# Should a Rich Speeder Pay More? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 21, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311 "2011-10-21T00:28:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/161 "2011-10-23T19:05:11Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Again, this is the same fallacy you’re making with regards to the rich and the poor. All people with more income make more money than people with less income. You’ve already agreed this is a fact. > [@](#): > > You are _assuming_ grandmothers are old and frail, while _assuming_ sumo wrestlers are fat. > > I work with a 38 year old grandmother from Mexico that I’m pretty sure could take a caning better than most people. Do you think this is clever? I clearly said that the system would be based on relative size. I gave Sumo wrestler and grandmother as simple to understand expressions of that. And you ignore that I said it was based on relative size and misrepresent what I said, so you can make a nonsense argument about how some wealthy people who make more income really have less income so you shouldn’t fine them more. I’d like you to admit your error here, okay? > [@](#): > > Like with wealth/income your system isn’t just imperfect, it fails miserably at its stated goal. No, it works fine. Say you make 10k a month and I make 1k. If we’re fined $5,000 and $500 respectively, we both have 50% of our incomes left. It works perfectly. > [@](#): > > You are trying to hurt people based on your preconceived notions of who they are based on simplistic variables. I’m trying to make punishments equitable because people should be treated equally under the law. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/162 "2011-10-23T19:18:54Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So? A poor woman could have, because of a fine, not enough money to get an abortion that ruins the rest of her life. Or not enough money to pay rent and be out on the street. Or pay her car payment and lose her car. Or food so her baby goes hungry. Ah, perfect: so how much do you propose this woman be fined? What non-zero amount is appropriate for someone in her dire situation? That’s really the only answer I need, if you’re pressed for time. > [@Lobohan](#): > > You measure it by looking at how much money they have left after paying the fine. Glad I could be of service in fighting your ignorance. Have you actually thought that process through? You’d need a full audit for every misdemeanor violation, to some how assess a persons net cash flow. But even simpler than that, it means a person making $200k with too much house gets a pass. As does his wife who has no income other than what her husband makes. Where do you propose the police/courts get this magical number representing “how much money is left”? I like that you consider that a win. > [@Lobohan](#): > > No he wouldn’t. He would be fined as a percentage of his income. Buffet’s income is many times that of his secretary. What income? He draws a very modest salary from his company, and most of his income is in dividends and capital gains. How do you propose to make sure he hurts the same as his secretary? > [@Lobohan](#): > > I’m talking about income, not wealth. This would be yet another area where even if this were instituted, the wealthy would get a pass. So how many areas that does make now? How many until you realize you’re wrong? I’m going to a movie soon so we might need to speed this along. > [@Lobohan](#): > > If the student making 10k a month on his first month on the job, who the fuck cares? There are always going to be outliers. You make the system to be as fair as possible to as many people as possible. Well, he cares I would assume. You’ve taken the food right out of his mouth! Seriously though, if you have that many outliers eventually the term is kind of meaningless. And right here we have back to back failures; you’ve let the wealthy slide through, and hurt the poor. How much worse can this get before you acknowledge it’s worthless? > [@Lobohan](#): > > That’s a pretty stupid objection. If only there were some way that debt forgiveness could not count as income for this purpose. If only there were some possible way that when writing the law, that debt forgiveness could not count as income for this purpose. How long do you imagine this law to be? How many loopholes do you need to create? At some point you’ll realize that income is a piss poor way to measure how much it hurts to lose money. We’re up to three cases in a single post and neither of us are lawyers. If anything this law will create plenty of work for lawyers, so I guess we could call it a job creation bill. And this is where we need **Bricker** because I’m under the impression that each time someone uses one of these “special cases” it because part of case law. > [@Lobohan](#): > > Are you taking the piss? Do you smell asparagus? > [@Lobohan](#): > > I think I speak for everyone when I express my astonishment that criminals get away with stuff that makes their lives easier. If you new and improved criminal code makes it subsequently even easier, wouldn’t you call that yet another failure? We’ve got a forth case where you law does the opposite of what you want it to do. Not just fail, but actively make things worse. > [@Lobohan](#): > > No. It’s you slinging bullshit because of an ideological desire to shield the rich. No, it’s me getting a good laugh out of a poorly thought out plan. I won’t even bother counting that one against you. > [@Lobohan](#): > > I don’t often win arguments this utterly. Thank you for the opportunity. Awesome. Four gaping holes and you declare victory. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/163 "2011-10-23T19:23:48Z")
Seriously, this question cannot be answered until we know what we’re fining people for. This was mentioned upthread but the point seems to have been lost or ignored. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/164 "2011-10-23T19:26:44Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Again, this is the same fallacy you’re making with regards to the rich and the poor. > > You are _assuming_ grandmothers are old and frail, while _assuming_ sumo wrestlers are fat. > > I work with a 38 year old grandmother from Mexico that I’m pretty sure could take a caning better than most people. > > Like with wealth/income your system isn’t just imperfect, it fails miserably at its stated goal. > > You are trying to hurt people based on your preconceived notions of who they are based on simplistic variables. If I had known you work with a 38 year old grandmother from Mexico that could survive caning, I would not argue with you. I mean how more definitive can you be. That is an argument that just wins all. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/165 "2011-10-23T19:38:11Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > If I had known you work with a 38 year old grandmother from Mexico that could survive caning, I would not argue with you. I mean how more definitive can you be. That is an argument that just wins all. “This young woman is a grandmother who can survive a caning. YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/166 "2011-10-23T19:38:28Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > And this is where we need **Bricker** because I’m under the impression that each time someone uses one of these “special cases” it because part of case law. Not every time. Precedents typically get set at the appellate level. To make case law, you typically need a case to be appealed to the court that can create binding precedent. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/167 "2011-10-23T19:48:48Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Ah, perfect: so how much do you propose this woman be fined? What non-zero amount is appropriate for someone in her dire situation? > > That’s really the only answer I need, if you’re pressed for time. I imagine that there would be alternatives for people who assess fines and cannot pay. I also assume there would be some floor that operates as a base fine. > [@](#): > > Have you actually thought that process through? You’d need a full audit for every misdemeanor violation, to some how assess a persons net cash flow. I haven’t. But I’m not a lawmaker. In Finland the police can access the driver’s current net income to assess the fine. > [@](#): > > But even simpler than that, it means a person making $200k with too much house gets a pass. As does his wife who has no income other than what her husband makes. I would suppose they are assessed based on the family’s income. > [@](#): > > Where do you propose the police/courts get this magical number representing “how much money is left”? You still misunderstand. I’m not suggesting they look for how much is left. I’m suggesting that they apply the fine as a portion of the person’s income. And that being done, they end up with the same amount left. > [@](#): > > I like that you consider that a win. I like that you’re happy. > [@](#): > > What income? He draws a very modest salary from his company, and most of his income is in dividends and capital gains. How do you propose to make sure he hurts the same as his secretary? Are you under the impression that I wouldn’t want capital gains to be considered a part of income for this purpose? > [@](#): > > So how many areas that does make now? How many until you realize you’re wrong? I’m going to a movie soon so we might need to speed this along. Uh, zero areas? > [@](#): > > Well, he cares I would assume. You’ve taken the food right out of his mouth! Seriously though, if you have that many outliers eventually the term is kind of meaningless. And right here we have back to back failures; you’ve let the wealthy slide through, and hurt the poor. How much worse can this get before you acknowledge it’s worthless? You haven’t managed a single cogent point in this thread as far as I’ve seen. > [@](#): > > How long do you imagine this law to be? How many loopholes do you need to create? At some point you’ll realize that income is a piss poor way to measure how much it hurts to lose money. We’re up to three cases in a single post and neither of us are lawyers. It’s a very simple way to judge how much money you make. > [@](#): > > If anything this law will create plenty of work for lawyers, so I guess we could call it a job creation bill. Another nonsense objection. > [@](#): > > And this is where we need **Bricker** because I’m under the impression that each time someone uses one of these “special cases” it because part of case law. > > Do you smell asparagus? I smell you handwaving away objections and trying to create needless emotional distractions. > [@](#): > > If you new and improved criminal code makes it subsequently even easier, wouldn’t you call that yet another failure? We’ve got a forth case where you law does the opposite of what you want it to do. Not just fail, but actively make things worse. You haven’t demonstrated what you claim. > [@](#): > > No, it’s me getting a good laugh out of a poorly thought out plan. I won’t even bother counting that one against you. Good, I guess. > [@](#): > > Awesome. Four gaping holes and you declare victory. I’ll let the peanut gallery decide which of us is fountaining nonsense like the Bellagio. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/168 "2011-10-23T19:51:52Z")
