[choccymonster]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8446545.stm

"Fines should be assessed against an individuals wealth."

Discuss.

 

[focus149]

remind me never to drive fast through switzerland .. bet he aint even bothered

ferrari testarossa looks a damn sight better than i remember aswell

 

[Jimmy]

Bit steep if you asked me

EDIT - Focus149 it was in Switzerland

 

[Thunder#59]

perfect idea to asses fines on personal wealth

why should, lets say davud beckham get away with £90=....?

would that bother him?

fines are as much a deterant as points....but current fines wouldnt deter a millionare

points should be universal....but fines not

 

[motormadj]

QUOTE(Thunder#59 @ 7 Jan 2010, 04:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>perfect idea to asses fines on personal wealth

why should, lets say davud beckham get away with £90=....?

would that bother him?

fines are as much a deterant as points....but current fines wouldnt deter a millionare

points should be universal....but fines not

yeah I agree with that.
Probably wouldn't if I was loaded tho. lol

 

[choccymonster]

[Devils Advocate]

Taken from another forum:-

"I can understand this when you are talking about extremes, but on the flip side, why should I pay more for the same crime just because I have worked harder during my life and got a better paid job??"

[/Devils Advocate]

 

[yoinkster]

Fines based on wealth sound great to me, I can speed all I want and get fined £0.01 each time as I'm as poor as they come

I think there should be more cleverness in the fines as well, say someone on benefits get caught speeding - take away the benefits. Say someone a sales rep who works on commission gets caught - ban them for just one week so they can't work. ST owners get caught - ban them from filling up for a month

Then people would think again.

 

[razzleultra]

Taking into account my mortgage, student debt etc., my 'assets' are significantly in the red.

Does this mean they'd pay me money to speed in Sweden?

 

[LiamX8]

QUOTE(yoinkster @ 7 Jan 2010, 05:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Fines based on wealth sound great to me, I can speed all I want and get fined £0.01 each time as I'm as poor as they come

I think there should be more cleverness in the fines as well, say someone on benefits get caught speeding - take away the benefits. Say someone a sales rep who works on commission gets caught - ban them for just one week so they can't work. ST owners get caught - ban them from filling up for a month

Then people would think again.

i dont have to type its done for me in the post above

 

[Dennis]

Fines already are based on imcome etc. i recall when I got summons'd for speeding in 2001

, I had to fill in a form to identify my disposable income for consideration when desciding on the fine by the magistrate.

however my view is for those that can not afford a descent fine, make them do some real work to pay it off

 

[Thunder#59]

QUOTE(choccymonster @ 7 Jan 2010, 05:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>[Devils Advocate]

Taken from another forum:-

"I can understand this when you are talking about extremes, but on the flip side, why should I pay more for the same crime just because I have worked harder during my life and got a better paid job??"

[/Devils Advocate]

i can half see where this person is coming from....but as said....fines should be a deterant

and not all wealthy people work harder than less fortunate

its a bit like saying 'why should i worry about speeding fines that are only pocket change to me, because i have worked harder than everyone else?'

the poster should think a little more about that

and as for those on benefits....or massively in the red...they should get some level of community service

i dont think fines should be directly related to income to the exact penny....it would be too difficult

but lets say the current amounts stay the same for those of us in the standard income tax brackets

and so on

obviously the above is off the top of my head and not thought about in great detail....but you get the idea

ie plus £40k it triples

plus £60k add a bit more

 

[jonn]

QUOTE(choccymonster @ 7 Jan 2010, 04:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8446545.stm

"Fines should be assessed against an individuals wealth."

Discuss.

seem to remember something like this was brought in about about 15 yrs ago in england

i dont think it still applies though in england ?

 

[choccymonster]

QUOTE(Dennis @ 7 Jan 2010, 06:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Fines already are based on imcome etc. i recall when I got summons'd for speeding in 2001

, I had to fill in a form to identify my disposable income for consideration when desciding on the fine by the magistrate.

I didn't know that.

However, my "topic" is still valid. Even if this is already in practice in the UK, is it right?

QUOTE(Dennis @ 7 Jan 2010, 06:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>however my view is for those that can not afford a descent fine, make them do some real work to pay it off

 

[Si]

QUOTE(choccymonster @ 7 Jan 2010, 04:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8446545.stm

"Fines should be assessed against an individuals wealth."

Discuss.

They already are to an extent!

