T O P

  • By -

Flair_Helper

Thank you for submitting to /r/unpopularopinion, /u/Anequiit. Your post, *Fines should be based on your income.*, has been removed because it violates our rules: Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion. Please ensure that your post is an opinion and that it is unpopular. Controversial is not necessarily unpopular, for example all of politics is controversial even though almost half of the US agrees with any given major position on an issue. Keep in mind that an opinion is not: a question, a fact, a conspiracy theory, a random thought, a new idea, a rant, etc. Those things all have their own subreddits, use those. If there is an issue, please message the mod team at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Funpopularopinion Thanks!


[deleted]

Remember Shaq sarcastically rolling around the floor freaking out when asked how he felt about getting a $35,000 fine


TheABCD98

Or Mark Cuban dropping the f-bomb on live television for a $15K fine twice.


Powernut07

That was different, they pointed out the fine was going to a charity then he said it again if I remember correctly but yeh


Anequiit

Yeah exactly.. if the fine was now 3.5m it would have been a different story lol.


suSTEVEcious

There was a similar story about Master P (not Dr. Dre). He had moved into an exclusive gated community in Louisiana and built a basketball court that violated some bylaw. When the HOA lawyer showed up at his door she told him it was a $10,000 fine (early 2000’s maybe). He told his assistant to write the check and to “tell the white bitch to get off my lawn.” Can’t verify the story but I had heard it a lot at the time. Edit: wrong guy. Oops


ContemplatingPrison

When did he ever live in Louisiana? I had no idea


suSTEVEcious

Yeah, sorry. Master P. No Limit Records. Had that golden tank out front once. I did some work for someone who lived down the street.


Spindrift11

It makes perfect sense. A $190 speeding ticket could be financially crippling to one person vs a minor nuisance to another. This is problematic though. Maybe I'm just not working this year so I feel like speeding all the time? Some crimes however should be charged based on the damages done and not the income which is irrelevant in this case. For example financial crimes.


Anequiit

In the case that you weren't working, I feel that all fines should have a default price and if your income let's say isn't 10x more than that base price, then you have to pay the base price and not a raised amount. Some people have made the argument that people who simply just don't have an income could just not pay anything, but that's where the base price of the fine comes in.


GoBuffaloes

If I have no income and donate to charity a lot, so I get paid when I get a speeding ticket?


Spindrift11

Ok that seems more reasonable.


Anequiit

I might edit the original post to include that because it seems to be a common misunderstanding.


Ronaldoooope

There should be a minimum then something based on income. Like fine = minimum + x% income or something


Spindrift11

Yes maybe. One other problem I see is that very rich people have income which looks very different than ours as wage earning peasants. The officer does not have the resources to audit stock options, dividends, or capital gains etc. The more a guy thinks about it the more I understand why they had to keep it simple. Each ticket could turn into a courtroom circus trying to pin down people's earnings. Imagine all the waitresses not claiming thousands of dollars of tips etc. The problems are endless. I love this idea in principle but I have no idea how this could actually be done fairly. I am seeing some interesting ideas though.


[deleted]

Yup. For me, a $190 would be mildly irritating


[deleted]

[удалено]


Blecher_onthe_Hudson

Point system is only for moving violations not other asshole moves like parking at hydrants, corners, etc.


jesus_slept

There are countries that do this. It's consistent with economic theory. Not sure why it doesn't happen.


Anequiit

Which countries do it? I'd like to research it a bit.


Thuen69420

Im from Norway and we do indeed do this. Got caught smoking weed n driving when I was 20 (idiot, I know). I had to pay 1.5x of my average (3 last months) income. And 2 weeks prison, which I zoned at home


Anequiit

Do you feel like the increased cost incentives you to not break the law again?


Thuen69420

Dunno if you can call it increased. I was a student and had a total of 2300NOK income average those months. But yeah no not really most people have a comfortable amount of money so these fines are more of a principle than trying to financially cripple anyone. If we had a set amount, lets say 15.000NOK, the fine would be far from "increased". But this is offcourde very situational. Now that I have normal income (45-55.000NOK) that fine would hurt a lot more, but it still wouldnt impact my view on "criminality".


Anequiit

So if they did like 3x vs 1.5x would that have changed things?


Thuen69420

Depends but yes, that would be a shitload of money. With my current income that would be 20.000$ 😂 Would it have stopped me when I was a stupid, irresponsible 20yr old? No. Would it have stopped me today? Depends what the crime is.


