This weekend our traffic enforcement

[Minpin]

I can;t believe this is still going on. What's this thread even about now? I got bored around...page 1.

[Rupert]

If you punish them more for not having money, that's wrong.

I find it interesting that you think it's okay to punish someone for being successful, but it's wrong to treat people the same. 

I would insist that success does not (or should not) depend on one's pocketbook, but to each his own opinion on that matter, so I won't.

So long as both understand that this is a pretty philosophical discussion and not a practical one, it's hard to argue with equality for all based on class-- oh, sorry, I meant money. But that's it, isn't it? Class is the issue here, as it is with so many things. Why should one class be able to basically get away with paying a small toll to speed all over town, while another has to not eat decent food for a month because they were late for their doctor's appointment because their boss kept them ten minutes later than usual?

Understand also that my mind is not made up on this particular issue because it's fairly complicated in practical and other ways. Still, I don't agree with your rich-man's view.

[TBR]

It only sounds appealing because you're on the opposite end of the spectrum.  It sounds appealing the same way the estate tax sounds appealing. 

Both things fuck you for working harder and smarter than other people.

I think you should be able to buy speeding ticket exemptions.  $500 a year or so gets you out of tickets. 

Estate takes don't hurt the person who actually worked for the money...

Most expenses in life are 'regressive.'  The electric company doesn't care about your income when they determine your electric rates.  Ditto for the phone company, food prices, etc.

Financially, things are not equal and never will be.  The cost of trying to make them equal has been proven to be widespread poverty.

While on the subject of punishment and its dispirite effects on different people, think of a more serious case -- a murder conviction.  An older person will effectively serve a lesser sentence for that, since he has fewer years to live.  At the same time, when an older person goes to prison, that prison time will take up a larger percentage of his remaining life than it does for a younger person.  There are many different ways to look at this issue, and it's clear that there will be inequalities whatever the system is.

As far as speeding goes, for many people, a more effective punishment than taking a person's money is taking a person's time.  After 3 tickets in my state, you have to attend an all-day re-training class.  To me, that is more onerous than the fine they'd come up with. 

Of course that would be regressive as well, richer people tend to be paid by salary and to get xx number of vacation days so they would essentially still be getting paid for the class while poorer, paid by the hour people would have to ask off work and forfeit income.

The reality is that life can not be fair. Cliched, yes, but it is the truth.

[Raza]

Estate takes don't hurt the person who actually worked for the money...

They are your possessions, and you already paid taxes on them.  Why shouldn't you be allowed to give it to whoever you want to without the government grabbing another slice of it? 

But you're right, that's a different discussion.

[Raza]

I would insist that success does not (or should not) depend on one's pocketbook, but to each his own opinion on that matter, so I won't.

So long as both understand that this is a pretty philosophical discussion and not a practical one, it's hard to argue with equality for all based on class-- oh, sorry, I meant money. But that's it, isn't it? Class is the issue here, as it is with so many things. Why should one class be able to basically get away with paying a small toll to speed all over town, while another has to not eat decent food for a month because they were late for their doctor's appointment because their boss kept them ten minutes later than usual?

Understand also that my mind is not made up on this particular issue because it's fairly complicated in practical and other ways. Still, I don't agree with your rich-man's view.

If rich people have more expensive cars, they'll have higher insurance costs than poor people, so the ticket would cost them more in insurance increases.  Does that make it more fair?

Fair in life will not happen.  But that's not what I'm talking about.  Fair in law is a must.

And fine, measure success however you want to.  But when I say "success", I imply "financial success".

God damn hippies. 

[Catman]

I've gone too long without reading this thread.  I can add nothing because I am too lazy to go back and read.

[dazzleman]

I've gone too long without reading this thread.  I can add nothing because I am too lazy to go back and read.

The argument has gotten into whether traffic fines should be graduated according to income, or just a flat amount.

What's your opinion on that Greg?

[TBR]

They are your possessions, and you already paid taxes on them.  Why shouldn't you be allowed to give it to whoever you want to without the government grabbing another slice of it? 

But you're right, that's a different discussion.

I don't disagree with you in theory, but in practice I just don't care (I am not a big fan of generational wealth).

Besides, the government taxes many things multiple times. My car has been, by my math, taxed 15 different times (original sales tax, annual registration, and sales tax again when I bought it).

[The Pirate]

I don't disagree with you in theory, but in practice I just don't care (I am not a big fan of generational wealth).

Besides, the government taxes many things multiple times. My car has been, by my math, taxed 15 different times (original sales tax, annual registration, and sales tax again when I bought it).

Isn't the used car tax great?  I'm the 3rd owner of my car.  The state has collected sales tax on the same car 3 times.

[Catman]

The argument has gotten into whether traffic fines should be graduated according to income, or just a flat amount.

What's your opinion on that Greg?

So we should put together a new gov't agency to verify income on everyone and transmit their income to the police mobile computers so an officer can calculate the fine?  Not going to happen. 

[Raza]

I don't disagree with you in theory, but in practice I just don't care (I am not a big fan of generational wealth).

