Itâs time that the rich receive larger penalties for traffic tickets. This will allow states to increase revenue, which will in turn, be able to fund more social programs. This will also stop the rich from getting away with petty crimes with no real punishment.
Letâs say I get a speeding ticket. Here in Illinois, the minimum ticket is $75. If I get a ticket, I might not be able to afford medications next month. So I obey traffic laws pretty strictly. I have incentive to obey the law. Now, if a rich person gets a $75 speeding ticket, how does that hurt him/her? They could pull $75 out of the bank to pay it off, and pull out another $75 to use as toilet paper.
This is not some angry tirade. I received one ticket in my life, and it was four years ago. I am not advocating longer jail sentences or license suspensions. Those will remain equal. Nor am I demanding that minimum wage workers pay $5 for a ticket. Hell, keep the penalty at $75 or more. I just think the rich need to receive an equally proportional punishment when it comes to fines. While a ticket could devastate a minimum wage worker, it does nothing for a wealthy person.
I have no idea what the penalties should be. Maybe $0-$15,000 would pay $75 for a minor ticket. $15,001-$20,000 would pay $100. 20-30K would pay $200. Sweden has a system like this. A multi-millionaire recently received a $400,000 speeding ticket. He was going 150mph in an 80mph zone. Because he was so wealthy, he was given a punishment which would put a dent in his bank account.
This will do two things. First, it will actually punish people who make a lot of money. That man in Sweden with the $400K ticket will definitely think twice about going nearly double the speed limit again. Making higher penalties for the rich will cut down on traffic violations an road deaths. Secondly, this could be used to raise state revenues which could directly fund social programs such as healthcare, road construction, public projects, public jobs, etc. Having a proportional monetary punishment is the only just way to equally punish traffic offenders under the law.
I wrote this on Word, and the paste didn't translate too well. The first word should be "It's" and the first word in the second paragraph should be "Let's."
This is not some angry tirade. I received one ticket in my life, and it was four years ago. I am not advocating longer jail sentences or license suspensions. Those will remain equal. Nor am I demanding that minimum wage workers pay $5 for a ticket. Hell, keep the penalty at $75 or more. I just think the rich need to receive an equally proportional punishment when it comes to fines. While a ticket could devastate a minimum wage worker, it does nothing for a wealthy person.
If two people are making the same pay, one person saves their money and the other person spends theirs foolishly, should the person who saved their money really be forced to pay more than the foolish spender?
I believe that traffic laws are fairly strict. There is a reason, however.
Rich people who make hundreds of dollars a day may not suffer as much as those who make between 9 to 20 dollars an hour, but the rich can't pay their way out of every situation. After a certain number of traffic violations, they will lose the privalage to drive like anyone else.
I don't care if the rich don't get as heavy as fines as everyone else. That's not the problem. The problem is when they commit crimes such as assault and get off free due to being able to afford better lawyers that stall on court dates so the victims can't sue for as much money. That's a dirty trick that needs to be illegal in itself.
sorry dude but i dont agree because they have been successful in life and business they have to pay a higher penalty?
So being born into a rich family and inheriting daddy's money means you are hard working and successful as he was?
Fines should be more a percentage of income rather than a flat fee. It more fair that way. Everyone pays the same percentage, thus the poor don't pay too much and the rich don't pay too little.
So being born into a rich family and inheriting daddy's money means you are hard working and successful as he was?
A rather typical counter-point to a rich argument. Yes, the princes of the king's wealth get to inherit their money, but whose fault is it? The parents for not teaching the child about the labors of life.
Another topic to add to this thread is: Traffic penalties for the Legislators. State senators, National senators, representatives, all these guys get small amounts of "erks" that come with their job. Should getting let off easy from traffic violations be one of them? An Indiana state senator (who also happens to be my government teacher which is shweet) once got caught going 90 on a 70 interstate. The cop realized that he was THE state senator, so he/she never did give him a ticket, essentially. He could have been a hazard on the road and could have endangered the lives of others if certain things went wrong.
In Dominican, We honestly don't have too many traffic laws, except in city districts. We use something called common sense, ussually people who speed daily in a area, will get people angry at them, and they set up spikes, and bang they skid into a tree.
But in this case, I think all these Government officials should be penalized.