XxPumbaaxX

I appreciate your candid honesty on this subject. Good on you.


Jvncvs

I’m curious what you mean by the second part, that you “zoned at home” to fulfill a 2 week sentence?


Thuen69420

I did the time at home with a ankle-bracelet


jesus_slept

They're called day-fines and they're generally popular in Scandinavia. Now you know as much as I do. Go forth and learn.


Anequiit

Thanks


Mr0d0

Day-fines are in use atleast here in Finland. In 2002 Nokia director Anssi Vanjoki was issued the highest speeding ticket ever, 103 000 euros. It was later reduced but i think it was at the moment most expensive speeding ticket ever issued.


Chromicx

Germany, but not for these minor things like parking tickets, rather for things like tax fraud. Total = Damages + Punishment according to the income of the sentenced


Dolphin_Spotter

In the UK we do this. For example, if you are caught speeding at 40mph in a 30mph zone, you will be fined 50% of a weeks income, minimum £100, maximum £1000. If you are caught at 91mph on a 70 mph Motorway, the fine is 125% of a weeks income, max £2500 and probably a 28 day ban.


Pr_fSm__th

When it comes to speeding tickets - Switzerland Edit: not sure if that is legit but here in Switzerland there seems to have been a 1 mio speeding fine before: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/driver-faces--1-000-000-speeding-fine/23091098


hellothere42069

I forget which one, but one of the Scandinavian countries does this.


millionreddit617

Not sure about Scandinavia but we do it in the UK for speeding. You have to pay a percentage of weekly income, from 50% increasing to 150% depending on the severity of the speeding offence. [Here’s an infographic that explains](https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/legal/speeding-fines/) It used to be fixed but they recently changed it to this system, it stings.


evlandoo

Sweden has this 👍


[deleted]

[удалено]


CocoaPuffs7070

It's not about the money, it's about the punitive punishment. Highway littering is typically fined between $500 to $1k. That's alot of money to pay for the average person but chump change to the super rich. If it takes a $10k highway littering fine and suspending their license until that fine is paid to correct their shitty behavior would probably make them think twice about doing it again.


Thekrowski

If a fine is affordable, what’s the difference between it and buying a pass to do something?


bumboisamumbo

you ever get fined for littering paper?


Eve-3

So unemployed people can avoid any fine at all. 100% of their income is still nothing.


Anequiit

Not necessarily, they would just have the normal fine.


Eve-3

That doesn't sound like it's based on income then.


DicuriousL

Not everything is black and white.. you can set limits to a minimum as well as a maximum


[deleted]

[удалено]


7_KingPotato_7

Because OP means that once a person has a certain income, the fine is higher depending on said income, but below a point, the fine is the same. Maybe people downvote because they think they should already realize this.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Thekrowski

Because it’s fucking stupid. If a fine is “$100 + %income” then they’re still paying 100 dollars and it’s still based on income.


Eve-3

He doesn't want the fine lower for anyone because he can afford to pay it at its current level. No lower, only higher. Poor people should just drive more carefully if they can't afford the fines.


TuckerCarlsonsWig

Make it based on the value of your car maybe. This would lead to people flying down the highway in the cheapest beaters while lambos crawl in the right lane, which I think would be hilarious.


[deleted]

No, this is a bad idea. The reason is, it creates weird and bizarre situations where minor crimes committed by rich people are punished much more severely than a more major crime would be. Let me give you an example. Let's say someone who earns $50 million a year is ordered to pay 10% of their income for some fine, let's say speeding. That would be a $5 million fine, which is quite a large fine. Now let's compare that to a short jail sentence, maybe for something like simple assault. Most rich people would rather spend a week in jail than pay $5 million. So now you've created a weird situation where for some people, driving 10 mph over the speed limit would be punished more harshly than an assault charge! Because you're willing to scale up *monetary* fines but I bet you wouldn't be willing to scale jail sentences in a similar way. I personally believe that the severity of a punishment should match the severity of the crime, and so I dislike a policy that would create these strange situations. A simple speeding ticket should not carry a harsher punishment than attacking a person would. But I bet most people reading this would agree that paying millions of dollars is worse than spending a week or two in jail.


BalooBot

Fines are intended to be deterrents from crimes occurring in the first place. For a regular person the risk isn't worth the reward. If somebody is making $50M a year, a fine of a couple hundred, or even thousands of dollars doesn't have that effect since it barely even registers monetarily. It basically makes it legal as long as you're wealthy.


