimes. I don't see fines based on income as any fundamental injustice. It seems to work in some other countries.

seamus wrote: »

It's all interpretation of course, but it doesn't really matter that one person would find €80 more difficult than another, the point is that they are both being fined equal amounts. For legal purposes those people are equals, their salaries are irrelevant, therefore they receive equal fines.

Can't it just be looked on as being equal in terms percentages of income? The fine is supposed to be a deterrent, after all.

The penalty points route would probably be the simpler solution though, Maybe 0.5 points for illegal parking, something like that.

RichieC · 10-01-2012 05:37PM

Reminds of the speeding tickrt from CA were some 25 yo got a 200 dollar fine for doing 220 mph in a bugatti veyron.

That should be jail time.

FTGFOP · 10-01-2012 05:40PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

So we don't mind less well off people continuing to commit the offences, we just don't want wealthy people doing so. Makes sense.

I didn't see anyone saying that. It's that people think that fines should be as a great a deterrent to the wealthy as they are to the poor.

RichieC · 10-01-2012 05:43PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

I thought wealthy people were above the law? Or is that a myth perpetuated by the left?

You kind of are if your fines make no impact on you. Herpyderpy left.. JFC..

promethius42 · 10-01-2012 05:44PM

Perhaps some sort of means tested fine? Then again this may be seen to be discriminatory toward the higher earners. For something the likes of speeding, a low earner speeding and a high earner speeding are in equal proportions of wrong so why would it be justifiable to charge the high earner more imply because they can afford it?

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 05:46PM

FTGFOP wrote: »

I didn't see anyone saying that. It's that people think that fines should be as a great a deterrent to the wealthy as it is to the poor.

Are there any metrics or research to back up the suggestion that the current system is less of a deterrent for the wealthy? Other than anecdotal 'evidence'.

If we are referring exclusively to motoring offences, then the points system is a better way of introducing equity - or will someone point out that the wealty can afford drivers?

If this was introduced, then I think the social welfare system should also change to pay out based on previous salary rather than the current approach whereby everyone gets the same. Same principle surely?

seamus · 10-01-2012 05:48PM

FTGFOP wrote: »

Is it? How so?

Because the absolute value of €80 is €80, regardless of one's income.

FTGFOP · 10-01-2012 05:51PM

But the absolute value of the punishment it not equal. A poor person and a rich person both being fined 80 euro is not equal punishment. The currency value is the same but the punishment is different.

Sindri · 10-01-2012 05:52PM

promethius42 wrote: »

Perhaps some sort of means tested fine? Then again this may be seen to be discriminatory toward the higher earners. For something the likes of speeding, a low earner speeding and a high earner speeding are in equal proportions of wrong so why would it be justifiable to charge the high earner more imply because they can afford it?

Its justifiable to ask a high earner to pay more of a fine because the morally righteous left think so. Even though as you pointed out they are the same crime but it would result in different punishments based solely on ones wealth.

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 05:54PM

Is this not discrimination? Or is there an unwritten rule that nothing you do to the middle income can be classed as discrimination?

Sindri · 10-01-2012 05:55PM

FTGFOP wrote: »

But the absolute value of the punishment it not equal. A poor person and a rich person both being fined 80 euro is not equal punishment. The currency value is the same but the punishment is different.

Not an equal punishment but the application of the law would be equal, and thus both citizens would then be viewed as equal in law.

FTGFOP · 10-01-2012 05:58PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

Are there any metrics or research to back up the suggestion that the current system is less of a deterrent for the wealthy? Other than anecdotal 'evidence'.

Won't simple logic do? An 80 euro fine is less of a deterrent to a rich person than a poor person.

juan.kerr wrote: »

If this was introduced, then I think the social welfare system should also change to pay out based on previous salary rather than the current approach whereby everyone gets the same. Same principle surely?

This is more like US system, and logically enough is proportional to what you paid into it while you were working. Seems fair to me. Going outside the scope of this thread though, I'd say.

FTGFOP · 10-01-2012 06:02PM

Sindri wrote: »

Not an equal punishment but the application of the law would be equal, and thus both citizens would then be viewed as equal in law.

My logic is that the burden on the payee = the punishment and in that way the fines could have different cash values but be equal punishments.

PCPhoto · 10-01-2012 06:10PM

hmmm... should the rich pay higher fines .... if they break the law and ignore the law ..YES !