This situation kind of proves that fines for anyone as a punishment is unfair and as a deterrent is unreliable. The only time fines are appropriate are to repay actual damage caused, or to punish companies, since you can’t put them in jail. Minor offenses can be subject to community service, points on your license, or taking a remedial class. What’s lunch for one person can be another persons food budget for the week. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/169 "2011-10-23T22:12:27Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > All people with more income make more money than people with less income. You’ve already agreed this is a fact. Yes, that statement is true. Problem here is that you then try to draw two conclusions from this: 1. That a person with more income has more money than a person with less income 2. That a person with more income feels less pain from the loss of that money than a person with less income Neither of those statements are true. You want then and need them to be true, but they aren’t. We’ve demonstrated pretty clearly that they aren’t true. The rest of your proposal is based on those two flawed assumptions. But that didn’t stop you from putting on your jump suit and declaring mission accomplished. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/170 "2011-10-23T22:27:43Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Of course I disagree. It’s flatly wrong. Rich people work more hours than poor ones. [Cite](http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/03/21/the-workaholic-rich/), [cite](http://www.urban.org/Pressroom/workingfamilies.cfm), [cite](http://www.urban.org/publications/309708.html), [cite](http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9505E1D8103FF930A3575BC0A9609C8B63). > > Regards, > Shodan Hey, why don’t you include a short summary of each of those so-called “cites”? Thanks bunches. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/171 "2011-10-23T22:40:46Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So? A poor woman could have, because of a fine, not enough money to get an abortion that ruins the rest of her life. Or not enough money to pay rent and be out on the street. Or pay her car payment and lose her car. Or food so her baby goes hungry. Again, when that woman is caught doing 15 over the speed limit, how much do you propose we fine her? > [@Lobohan](#): > > I imagine that there would be alternatives for people who assess fines and cannot pay. I also assume there would be **some floor that operates as a base fine.** (bolding mine) But based on the \*simple god damn logic \*in this thread, as income goes down the pain felt by a given fine goes up. What happens when you approach the bottom of that curve? What are you going to do when any non-zero fine means a child goes hungry, with the power off, and no medication?!?! Like with caning as a punishment, there will be a segment of the population that will suffer insurmountable pain at even the slightest nudge. Either you apply the lowest level of caning you can, which will still hurt disproportionately to any grandmother you beat. Or you don’t apply a punishment. So what do you do about the woman in your example? What punishment can you apply that won’t be disproportionate? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/172 "2011-10-23T22:46:10Z")
Sure, assuming that everyone is punished equally by losing the same proportion of their income is only an approximation. There will undoubtedly be exceptions. But it’s a heck of a better approximation than assuming that everyone is punished equally by losing the same number of dollars. Any argument against proportional fines on the grounds of fairness is also an even better argument against non-proportional fines. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2011, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/173 "2011-10-23T23:41:04Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Sure, assuming that everyone is punished equally by losing the same proportion of their income is only an approximation. There will undoubtedly be exceptions. But it’s a heck of a better approximation than assuming that everyone is punished equally by losing the same number of dollars. Losing the same number of dollars causes loss of the same amount of stuff. As already demonstrated by multiple examples on this thread, the punitive effect of losing a given amount of stuff depends on eleventy zillion (give or take a few thousand) variables. Hence, the best public policy can do is to use fines in a purely compensatory, rather than punitive, function. ---
**Author:** ![Jamicat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c67d28/32.png) [@Jamicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jamicat)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2011, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/174 "2011-10-24T02:43:18Z")
Punishment should be of no _monetary_ value. **Personal time** has equal Value. But, of course as long as both parties have equal opportunity to Pay Proportionately, if inclined to. 😜 ---