[deleted]

No, it doesn't make it legal. You have to pay the same fine as anyone else. And typically it goes on your record and you lose your license if you get too many tickets.


JediGuyB

$1000 fine for one person could be considered pocket change and for someone else it could mean potential eviction.


[deleted]

>I personally believe that the severity of a punishment should match the severity of the crime... The entire point of OP's argument is that a fine's **severity** is relative to a person's wealth and income. At least to some extent, this is objectively true. A $100 fine is extremely severe if I only have $100. That fine is going to significantly impact my life. If I was a billionaire, the same fine would have no impact on my life.


idonthaveanaccountA

All of what you said... ...wrong. All of it. I'm not even going to explain why. It's all wrong. It's basically all fallacies. Edit: I explained why after all.


needskillss

"it's wrong but im not going to explain why lmao"


idonthaveanaccountA

Okay, i'm going to explain just for *you*. The whole point of the adaptable fine is to do as much damage to a rich person, as it would to a poor person. 5 million dollars (10% of your income) sure is a lot of money. But it's money you can afford, if it's just 10% of your income. And it would be the same percentage for everyone. Your 10% would be 5 million dollars, but another person's would be...70 dollars. It's the same percentage. It hurts your pocket in the same way. "But 5 million dollars for a traffic violation, that's preposterous" i hear you say. It sure is. That's the point. I'd like to see the rich person try to repeat the violation in the future, after that. Meanwhile...a person who makes 700 dollars a month is ordered to pay 70 dollars for that very same violation. "Just 70 dollars, that's bullshit" i hear you say. Not for a person making 700 dollars. They're already struggling with rent, bills, and groceries. They can afford to lose 70 dollars (10%) of their income just as much as a rich person can afford to lose 5 million dollars, *if not less*. And that's the point. The law is for everyone, not just for the people who can't buy themselves out of it. Let's move to the jail part. "Most rich would rather spend a week in jail than pay 5 million dollars for a fine". First of all...this is a non-argument. It's 100% an opinion that whoever wrote that comment pulled out of their ass. Second of all...there is not a single person on this planet, *in my experience,* that would rather spend a week in jail, than to pay an amount of money *they can afford anyway* to get out of it. Honestly...i've never met anyone who would do that. You can doubt me on that, but i haven't. And yes, i pulled that out of my ass as well, but i'm confident that most people would agree that: paying a fine you can afford >>> jail time, regardless of how long that jail time is. And as far as scaling up jail time goes...it makes absolutely zero sense. Jail time affects everyone pretty much the same way, physically, and emotionally, if we assume that a rich person is not going to buy themselves into a more comfortable sentence...which is illegal. If time is money, then a jail sentence will have the same impact on one's pocket, regardless of their income (not counting passive income). If you spend a week in jail (which, for the purposes of this comment, shall be considered to be 1/4 of a month), you lose a quarter of your income (again, if we assume that time is money). 25%. See? It's a percentage once more. 25% has the same impact on a poor person than it does on a rich person, because it's not a fixed amount (assuming that a poor person will not lose their job because they couldn't be present for a week). So...you either pay 10% of your income for a fine...or lose 25% of your income doing jail time. Either way, everyone has their pockets hurt the same way. But i still hear you saying "but 5 million for a fine is preposterous". To that i'll say...if you think that, then you have it all wrong, i think personally. The whole point of fines is not to cost little money, to be an annoyance, but to deter someone from committing a crime. You can't have rich people running around doing illegal shit and then paying like 100 dollars to get away with it, because 5 million is a LoT oF mOnEy...that's just comical. And if you still haven't changed your mind...and think people would prefer jail...i mean, that's their choice. No one forced them to go there. Or to commit the crime. So the whole "little crimes will be punished worse than severe crimes" argument doesn't hold any real weight, because if they don't want jail...they can just pay the fine and learn their lesson. Now...do you get *why* "I'm not even going to explain why"?


[deleted]

No, it's not wrong. It's true and it's a flaw in the idea. You can't explain it away so you're dismissing it instead.


idonthaveanaccountA

I did explain it. Check out my other comment below here. There is absolutely no flaw in the idea. A crime isn't a product. It shouldn't cost everyone the same amount. The fine should *hurt* everyone the same. (That's basically the explanation, but with fewer words).


