Show of HandsShow of Hands

blockey87 May 27th, 2018 8:16pm

Should fines from the government as punishment for an action be somewhat income based instead of a flat number for all offenders?

13 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

daverator Connecticut
05/29/18 6:22 pm

Excuse me, Elon Musk, did you just litter? That’ll be $100,000.

cpaswr 864511320
05/27/18 10:21 pm

Anyone that favors a flat tax should be voting yes.

Wackacrat Harford County
05/28/18 3:40 am

Why? Flat tax is 1 rate for all, just like a fine should be.

cpaswr 864511320
05/28/18 4:08 am

As you stated, it is the same rate for everyone.

sea California
05/27/18 4:57 pm

I guess that’s why I would always see signs that say “No littering. $1000 fine or 6 months in jail.” They want to make sure that rich people can’t escape the law.

Reply
blockey87
05/27/18 9:13 pm

Do you think they actually end up going to jail for this though? I highly doubt it. Having one of the best attorneys can get you off or at least away from jail time for much more offensive crimes than something like a traffic ticket which might be a fine. I don't think the rich guys going to jail for a traffic ticket because the fine won't impact him as much.

sea California
05/28/18 9:29 am

Well it just comes down to the judge or jury

lcamino Florida
05/27/18 4:26 pm

No, that doesn’t sound practical. If you are given a speeding ticket, they would have to investigate your tax records to find out how much you made.

mudkip17 United States of Texas
05/27/18 3:51 pm

No then it's an inproportionate punishment that favors the rich. Say you get a fine going 200 miles an hour. That fine is 2,000 dollars. Someone who makes 30k a year, well that fine is really gonna screw them over, but a millionaire would gladly pay that for a chance to do that. You're not really punishing the rich guy for putting all the lives in danger

mudkip17 United States of Texas
05/27/18 3:51 pm

Sorry misread the question but still stated my position

blockey87
05/27/18 8:48 pm

I'm not sure I follow. Are you arguing for it then? That way the poor wouldn't be bankrupted by it but still significantly burdened, and in theory the fine could be roughly close to as uncomfortable for the rich offender instead of irrelevant to them. The 2k fine wouldn't hurt them nearly as much as for the poor person who can't really offer that money without a payment plan that cripples them for months.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/27/18 2:51 pm

I lean yes, but I don't think fines are an appropriate punishment. They kinda buy into the liberal worldview about human nature and economic incentive. When a crime is committed, it's more important to focus on rehabilitation, such that it isn't committed again.

Reply
blockey87
05/27/18 1:21 pm

I'm on the fence about this, and think purely a percentage of income or something of that sort wouldn't be ideal but I think scaling it in some way might be reasonable. I saw someone recently say "punishable by fine means legal for the rich", and that's what got me thinking about this. The way we currently do fines can be extremely heavy handed and end up fining the poor into bankruptcy, where as the rich could sometimes take a fine of 100x and it would still be insignificant to them. I'm curious to hear what others think. I don't think this one is as simple to make "fair" as it would seem. A 250 dollars fine, although technically equal, could be backbreaking or insignificant depending on the offender.

Reply