I’ll tell you what, if the $100,000 guy can document that he spends all his money on orphans, widows, and kittens or cancer research then I agree the court should consider giving him a break.
It’s not emotional manipulation. It’s a fact $200 causes the poor a lot more hurt than the rich.
You know, responding to just the first sentence in my post is pretty meaningless, since the very next sentence implicitly acknowledges just the point you made, and uses that very assumption as the basis of the actual point of the whole post.
Want to give it a second try, and see if you can come within spitting distance of addressing what I was saying?
What sentence is it that acknowledges the point I made?
Was the point you were making supposed to be the one about how a year to an old person is worth more than a year to a young person? Because that point has already been raised and dismissed.
If you are indeed arguing from the position that fines should be equal for rich and poor people, please answer the following:
Do you think speeding fines ought to be treated as a punitive deterrent?
If so, do you think a rich person is deterred by a $100 fine less than, more than, or about the same as a poor person is?
Wrong, that is emotional manipulation. What you are saying is that it’s okay for that person to break the law, that some how the consequences of their actions are different. You fell for the same trick you’re trying to pull on other people.
No, it’s not a fact, it’s how you view the world. It’s what you do in all these threads. But all of that is besides the point, the poor person still broke the law. Essentially what you’re saying is that it’s okay for the poor to break the law because punishing them isn’t fair.
Doesn’t it make you wonder why a person who can’t afford a $200 ticket would risk a speeding ticket?
I am against it, but as far as I can tell, it’s no different than a progressive income tax.
That’s simply not a solid argument.
It’s the same amount of their overall life that’s being taken away. It has nothing to do with how much of it they’ve already spent.
In any case, the idea, in my opinion, should be that each person feels the same weight of the punishment.
I fail to see how this is any different than a progressive income tax.
Only if you think making money is criminal and should be punished. What the hell?
If it’s not a tax, its a punitive deterrent. Wouldn’t you agree?
Now see this is a strawman, and a retarded one at that. I would like to cite where I said the poor shouldn’t be punished. Otherwise I’d like an apology for misrepresenting me.
I said the poor and the rich should be punished equally. Confiscation of a plentiful vital resource is not the same punishment as confiscation of a rare vital resource.
For the poor money is rare resource (by definition), and for the rich money (again by definition) is a plentiful resource.
Simple god damned logic.
I keep telling you that capital punishment is wrong always and everywhere, and you keep coming up with stupid shit like that.
What is the deal with you?
I’d have no problem with the fine being a set percentage of a person’s income, and can’t see how that could be construed as discriminatory in any way, even tho a rich person would pay a higher dollar amount for a fine than a poor person would.
Nah. Make it $50T. That way EVERYBODY will have to plead for a financial-hardship adjustment, and back it up with evidence. This frees the judge to make things more equitable on a case-by-case basis.
You want to read those two arguments again? It doesn’t look like you’re really arguing the opposite…
I’ve never understood this assertion. F’rinstance, my chances of ever having a $25M cash infusion from working or investing are exactly zero. My chance of having it happen from a $1.00 ticket purchase may be 1.2 X 10[sup]-16[/sup], but it doesn’t imply that I’m bad at math to understand that that’s a larger number than zero.
Exactly, and they are being punished with a proportional amount of pain under this proposal.
I realize you like to posture like you’re the last living educated human who thinks marginal utility theory isn’t just wrong, it’s totally backwards, but that’s not really any excuse.
Presumably, that’s because you’re bad at math. 
Right, and if you multiply the probability of winning times the dollar amount if you were to win, you get what is called the “expected value”, which invariably will come out to less than the $1.00 you paid for the ticket. That’s what people mean.
A rich person has both more money, *and *more free time, than a poor person. Do you disagree?
Of course I disagree. It’s flatly wrong. Rich people work more hours than poor ones. Cite, cite, cite, cite.
Regards,
Shodan
Hypothetical, Shodan. If Superman spit gum on the sidewalk in Metropolis and caning was a punishment for that there, would you think Superman is equitably punished (like other defendants) by caning there?
Similarly, if a person who pumps gas in Oregon for minimum wage is fined a thousand dollars for walking his dog without a leash and Bill Gates is also, are they equitably punished?
I just saw this. To answer your question, no because by getting that many points you’ve shown yourself not safe to drive, at least according to the law (whether not potential sources of points represent actual hazardous activity is another debate). Taking your license is necessary because other drivers have a right to a safe roadway.
However I do believe there should be programs to develop public transportation. What I’d really like is a rail setup like New England has to be broadly deployed.
Right now we live in society that says things like “driving is a privileged, not a right”, and yet lacks basic public transportation in many areas with little intent to implement it. Logically the message is anyone who doesn’t have this privilege should fuck off and die.
So yeah loss of license leading to destitution is an injustice, but the fix isn’t destitution for everyone who losses their license, but taxis, buses, and trains.
Also, if you don’t believe in positive rights. You don’t need a license to drive a moped. So you have that option too.
Although I agree brisk moped ride in the middle of winter isn’t nearly as nice as a limo ride. At the end of the day you can’t make everyone’s punishment truly because of inherent differences in circumstance. You can equalize the punishment as much as possible.