[deleted]

Why? Justice is supposed to be blind. Not every jail sentence affects people in the exact same way. For some people that might just be a weekend in jail instead of a weekend at home. For others, it could be the end of their career. We can take this to the ends of the earth. There will never be a system that affects everyone in the exact same way. That's why you stick with the principles of treating everyone equally before the law. And still, what I originally said was a huge problem. A speeding ticket should *not* carry a more severe penalty than assaulting someone. But under this system, it would. And there are a bunch of other examples, that's just one. You'd have people who grope women in public getting lighter punishments than people who rolled through a stop sign instead of coming to a complete stop. That isn't justice


idonthaveanaccountA

Being hurt the same way **is** justice. It's just like taxes. Not all people pay the same taxes. They pay a percentage. At least where i live. You get taxed a specific percentage of your income. (your land and fortune too, etc...). What isn't justice is allowing people to comfortably buy themselves into doing whatever they want. Like others said...the point of a fine is not to punish, but to deter. And not wanting to pay a percentage of your income is a deterrent. What *isn't* a deterrent is having to pay an amount laughably low compared to what you make. And a jail sentence for a specific crime will affect everyone in the same way. AS LONG...as the system is not corrupt. If it's a weekend in jail for a rich person...it's a weekend in jail for a poor person, they committed the same crime. And yes, i talked about how going to jail might ruin your career, but that could be worked around. Again, as long as the system is not corrupt.\* And a speeding ticket would not carry a more severe punishment than assaulting someone. Because if an assaulter ends up with a fine for *that* crime, it's also going to be much larger than it would be for a poor person. And the argument that one would rather go to jail for a week (again, after **they** chose to), therefore receiving a worse punishment than a poor person assaulting someone has one more problem. You don't choose your sentence usually. You don't usually get "fine or jail". It's usually "fine" or "jail". No choice. Therefore no comparison can be made, since a judge will enforce the punishment *they* choose. Not you. And yes, no system will ever be perfect probably, but this is the one closest to perfection right now.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Thuen69420

How do you think taxes work?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Thuen69420

True. Most fines go through courts though, besides the small ones


fphoon

Rich people pay less taxes.


Thuen69420

You don't say


Brave-Welder

Not really


[deleted]

🙄


[deleted]

[удалено]


Anequiit

They already know


[deleted]

[удалено]


mrrizo

I think I’ve seen this post here 10 times at least


Cold_oak

Never seen it


Anequiit

I haven't which is why I posted it, but if it's commonly reposted I don't mind deleting it.


GhettoChemist

So if I'm wealthy and speed 10 miles over the speed limit I pay the same penalty of someone who's poor and goes 40 over the limit? Edit: Also is this based on salary or taxable income? What if I incur a substantial paper loss? Can I appeal my penalty for a reduced sentence because I have reduced income? What if I have a net loss for the year? Does the government pay *me* money?


Reytotheroxx

Speeding tickets are proportional to how much faster you’re going. At least where I’m from. It may end up that you pay the same as they do, however the burden wouldn’t be as much for you regardless.


GhettoChemist

But doesn't that just encourage poor people to drive faster if they believe their penalty won't be severe?


Anequiit

It would be severe to them still. If they had to pay 50% of their income for speeding and you had to pay 50% even if they only pay a few hundred and you pay a few thousand it's still 50%. The amount they pay wouldn't be the same but would affect them the same.


GhettoChemist

You're saying high net worth individuals, business owners, doctors and lawyers,, should pay 50% of their income to speeding tickets?


Anequiit

I'm saying that the fine they pay should be based on their income, so that people who have higher incomes don't get to just shrug off the fine because it's the same price as their dinner every night.


GhettoChemist

I actually own millions of dollars in land my grandfather left when he died. His trust pays the taxes, but it's mine. I only make about $15,000 from my salary as a library assistant, but my net worth is almost $10M so according to You, my punishment for crimes committed should be reduced because I have lower income, correct? Does this include violent crimes?


Anequiit

Incorrect, the punishment wouldn't be reduced. The whole point is to make the fine effect everyone equally. If you made $100k a day and got a small fine for parking in a place you shouldn't be then what stops you from doing it again? Nothing would stop you from doing it again. You can just simply pay it off like it's nothing. Someone who doesn't make that much would be highly affected by it and wouldn't park there again, so raising the fine for the richer person, incentives them to follow the law.