And for the richer people, Im not going to really say eithier or. It really depends on who the person is. I know plenty of rich people who are greedy, selfish, and indignous a holes who don't give a crap about someone.
Then there is rich folk who have worked their lives to build their empires, and they have not forgotten that they are a regular perso nas well, and are kind hearted. Yes, they still exist.
But honestly, thats irrelevant in today's society. I think, that a penalty should be the same price as everyone else. Because, even if your poor, and im not saying this is the case of all the time, but ussualyl its your own fault. It's your fault you didn't take the initative, or be smart with your money. It is your fault you didn't invest, you didn't plan, or didn't try hard enough to have a sucsessful life. That is solely your fault. But again, not always the case, some people are born into that enviroment. But they can still try. Im living proof. I was born in a slum and now I make 50 US worth a hour. And thats because I worked myself to sweating my eyeballs out, but hey, im in a good spot. But I honestly don't think the penalties in this form should change. But as No Name has suggested, the lawyer scandals, this is what I personally think.
LAWYERS SHOULD NOT BE IN COURT SYSTEMS. Say what you will, but the subjects should be determined, supported, or gone agaisnt by evidence, and EVIDENCE alone. You should nto be able to hire a man who has no seen, heard, smelt tasted or whatever the sitatuion first hand. I believe that is crap.
Because thats just pure crap. That is what I believe, and you may strike down on my answer, but honestly, im tired of it. Im not saying suspend your rights in court. But suspend lawyers. Lawyers should only be there, in a court system, for advice. For advice on legal documents, and so on. They shouldn't be able to veer off the evidence agaisnt you, or any sort of that. A court system should be equil and fair, and it should be where it's not by opinion, but rather by evidence, that determines your fate. Not a bunch of idiotsi n court, or piss for brains in buckets juries, that judge MERELY by opinion. KEep them, but it should be by cold hard evidence alone. And with this, the evidence should be double checked, and tested multiple times. And also in a public manner. Because some corrupt policeman may accuse someone of a crime, and frame him, it should be by a public ordinance. In this way, mabye we can bite out of our crappy legal system. But thats my veiw. Im not expecting many( and I mean like almost no one unless your half a nutshell as I am) to agree. But if you want go ahead.
LAWYERS SHOULD NOT BE IN COURT SYSTEMS. Say what you will, but the subjects should be determined, supported, or gone agaisnt by evidence, and EVIDENCE alone. You should nto be able to hire a man who has no seen, heard, smelt tasted or whatever the sitatuion first hand. I believe that is crap.
Lawyers work with the witnesses and the judge to fully grasp the situation. They take the experiences of the witnesses and fully explain them so that everyone can understand what really happened. This is also why we have prosecutors; the anti lawyer that counter-points what perspectives and points that the lawyer makes. They both take both side of the story, compile it all into one nice detail, and at the end, decide what to do with it. That's when the judge bangs his hammer!
Off topic, but nice little discussion there.. Despite being rich or being a legislator, enough of the same offense would cost you your license, or at least a probation.
Thank you ComradeWolf for your comments, I needed the laugh. Seriously though I agree with most of what you said: " I think all of these government officials should be penalized" "Lawyers should not be in court systems"
But I disagree with the first paragraph and "spiking the tires", that's what made me laugh.
Back to the topic, "traffic penalties for the rich" : I disagree and this would only serve to choke the court system even more. The government has it's special way of making the rich pay and it's called taxes. The disadvantaged poor, by birth and the economic poor because of unwise market decisions are given a lot of breaks, tax cuts, etc. Let's be realistic about the true definition of poor: there wouldn't be a speeding ticket because there wouldn't be a car.
He could have been a hazard on the road and could have endangered the lives of others if certain things went wrong.
why should anyone be above the law? Even the lawmakers themselves should never be above the law. Unless you like fascism....
A rather typical counter-point to a rich argument. Yes, the princes of the king's wealth get to inherit their money, but whose fault is it? The parents for not teaching the child about the labors of life.
Why not let the prince earn his money? Give it to him when he earns it and works for it.