**Author:** ![Walther\_Ego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8dc957/32.png) [@Walther\_Ego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walther_Ego)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2011, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/175 "2011-10-24T11:12:38Z")
Wow, interestingly abstract conversation about absolute justice, so different from everyday mundane practices of ticketing in Finland. Excessive over-speeding is charged based on income. The idea is, indeed, that some rich people have fast cars and wreck havoc in the highways. Charging them extra for large or repeated offenses is at least some deterrent. The police pay comes from public funding and does not depend on how much in fines they write every day. For small offenses, there is a simple uniform ticket for everybody. This system is as old as I can remember. At that time, nobody talked about points. The point system seems very efficient in avoiding repeated offenses, my TAG is that it is better. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/176 "2011-10-25T02:06:22Z")
> [@sportscrazed2](#): > > What’s the point in being rich if you can’t buy a fast car and enjoy it? You shouldn’t speed unreasonably like examples in the original post but, who doesn’t enjoy speeding a little? I take my car out to a race track, why the fuck can’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/177 "2011-10-25T02:08:27Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > I think that drunk drivers who kill people should be punished according to how much money the victim had. Someone who is poor had a lot less to lose by dying than a rich person. Thats the way it works, to some extent. Its based on income rather than wealth (so killing some really rich heir who didn’t produce anything and wasn’t necessary to supporting his family should produce no greater a judgment in trial than a really poor person but an investment banker had a lot of productive years ahead of him. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/178 "2011-10-25T02:10:42Z")
I think it’s worth noting the the first two cites were in Switzerland - not Sweden, as someone else said in a disparaging manner as if to indicate that there were no difference between the countries. There are huge differences. Switzerland is not even part of the EU. It was neutral in WW2, it didn’t sign the Human Rights Act, it rarely does anything its neighbours do. Its parliamentary system is like something from a fantasy novel. This is not necessarily a bad thing, just demonstrative of how different Switzerland is to the rest of Europe. It is also a tax haven and home to a lot more wealthy people than most countries, including many who moved there because it’s a tax haven, plus their kids who’ve grown up ultra-rich and untouchable; the country therefore has a lot more reason than most to try to discourage people from speeding by levying fines that actually hit the driver because they have many more people than usual whose income is such that a fine of a few hundred Euros would be laughed off. For them the bureaucracy involved in fining higher earners is worth it because, once they have the structures in place to check out the drivers’ incomes, they have more rich drivers to assess than most countries do. Also in Switzerland bureaucracy = happy times. It’s not ‘Europe,’ but Switzerland and one much smaller example from Germany. I’m all for the idea in general because I think speeding fines should be a deterrent to speeding, with only minor qualms about it due to admin costs. Those aren’t an issue in Switzerland. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/179 "2011-10-25T02:17:50Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Again, when that woman is caught doing 15 over the speed limit, how much do you propose we fine her? > > (bolding mine) > > But based on the \*simple god damn logic \*in this thread, as income goes down the pain felt by a given fine goes up. What happens when you approach the bottom of that curve? What are you going to do when any non-zero fine means a child goes hungry, with the power off, and no medication?!?! > > Like with caning as a punishment, there will be a segment of the population that will suffer insurmountable pain at even the slightest nudge. Either you apply the lowest level of caning you can, which will still hurt disproportionately to any grandmother you beat. Or you don’t apply a punishment. > > So what do you do about the woman in your example? What punishment can you apply that won’t be disproportionate? Allow payments over time? Just like they do now. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311/180 "2011-10-25T02:21:39Z")
I’m also surprised to see people claiming that personal time has equal value. If someone’s working a 45-hour week on an hourly wage, paying someone to look after their kids and finding it hard to do so, and doing all their own housework, then it’s going to be harder for them to take a weekend out to do community service than it is for someone on a regular salary with a nanny they can well afford and a housekeeper. Would a student from a wealthy family really find it as hard to spend a weekend painting houses as a man supporting a family on two jobs, the second of which is only at weekends? If anything, personal time would be far harder to judge - the rich person might also volunteer a lot, or the poor person might look after an elderly relative, or the rich person might work 90 hours some weeks but 20 hours others and get told to do their service in the 90-hour week, or the distance to the place for community service might be a lot more (in money and time) for either. And TBH, if there’s work that needs to be done then I’d rather the state said ‘let’s hire people to do this work’ and paid them. We don’t have zero unemployment, and forced, unskilled labour is not going to be very good. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-a-rich-speeder-pay-more/600311.md?page=10)