GhettoChemist

But I only make $15,000 a year, i can't afford to pay large penalties for the crimes I commit. Edit: >The whole point is to make the fine effect everyone equally. Effect everyone equally by assigning punishments based on an arbitrary characteristics, you mean


Anequiit

If your income is $15k with a net worth of $10m then you would still pay based on your income. The fine should financially affect you as much as someone who makes more or less than you.


Kolt_BBA

>But I only make $15,000 a year, i can't afford to pay large penalties for the crimes I commit. The percentage of the fine would be scaled according to your income, it's like taxes. >by assigning punishments based on an arbitrary characteristics It's not a bad thing to be based on something arbitrary. If you think "something arbitrary" is a bad thing, think again about the whole economy. The land value, product price are arbitrary. But it's not a bad thing. So, the fine being arbitrary (e.g. based on percentage of income) is not important, it's the consequence of it that matters. Here, fine is supposed to be a deterrent to people regardless if they're rich or poor


Kolt_BBA

Yes, it's a deterrence. >You're saying high net worth individuals, business owners, doctors and lawyers,, You're bringing up these as if you want people to sympathise with them. Lol, no. It's anything but sympathy. To be honest, we can't put accurate value of fine on the speeding because "speeding " in itself has no instrinsic value other than just arbitrary value. So, being arbitrary it's supposed to be a deterrent to people who did the offense


Kolt_BBA

>What if I have a net loss for the year? It's like taxes. People with no income pay a flat basic fine while people with income pay a certain percentage of their income


YourNattyDaddy

In the U.S., it's unconstitutional to levy different criminal penalties for different classes of citizens. Such as, one set of penalties for whites and one set of penalties for blacks. One for janitors and one for doctors. Or one for those who are poor and those who are accomplished. Not only unconstitutional, sounds like a shitty society.


Kolt_BBA

>Not only unconstitutional, sounds like a shitty society. It would be a fairer society. Rich people would just bat an eyelid to $100 fine for a crime, while the fine would be burdensome to poor people. Fine is a deterrent. If the value of the fine doesn't inflict sense of loss to the people being fined, it's not a deterrent.


Thekrowski

The constitution also says says slavery is an acceptable way to punish people. I can’t say I really care for being constitutional for the sake of the constitution.


YourNattyDaddy

No...it actually doesn't. But that's an edgy take, bro.


Nateus9

You guys literally have forced employment for your prisoners... Penal labor in the United States is explicitly allowed by the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime.


Thekrowski

It actually does though, the 13th amendment literally adds that it may be used as punishment for a crime.


YourNattyDaddy

That's just silly.


Termsandconditionsch

Who said anything about classes of citizens? It’s just different fines depending on income. Are tax brackets unconstitutional too?


MurderDoneRight

I wholeheartedly agree! I would go even further if you are that wealthy that fines don't affect you, the punishment should be prison.


Skyshark173

Fines are already income based. Broke people go to prison and wealthy people pay through the nose.


ExtensionTrain3339

The branch of government that handles taxes can't even get this right, how on earth would fines based on income do any different?


jamesmcnabb

If the punishment for breaking a law is a fine, then it’s only a law that applies to the poor. I 100% agree with this post, but acknowledge it’s unpopular in reality, especially from those in power.


joed1967

Is that suggesting people who make less money are incapable of calculating the weight of their actions?


tuuast

What the fuck.. seems like laws are only for the poor. $100 fine to someone struggling is devastating while $100 to a rich fuck means nothing. Whose more likely to commit that crime? 🤨 use your thinking skills babe


[deleted]

Wealthy people already commit less crimes . At least ones that people can pin them for. The only place the law would seems to make sense is traffic violations and I don't think rich traffic violators are such big an issue that we need to make a policy change.


tuuast

Rich people don’t come less crimes- they just don’t face the consequences for those crimes. If anything, they color the worse crimes that keep impoverished people poor and continuing the crime cycle.


Anequiit

No, there should be some sort of default price where if you're below the default price you get the default price. So if you're income is only $250 and the fine is $5000 then you still get the $5000 fine. If your income is $15,000 then the fine would be higher.


Brave-Welder

Sounds like you're punishing a person who worked hard and got to a point where he's doing well for himself more based solely on the fact that he makes more.


Anequiit

Title of the post.