However, in answer to your question my answer is absolutely could not agree more. I think we need far more equitability in society in terms of earnings and contribution. Therefore as a now 50% tax payer and using this idea that things should be related to your income, I would expect to get.

Priority at Hospitals
Priority from the Police
Priority for my choice of schools for my children

Otherwise surely its rather skewed isnt it, why should I get the same service that someone that pays some pittance of or no tax a year?

As for being lucky or fortunate to being a good earner, slaving through school, 2 degrees, another year of LPC, 2 years training on rubbish money meant that I didnt start earning properly until I was 26, I worked and continue to work damned hard, just to see half of it taken away to be squandered on keeping the workshy and the elderly that made no provision for their dotage in SKY TV and special needs teachers!

 

[razzleultra]

QUOTE(Si @ 8 Jan 2010, 10:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>As for being lucky or fortunate to being a good earner, slaving through school, 2 degrees, another year of LPC, 2 years training on rubbish money meant that I didnt start earning properly until I was 26, I worked and continue to work damned hard, just to see half of it taken away to be squandered on keeping the workshy and the elderly that made no provision for their dotage in SKY TV and special needs teachers!

Just to be devils advocate though, I did no very little work at school, or college, or at university yet have come out with a nice 'BA Hons Cantab' at the end of my name.

I do consider myself quite fortunate to be in this position as in my case it's clearly more to do with the luck of the genetic draw and my formative upbringing with my parents.....

It's not a straight equivalence between working hard and doing well.

There are people out there who, no matter how hard they try, will always struggle to learn things and progress.

Conversely, there will always be people who do well without having to try at all.

PS I'm not saying that fines should or shouldn't be means tested. Haven't made my mind up yet

 

[choccymonster]

From the same forum as I took the other quote:-

"so on the same principle should I pay more for my food and for the stuff i want to buy so I appreciate it as much as those that earn less than me?

should someone who earns more be forced to have a longer sentence than someone who doesn't?? If not why not??

Life is not about relativity it's about working hard to be able to afford to have the life you want, not so someone can decide what you should or should not have to contribute based on how hard you work??"

I also have not yet made up my mind - I can see both sides of the argument at the moment.

Hence the reason for the "discussion" thread.

Come on people - convince me, one way or the other!!

 

[Si]

QUOTE(razzleultra @ 8 Jan 2010, 11:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Just to be devils advocate though, I did no very little work at school, or college, or at university yet have come out with a nice 'BA Hons Cantab' at the end of my name.

I do consider myself quite fortunate to be in this position as in my case it's clearly more to do with the luck of the genetic draw and my formative upbringing with my parents.....

It's not a straight equivalence between working hard and doing well.

There are people out there who, no matter how hard they try, will always struggle to learn things and progress.

Conversely, there will always be people who do well without having to try at all.

PS I'm not saying that fines should or shouldn't be means tested. Haven't made my mind up yet

All very nice, however I regard this as exception rather than rule. Plenty of the people I went to school with and uni with loafed around, and 20 years later are continuing to do so! There are those that are fortunate through accident of birth or unfortunate for the same reason. I do not actually believe genetics has much to do with it, hard work = better reward, now that may be doing 50hrs per week on minimum wage paying more than 30 hours a week as all of these things are relative. Should the person doing the 50 hours therefore have to pay a higher fine than someone doing say 16 hours to get their Govt top ups?

 

[razzleultra]

QUOTE(Si @ 8 Jan 2010, 12:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Should the person doing the 50 hours therefore have to pay a higher fine than someone doing say 16 hours to get their Govt top ups?

As I said, I'm still undecided, but mainly because I don't think you'll ever get a fully 'fair' (whatever that means) system.

 

[Thunder#59]

QUOTE(choccymonster @ 8 Jan 2010, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>From the same forum as I took the other quote:-

"so on the same principle should I pay more for my food and for the stuff i want to buy so I appreciate it as much as those that earn less than me?

should someone who earns more be forced to have a longer sentence than someone who doesn't?? If not why not??

Life is not about relativity it's about working hard to be able to afford to have the life you want, not so someone can decide what you should or should not have to contribute based on how hard you work??"


i would reply to that person that buying food has nothing to do with breaking the law....but on a side note....some parts of this country do have lower food prices than others.....

length of sentence, again has nothing to do with wages

i dont agree that anyone more fortunate financially should pay more than others for anything....but in this instance though, its about being fined

one of the reasons for a fine is to stop one re offending.....why would a millionare be detered from offending if it didnt dent his wallet?