Fines should be based on percentage of wealth instead of a set amount, amirite?

To fund law enforcement This isnt usually the case. Normally it goes into general taxation. Which i think is important to avoid individual police departments prioritising enforcement based on a profit motive rather than a public good basis

by Anonymous 5 hours ago

Good to know! I've heard differently, but I'll look into it.

by Anonymous 4 hours ago

World's a big place, im sure in some places it does go to the police department. But it is never a good idea

by Anonymous 4 hours ago

I agree, never a good idea

by Anonymous 4 hours ago

Even if it doesn't go directly to the police department and goes to the city instead, it still can incentivize the mayor to put pressure on the police chief to make more arrests because it increases city revenue. It is the Mayor who typically appoints a police chief in the first place. A mayor is often directly involved with local law enforcement policy. So the bad incentive structure could still reach the police department through proxy regardless.

by National-Security904 4 hours ago

Indeed, if the punishment is a fine the law doesn't exist for the rich

by Anonymous 4 hours ago

And if it's a percentage of wealth the law doesn't exist for anyone with debt. Including basically every college grad.

by Anonymous 3 hours ago

laws no longer exist for poor people because the fines would be so low they don't matter. Easy enough to resolve that issue with a fixed minimum fine. Speeding ticket? $250 or .5% of annual taxable income, whichever is higher.

by Edwin58 3 hours ago

Thats not really true. Loosing 10% of your money (for example) hurts a poor person much much more than a rich person because a poor person has less of their income as disposable income. It might mean you couldn't fine a homeless person, but you can't realistically fine a homeless person today anyway

by Anonymous 3 hours ago

You could just give a minimum cap on the fine. E.g. whichever is higher of $100 and 10% of their monthly income

by Anonymous 3 hours ago

losing £10 to a poor person living paycheck to paycheck means not getting a takeaway or not buying beer or not using the central heating for a weekend etc Losing £10,000 to a millionaire means nothing

by Anonymous 2 hours ago

The laws are to keep the working class in line. If you are rich enough or poor enough, you can ignore them.

by shayneheller 2 hours ago

This is already the way fines are assessed in the Nordics (Finland and Sweden for sure)

by Anonymous 2 hours ago

Same here in the UK. Surely that's the way it works everywhere??

by Anonymous 2 hours ago

No, they calculate some fines based on income, not wealth.

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

That's awesome! I didn't know that.

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

That's awesome, I didn't know that!

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

So what happens when the person you're fining declares bankruptcy and hides their assets to escape having to pay the fine

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

People do that all the time for taxes, too. It's a problem that needs to be solved, but not unique to this.

by Anonymous 57 minutes ago

Same thing that happens now, they end up not paying the fine.

by Anonymous 38 minutes ago

There needs to be a minimum

by Anonymous 35 minutes ago

if student loans are not forgiven during bankruptcy why would fines be?

by Anonymous 5 minutes ago