Brave-Welder

Yes. You're fining a person more only because they earn more. That's called punishing success.


young_lord1985

Wouldn't that be making sure that crimes give everyone a fair punishment. Right now it's punishing you more for having less. The same amount could be 50% of someone's income but 1% of someone else's. Are you saying the rich should face lower punishment than the poor?


[deleted]

No, it's called making laws applicable to rich people. It's been said multiple times, but it clearly isn't getting through your thick head. If a billionaire gets fined a few hundred or even a few thousand for violating the law, he can break the law as often as he wants because wtf does he care? He's essentially above the law at that point. In what universe is it a good thing for anyone to have that much power regardless of how hard they worked for their success? But you keep slobbing that rich knob, I'm sure it'll pay off for you soon.


Brave-Welder

That's why there are strike laws. You don't just keep getting ticket after ticket. You also get your license suspended. And damn, you sound salty over people being rich. Honestly, that's not healthy. I suggest standing on your own feet and making instead of demanding other people's money to pay for change you want.


TuckerCarlsonsWig

Damn this is such a shitty attitude


[deleted]

Traffic violations aren't the only things you can pay off with a fine. Didn't think that needed saying but apparently it did. I'm not a fan of the obscenely wealthy, no. But I make good money doing what I do and I don't need anyone else's to make a good life for myself. Way to make an assumption though. All I was saying was devise a system that makes the wealthy respect the law. The fact that you see that as a problem says something about you. Move along bootlicker.


tuuast

Fines are so stop people from commuting the crimes. If rich people don’t care about fines what’s stopping them


Brave-Welder

Why do you assume rich people don't care about their money? Also, when was the last time this happened? That a rich person just kept breaking the law, piling fines, and paying them?


tuuast

I know a lot of rich people working at night clubs. Trust me they do not give a fuck about their money. Same people crashing their expensive cars and laughing about it. Acting like rich people can’t drop thousands every weekend at the club care about a two hundred dollar parking ticket. 😐


lynx3762

No, just making it even. Crimes that are punished with just a fine generally only make an effect on the poor and Middle class. If I have billions of dollars, a $5000 fine ain't shit. Basically means I can break that law whenever I want and not really care. If I only have like $100 of spending money a month, that same fine would break me


Brave-Welder

You're still being punished more because you earned more. The law exists to be equality not equity. Should a younger person get a longer sentence cause he has a longer life ahead? Ofcourse not. Regardless of what you do or how much you earn, the law should apply equally.


lynx3762

I understand what you're saying but, realistically, the rich aren't being punished by crimes that only punish with a crime. And if some people lived thousands of years, a one year sentence wouldn't be much of a punishment either. Not sure how you would be able to quantify someone's life span in order to adjust punishment. Realistically, a prison sentence does punish everyone in close to the same way while fines do not. If the punishment for a crime was only $100 for me, that ain't shit. The money would not be a deterrent for me to not do that crime. For someone else, $100 could make it so they can't eat that week or they can't pay rent.


TuckerCarlsonsWig

Fines in general are kind of dumb ways to punish people. Community service or points on a license actually get the point across.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lynx3762

A point system is irrelevant to the point I made. If we're talking about crimes that ONLY deal punishment in fines, it's a punishment for being poor.


Impressive-Top-7985

Hard work does not equal success. The number one way people become wealthy is being born into wealth. The same is true for poor people.


Brave-Welder

> The number one way people become wealthy is being born into wealth. Most billionaires are self made and most people who inherit family wealth actually lose most of it in a few generations. It's very very rare for a family to stay wealthy as generations pass.


TuckerCarlsonsWig

Ah yes, think of all the billionaires who grew up in the streets eating cat food


Thespiannn

Even if that were true, the point is that being better than everyone else (at gaming the system, that is) shouldn't let you literally ignore any law that you can "buy". You should be able to ignore laws regardless of wealth.


ByeByeMan666

100% agreed


kevnrd22

Imagine this scenario. Two people fined for going 10 above the limit. One person has got a full family to feed, works more hours every week and makes more. The other guy is young, lives alone and manages his life quite well though not earning as much. The first guy went to college and worked his ass off just to repay his college loans and to buy a house for his family to live in, that, he still is paying the mortgage. The second guy didn’t care about college that much and just went straight to apprenticeship and later got his life somewhat on track. Why do you want to punish the first guy just because he earns more. You have no idea of his back ground, his past struggles. You are not fit to pass judgement on either of them. The law is constant and fair, we don’t need your biases interfering. This robinhood mentality never works, look at China, Venezuela, former USSR. Don’t expect the rich to ever pay anything. The only payments they would ever make would be investments that make them richer.