Why?  You think everyone should have to start on the bottom rung?  If people gain immortality through their offspring, it's in their nature to want to give them better lives than what the parents had when they started.  I don't understand the argument against generational wealth.

[dazzleman]

So we should put together a new gov't agency to verify income on everyone and transmit their income to the police mobile computers so an officer can calculate the fine?  Not going to happen. 

You could argue the theoretical point either way I think, but in practical terms, the implementation of an income-based fine system would be a nightmare.  And surely not worth the trouble in the grand scheme of things.

[dazzleman]

Isn't the used car tax great?  I'm the 3rd owner of my car.  The state has collected sales tax on the same car 3 times.

The government collects taxes on the same income many times also.

I pay taxes on my money, and if I hire somebody to do some work for me (such as a contractor, housekeeper, etc.), that person is taxed on the money I pay him/her.

The concept of taxes being collected on the same money (or in your case, object, multiple times) is a pretty widespread one.

[TBR]

Why?  You think everyone should have to start on the bottom rung?  If people gain immortality through their offspring, it's in their nature to want to give them better lives than what the parents had when they started.  I don't understand the argument against generational wealth.

It creates spoiled, arrogant brats who would most often be happier and more successful without the money. People work harder and smarter when they have to build up their resources on their own.

I would rather give my children things to remember me by, then to give them a lot of money, which is, imho, actually a disadvantage.

[Rupert]

You could argue the theoretical point either way I think, but in practical terms, the implementation of an income-based fine system would be a nightmare.  And surely not worth the trouble in the grand scheme of things.

That's pretty much true. Also, I'm not really comfortable with the government going through my income taxes or what have you whenever I get a ticket.

[Raza]

It creates spoiled, arrogant brats who would most often be happier and more successful without the money. People work harder and smarter when they have to build up their resources on their own.

I would rather give my children things to remember me by, then to give them a lot of money, which is, imho, actually a disadvantage.

You really think that?  I disagree completely.

[the nameless one]

You really think that?  I disagree completely.

Look at people like Paris Hilton and all of the kids of other famous people. They are almost all screwed up people because of their unrealistic upbringings, easy cash without having to work for it, etc.

[the nameless one]

Why do you bother arguing with me in the first sentence just to prove my point in the second?

My knowing that the violation happened does not make me "infallible" or "all-knowing"...but I KNOW that THAT violation happened, or I would not be making the stop or issuing a ticket.

[Raza]

Look at people like Paris Hilton and all of the kids of other famous people. They are almost all screwed up people because of their unrealistic upbringings, easy cash without having to work for it, etc.

And Paris Hilton represents all people born with means.  Your assumption is based on availability, not logic.

[Soup DeVille]

You could argue the theoretical point either way I think, but in practical terms, the implementation of an income-based fine system would be a nightmare.  And surely not worth the trouble in the grand scheme of things.

Some european countries have tried such a scheme. There were some cases where people were levied huge fines, but instead of paying them made them into huge money losing court cases that they eventually settled for a fraction of what they were initially levied.

[Soup DeVille]

Look at people like Paris Hilton and all of the kids of other famous people. They are almost all screwed up people because of their unrealistic upbringings, easy cash without having to work for it, etc.

So, I should use Mark Fuhrmann to base all of my opinions about cops on, and lt/ Calley to form my opinion of all military people as well, huh?

[TBR]

And Paris Hilton represents all people born with means.  Your assumption is based on availability, not logic.

I can think of at least two people on this board who would probably be alot happier and alot less stressed without their family's money and the expectations included with it.

[Raza]

I can think of at least two people on this board who would probably be alot happier and alot less stressed without their family's money and the expectations included with it.

You're right.  No one should have money ever. 

[TBR]

You're right.  No one should have money ever. 

When did I say anything like that? I am just of the opinion that people who work harder for their possessions (I am including education and money in that as well) get more satisfaction and good from them. It really doesn't seem to be an unreasonable theory at all.

[Raza]

When did I say anything like that? I am just of the opinion that people who work harder for their possessions (I am including education and money in that as well) get more satisfaction and good from them. It really doesn't seem to be an unreasonable theory at all.

I think it's a stupid theory.  Just because people are born with nice things doesn't mean they can't appreciate them.

[TBR]

I think it's a stupid theory.  Just because people are born with nice things doesn't mean they can't appreciate them.

Okay.

[TBR]

I think I am much more fit to judge the other side than you are.

[Raza]

I think I am much more fit to judge the other side than you are.

Why is that?  Because your parents make you pay for everything on your own?  Or because your Christian sensibilities allow you to judge?

I think you're wrong. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

As the person with the least amount of money on this entire forum, I can say that nobody here knows what they're talking about.

[The Pirate]

Count me in the "earn your way" crowd.  My parents, though not in the top percentage of income in the country, are very financially sound and could have bought each of their kids new cars and paid for school fully for us.  They paid most of our schooling (having us each take out minimal loans to appreciate the investment) and strived to always teach us the value of a buck.

I'll do the same for my kids.  Even if I was a millionaire, I won't buy them cars.  I will, however, help with schooling costs.

I agree fully with TBR.