In the same way that someone who is poor should be given higher and higher fines if he/she continues to break the law.

I cant understand why we cant/dont introduce a simple system for driving - PROPER enforcement of the penalty points system (obviously changing some of the stuff to make it properly about road safety and not about creating revenue).

if/when someone goes above the penalty point limit .... they have to complete and pass "Driving School" - which would mean a number of weeks of weekly sessions learning proper driving techniques and attitude on the road - something which the person has to pay for and pass BEFORE they get their next licence....and even if they do they face 12months with a tachograph/GPS system fitted to their vehicle which would be reviewed on a monthly basis to ensure at least 12months of lawful driving to completely change attitude/behaviour on the roads.

Sindri · 10-01-2012 06:20PM

FTGFOP wrote: »

My logic is that the burden on the payee = the punishment and in that way the fines could have different cash values but be equal punishments.

Yes but then we would be differentiating the equality between the higher income earners and the lower income earners in regards to the law. So if you earn more you pay more is discrimination against higher income earners.

The state/law would then discriminating against those who earn more just because they earn more. The law itself must regard all as equals.

EDIT
123rd post YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 06:21PM

FTGFOP wrote: »

Won't simple logic do? An 80 euro fine is less of a deterrent to a rich person than a poor person.

So that's a no then. Case closed.

Suryavarman · 10-01-2012 06:22PM

Giving different punishments for the same crimes based on spite and jealousy. Interesting idea.

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 06:31PM

Maybe we should take this a step further.

Is the OP suggesting randomly cherry picking specific practices that suit his / her political opinions, or would he/she advocate implementing some other Finish practices?

How do the Finnish welfare rates & practives compare to those in Ireland?

Chuck Stone · 10-01-2012 06:34PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

Giving different punishments for the same crimes based on spite and jealousy. Interesting idea.

How is being fined a % of ones income anything other than fair?

Sindri · 10-01-2012 06:38PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

How is being fined a % of ones income anything other than fair?

Because it differentiates between people based on their income when the break the law.

Capt'n Midnight · 10-01-2012 06:41PM

dotsman wrote: »

Um, you do realise that the richest people don't get a weekly wage?
...
How do you define their weekly income? .

Just apply the usual means test rules, where your assets excluding the family home are judged to capable of providing income, it's not rocket science and doesn't need new rules.

As for tradespersons, if they aren't declaring income then the usual rules of tax evasion apply.

Maybe we could make a rule that repeat offenders have to undergo a tax inspection ? :pac:
Scare the living bejasus of some people

Chuck Stone · 10-01-2012 06:41PM

Sindri wrote: »

Because it differentiates between people based on their income when the break the law.

And taking 20% of a person's wage as opposed to 1% isn't?

storker · 10-01-2012 06:42PM

oldyouth wrote: »

If everything in life was in relation to your earnings, where's the incentive for people to better themselves. Why should a wealthy person have to pay more for a fine?

Two possible reasons might be (a) because they're still better off and (b) if they get fined it's because they were doing something they shouldn't anyway.

Stork

Suryavarman · 10-01-2012 06:43PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

How is being fined a % of ones income anything other than fair?

How is giving two people different punishments for the same crime fair? It kind of makes a mockery of the whole concept of equality before the law.

juan.kerr · 10-01-2012 06:45PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

And taking 20% of a person's wage as opposed to 1% isn't?

Nothing like a spurious exaggeration or prove a point.

Sindri · 10-01-2012 06:46PM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

And taking 20% of a person's wage as opposed to 1% isn't?

What are you referring to?

Chuck Stone · 10-01-2012 06:47PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

Nothing like a spurious exaggeration or prove a point.

So imposing an €80 fine on a person with a weekly wage of €300 is equitable with taking €80 from a weekly wage of €900?

gaf1983 · 10-01-2012 06:48PM

oldyouth wrote: »

If everything in life was in relation to your earnings, where's the incentive for people to better themselves. Why should a wealthy person have to pay more for a fine?

Well fines are an incentive to behave well, if you like, so making a fines a proportion of one's earnings should incentivise everyone to behave within the law, not just those who are going to be hit more badly through a proportionately higher loss of earnings.

storker · 10-01-2012 06:50PM

Sindri wrote: »

Because it differentiates between people based on their income when the break the law.

Call me crazy, but if people don't want to be differentiated on based on income, they always have the option of..um...not breaking the law...

Stork

Should the rich pay higher fines ?

Comments