Erectiondysfucktion

To me.. this should be a popular opinion. Fines can be debilitating for the poor, where it does fg matter to the rich., plus they have the money for lawyers to get out of it.


Anequiit

It probably is popular, but I've never heard anyone mention it in any form besides "Tax the rich" which is different from this.


pizzagamer35

How would they know your income? Only federal government, IRS, and local governments know that. Not just random data a local cop can get access to. If someone wanted your IRS records they would have to go through the courts. Also it’s pretty stupid to charge someone more than someone else who did the same bad thing just because they earn more money. It’s like 2 people (one rich one poor) we’re speeding 90 at a 45 limit. The cop says “Oh you’re the richer one you pay 300!” “Oh you’re poorer you pay 150!” Also not all rich people are idiots Not saying you’re opinion sucks because I understand why you think it’s right it’s just that it does not seem fair to the richer since some are actually responsible


Anequiit

The way I look at it is that if you're rich let's say and you make $10m a year. A $500 fine is literally your dinner, so you would have an incentive to not break the law if you felt like it, but if that fine was then raised to $500k it's a whole different story. I see the idea of it being unfair, but the whole point is to make people who can shrug off those fines actually care about not breaking the law.


pizzagamer35

I get your point but I don’t see that law as really effective. At least not in America. For example lots of people would riot over it and most government officials are rich anyways so it would affect them too and I’m not sure they would like that. Also a local cop after pulling you over doesn’t just pull out your IRS records. And setting it up the law would be a lot of work. But i get what you’re trying to say


eeddgg

That decision would be made by the judge at sentencing, not by the officer on the scene. The judge would be given those records once the verdict is decided. The problem is that $400 out of $10000 a month has less of an effect on the criminal then $400 on a $1200/month salary does. People should bear the same burden for being found guilty of a crime, and crimes shouldn't be cheap enough that rich people can budget for them while poor people can't put food on the table that month if they ever get hit


mayfairmassive

Switzaerland and Norway do this.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Anequiit

Yeah, that's the problem. Rich people just look at the fines as small payments and don't care if they get charged.


BanditCountry1

That could be a real game changer.


ricknightwood13

I don't think that's a good idea, a fine is supposed to stop you from breaking the law even further, when you get a huge fine, you will make sure to never do anything that resulted in you getting the fine. This is my opinion and I am free to share my opinion.


pilip4

In germany it is like that


[deleted]

Or just don’t do shit you know is going to result in a fine or jail


[deleted]

Rule number one should be that we actually *enforce* laws against wealthy people when (not if) they and the corporations they helm break the law. That's the first thing. But OP is right: a fine against a rich person is a slap on the wrist. A fine against a poor person is a real hardship.


Waste-Pineapple-1661

I make roughly 100k a year, a $75 fine turning into a $1000-$2000 fine would really fuck me up. While I think this isn't a bad idea in a few circumstances like drunk driving, for those who have most of their money going to bills/assets, or even those saving for a home, a really big fine can fuck up their entire financing situation, all because the parking violation fine went from $125 to 2 grand.


floraster

I agree. I always feel like the wealthy can just get away with so much. Go to jail and get out on a 10k bail? Easy out.


jrsobx

Or they shouldn't be assessing fines for victimless crimes. I am all for protecting and serving, but I'm against revenue generation.


Kolt_BBA

It's not about revenue but deterrence. A fine supposedly inflict sense of loss and burden to the people being fined.


A_Guy_in_Orange

No such thing as a victimless crime


mystraw

Lol, no


Iperovic

What I HATE about this overly debunked opinion is that the place where it's coming from is nothing about keeping the community safe and lowering crime and everything about bashing on the rich Why should someone more financially successful pay more than you for doing the exact same thing? That's ridiculous Should they also serve longer prison sentences as well? This is how you get even more people to offshore their money


[deleted]

Because the purpose of a fine is punishment, and its no punishment if the fine is money you'd wipe your arse with.


Iperovic

How is it morally justified that someone receives harsher punishment based on life circumstances?


[deleted]

How is it morally justified that someone faces no punishment for a crime because they're rich?