. It's your fault you didn't take the initative, or be smart with your money. It is your fault you didn't invest, you didn't plan, or didn't try hard enough to have a sucsessful life. That is solely your fault. But again, not always the case, some people are born into that enviroment. But they can still try. Im living proof. I was born in a slum and now I make 50 US worth a hour. And thats because I worked myself to sweating my eyeballs out, but hey, im in a good spot
but instead of earning 50 US dollars a hour, imagine if you grew up in let's say the rich part of the city. You would be provided with education and probably more necessities. If you worked as hard as you did right now, but grew up in a different setting, you would probably be making around 60,000 US dollars a year.
LAWYERS SHOULD NOT BE IN COURT SYSTEMS.
You obviously never been to a hearing or a legal dispute.
The government has it's special way of making the rich pay and it's called taxes. The disadvantaged poor, by birth and the economic poor because of unwise market decisions are given a lot of breaks, tax cuts, etc.
Even then, why does 1% of the US population own 40% of the wealth? The middle class and the poor pay taxes, and yet they are more impacted by then than the rich.
[quote]think twice about going nearly double the speed limit again.
Going double the speed limit is a Felony in the US, its worse than a ticket[/quote]
Then I am glad I have only gone 82% over the speed limit.
Penalizing one class of people worse simply because they have money is abuse of power. A fine is a fine is a fine. You don't get incrimental fines for something like breaking a no spitting ordanince. LMAO if that were an actual ordinance in my town over half the populus would be owing money...
Why not let the prince earn his money? Give it to him when he earns it and works for it.
Because every mother and father has a bloody right to pass down their possesions to their children. As simple as that.
Even then, why does 1% of the US population own 40% of the wealth? The middle class and the poor pay taxes, and yet they are more impacted by then than the rich.
What would happen if those people divided their wealth between the middle and lower class people? Everyone would have more money! Yay! Wait, won't the prices of everything skyrocket in response?
Wow, the rich giving up their money sure was pointless. The only difference now is that nobody is the richer. Oh wait, we solved the problem of jealousy! They still have nicer hats though... nevermind, jealousy problem not solved.
The point I'm trying to make is this. The rich may not suffer as much when they break the law, because it's easier for them to pay off their fines without falling into financial trouble, but shouldn't someone who works for their money gain the benefit of of having some spare cash to get him out of trouble? He works hard, he speeds, he pays a similar fine as someone who doesn't work as hard as him. Oh, some people do inherit their money and they don't have to work their way out of trouble. That's just too bad though, because that's life.
Some people are born happy, others inherit happiness. Everyone else is born poor and sad. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to fix this problem. That's life.
I should also mention that there are different levels of upper, middle, and lower classes.
Keep in mind that there is the upper-middle class and lower-middle class. Many of these people are hard workers who did not inherit their fortune. If the rich are hit harder with fines, so will be the upper-middle class. Basically, the working upper-middle class gets screwed even harder than ever!
Good job, now the people who earned their money through sweat and blood are being kicked even more by the government.
Another example of the old maxim,''the rich get justice, the poor get the law.''
I see no problem with a proportional system, seeing as how the justice system is heavily biased against the lower classes, since it was born out of an elitist, quasi fascist era.
[quoteWhy not let the prince earn his money? Give it to him when he earns it and works for it. [/quote]]Because every mother and father has a bloody right to pass down their possesions to their children. As simple as that.
Am I missing something? Aren't both of you saying the same thing two different ways?
"traffic penalties for the rich" brings out the "anti-lawyer" in me. I've only been to court three times for various misdemeaners. Arriving, like at an airport, to check the docket and wait..., watching the wealthy stride in with their attys looking and smelling like fashion models, say a few words and out the door they go. Talk about preferential treatment. Excuse me but where is the "fast lane" for the rest of us. To date, I've never needed an attorney and so far, I've only had one speeding violation. Yes, court appearance is demanded in NC when diving over 80, period. I think it would be great to have a "rayer for judgment lane".
Do I think the rich should pay more? I don't mind repeating myself, once. No. Nor, do I think they should be given the "red carpet" when they show up to "traffic court".
I am by no means wealthy in any way, but its not like a $83 or a $154 fine is going to be as awful as you make it seem for the average American. Its easy to simply realize to obey the law of pay for it. All this bullshit about the law catoring simply to the rich is rediculous. The haves and have nots will both pay the consequences of breaking the law.