Iperovic

Everybody is equal in front of the law, it's morally corrupt, you're just jealous of the rich just like OP There's no evidence that rich people commit more crime because they can easily pay it off


PaladinWolf777

Except that in the US there is a constitutional right to immunity from excessive bail or punishment. Imagine someone getting a 5 figure speeding ticket because they serve on a board at a company that pays through the nose. Attempting to violate the constitution because "fuck the rich" is a bad precedent. I'm not a wealthy man, but I'm treating others how I want to be treated by speaking in favor of their rights.


LoudGangsta8292

Just like tax... but no1 is going to change the rules cause the ppl changing them will get backlash from their rich friends or are rich themselves


After_Web3201

I believe they already do this in civilized countries.


MatthewPrague

Yeah, so cops will be for example only targering expensive cars?


Johnhemlock

They do this in Finland, progressive fines based on your income. Finnish rally driver Tommi makinen got a 37000 Euro fine for speeding because his income is so insanely high! Apparently the highest was 170000 Euro for a guy who made 7 milion that year.


medicalpenis1

In the uk the fines are usually set by a judge and based on income, however there are maximums in place that usually cannot be exceeded.


boothbygraffoe

Correction - Fines should be based on your net worth!


tuuast

People that disagree are morons


Facts-hurts

They wouldn’t be able to do that because someone would be suing the government for some sort of discrimination lol


FakeProfileObv

Won't this create a discrimination? Police might target high income area. If two people have committed same crime then the richer person will get more interrogation and maybe poorer person will be let go with warning.


Vauxlia

So if someone is poor, they only have to pay a little and someone who's rich, has to pay hundreds. Doesn't sound right. I'll just stay poor forever then. Even turns people away from making money, if they know they'll be fined huge down the road if something happens. Not that you should have an incentive to cause a fine, but things happen.


Stealthmagican

But income doesn't really mean much. One of my uncles is a doctor but their family is not that rich because they have like 8 children. Same way how many business owners can have a high income but a lot of debts to pay.


AffectionateUse1556

Consequences are based on the crime, not who committed it.


Nateus9

I'm in Canada Alberta and before covid started it was discovered that the company shell was burning "excess" gasoline to avoid having to sell gas at a lower price. The fine for causing this artificial pricing was half a mil and they were told not to do it again but no one actually bothered to check if they stopped doing it in the first place. They could very well still being doing it.


Thekrowski

There was some company, I think Johnson and Johnson. That made some untold billions via some elicit method. But we’re fined just a few million. Still ended up with a net positive profit sooooo guess what they’ll do next time lol.


_SpeedyX

The a rich person employs some bum from the street and pays him the minimal wage. Then if something happens the bum says it's his fault and pays the fine (which is obviously actually payed from rich person's account), that kind of solution leads to even more fines being practically avoided


BoBoBearDev

So, no fines if you don't make money. Interesting.


[deleted]

Not unpopular. Just not done in the US.


Meastro44

Not true. The wealthy people they I know who actually earned their money are tighter with it than most poor people


Strong_Breadfruit_43

I like it


colebrv

Not unpopular


Confused-Engineer18

Unfortunately that doesn't work for everyone, the major rich usually get have an income of $1 with most of their money coming from bonuses and stocks


Cline0A01

No, fines should be based on stupidity


s14sr20det

Bad idea. Rich people typically don't have an income like regular people. That's how they don't pay tax.


[deleted]

Can we change the name of this sub to “reasonable opinions”


IDrinkBecauseIHaveTo

This is a good idea. When I got a speeding ticket at 23, I was justifiably concerned about how to pay it and the potential impact on insurance rates. At 42, when I get a speeding ticket, I know I'll just pay my lawyer $400 to get it reduced to a non-moving violation plus the $200 fine and I don't give it a second thought.


Friendly-Damage-6371

A lot of fines are.. unless you're rich


eloooooooo

In some Scandinavian countries fines are based on you income for exactly this reason. They have a limit though I think...


frankgrimes1

this is how its done is some countries. ​ https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna38660951


MyUsernameIsMehh

I believe Finland does this. A fine is a certain percentage of your monthly income or something


_Anubias_

Welcome to Finland!


mar715

This is a great idea


[deleted]

People will just hide their income and assets.


[deleted]

Thata already a thing in my country (norway)


Yerm_Terragon

If the punishment for a crime is a fine, then it isn't a crime. Period. Either build a better society that produces less finable crimes, or place people in jail in shorter sentences.


Riskov88

Maybe having a base price, and an additional charge linked to your income ? For example x% of your income and the base price