It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Europe slapping rich with massive traffic fines

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   

GENEVA (AP) -- European countries are increasingly pegging speeding fines to income as a way to punish wealthy scofflaws who would otherwise ignore tickets.

Advocates say a $290,000 (euro203,180.83) speeding ticket slapped on a millionaire Ferrari driver in Switzerland was a fair and well-deserved example of the trend.

Germany, France, Austria and the Nordic countries also issue punishments based on a person's wealth. In Germany the maximum fine can be as much as $16 million compared to only $1 million in Switzerland. Only Finland regularly hands out similarly hefty fine to speeding drivers, with the current record believed to be a euro170,000 (then about $190,000) ticket in 2004.


Read the rest of the story [url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_SWITZERLAND_HUGE_SPEEDING_FINE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2010-01-10-11-30-13]here.[/u rl]

Well I love European justice these days!

I mean, it's fair, you wanna ignore traffic fines because your rich and they are so low, then let's up the fines on those who can afford it. It helps pay for other things, makes more money flow through the government and it keeps these rich basterds from feeling higher than others.

What are your thoughts ATS?

~Keeper




posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I actually find this QUITE refreshing. Could you imagine if all fines for traffic were a percentage of one's wealth?

That just would not go over to well here in the states. We have two sets of laws here. One for the rich and powerful, and one for the rest of us.

Of course, my thoughts on some of these laws are that they need to be none. If you hurt someone you are punished. If you infringe on another's rights you are punished. Enough of the 600,000 statutes to try to control every aspect of our lives.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Well, it couldn't only be a percentage...then low income makers will get away.

Would have to have a bottom and top max out, and anything in between is settled by income percentage.

I personally feel ticket prices should FIRST be settled by the chances of any harm done by committing the act.

For example, running a red light at night with NO OBVIOUS cars around (except the po-po sitting in the drive way), compared with a rush hour time frame.

Is this fair? Eh...sort of, sort of not.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
One part of me thinks this is good, while the other part thinks that it is unfair and the law should be applied to all equally and without favour. I quickly realised that my "good" feeling was based on my natural jealousy for the wealthy rather than fairness per se.

In the UK you get points on your license and a modest fine. If you are repeat offender then you will lose you license. This is the way to motivate in my opinion and I think these nations with "fines based on wealth" should change their approach and not set precedents like this.

Edit to add... In the UK you can also lose your license for excessive speed, so that's harse whether you are driving a fararri or a ford.

Regards






[edit on 10/1/2010 by paraphi]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

GENEVA (AP) -- European countries are increasingly pegging speeding fines to income as a way to punish wealthy scofflaws who would otherwise ignore tickets.

Advocates say a $290,000 (euro203,180.83) speeding ticket slapped on a millionaire Ferrari driver in Switzerland was a fair and well-deserved example of the trend.

Germany, France, Austria and the Nordic countries also issue punishments based on a person's wealth. In Germany the maximum fine can be as much as $16 million compared to only $1 million in Switzerland. Only Finland regularly hands out similarly hefty fine to speeding drivers, with the current record believed to be a euro170,000 (then about $190,000) ticket in 2004.


Read the rest of the story [url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_SWITZERLAND_HUGE_SPEEDING_FINE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2010-01-10-11-30-13]here.[/u rl]

Well I love European justice these days!

I mean, it's fair, you wanna ignore traffic fines because your rich and they are so low, then let's up the fines on those who can afford it. It helps pay for other things, makes more money flow through the government and it keeps these rich basterds from feeling higher than others.

What are your thoughts ATS?

~Keeper

EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PEGGED TO INCOME AND ASSETS.
That is True Socialism.
Anything less is some form of Capitalism, which is economic slavery when the less affluent have to pay a larger percentage of their income for services that are provided to the rich.
In other words , the rich get to use the roads, but the poor and middle class pay for them and their maintenance.
All other government services are the same that require a FLAT use fee:such as park fees,fishing license fees, gasoline tax,cigarette tax, sales tax, flat income tax,capital gains tax,etc.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
All laws should apply to all people equally.

If you're using a sliding scale for traffic fine you might as well just admit it's a hidden tax and use the tax law.

As much as this could help, I believe it punishes some more then others, and that I am against.

The other problem is even tying to determine income versus net worth, what scale do you use to fine? If I own a home do I pay more then the next person who only rents their home?

I don't agree with any law that does not apply across the board evenly. I'm not sure about europe but many states have a point system. Sure they can ignore the amount of the fine as trivial, but after a certain amount of tickets they can no longer drive.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   


EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PEGGED TO INCOME AND ASSETS.
That is True Socialism.


Its not Socialism.. its fairness in penalties lol - even though it is a characteristic of Socialist ideals.

Im not an advocate of Socialism but I do like this law.. even though we don't have it in Ireland.


don't agree with any law that does not apply across the board evenly.


Yea but its not the law that should affect everyone fairly.. its the penalty for breaking it. Thats the way these states look at it.. And the way most EU states look at crime.

I think its fair. Why should wealthy people be allowed disregard the law whereas less well off people get screwed by it?

Still though, I would prefer the license points system we use instead of fines.

[edit on 10/1/10 by Dermo]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


This is the second time today (and my entire life) I have heard the word scofflaw .. weird how that happens...... scofflaw.. I don't like it.

Anyways, I fully agree with these new laws.. I wish the US did the same thing. It's not "unfair" .. it's based on a percentage of income.. couple of months ago I got a parking ticket that was a day and a halfs wage.. if a millionaire got the same ticket, it would have been a few seconds of his wage compared to my day and a half .. why should i pat more, comparatively, than the millionaire? Or billionaire for that matter..

I imagine their fancy lawyers will get them out of the tickets.. they hardly ever pay normal tickets let alone 250K tickets, ya know? Score one for the little guy though.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by RRokkyy
 




EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PEGGED TO INCOME AND ASSETS.
That is True Socialism.


That's not socialism at all ...
I think you might want to do more research on that topic lol .. in fact, most socialist/liberals and other left leaning individuals despise ideas like the Fair Tax etc..

I support Fair laws. I support Fair Tax. I am a Libertarian, far from a socialist.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by RRokkyy
 




EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PEGGED TO INCOME AND ASSETS.
That is True Socialism.


That's not socialism at all ...
I think you might want to do more research on that topic lol .. in fact, most socialist/liberals and other left leaning individuals despise ideas like the Fair Tax etc..

I support Fair laws. I support Fair Tax. I am a Libertarian, far from a socialist.

When you stop laughing why dont you tell us how many countries have a Libertarian form of government.

Socialism is the redistribution of wealth to create a greater degree of equality. Fining a a millionaire speeder, $250,000 seems to fit that idea.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by RRokkyy
 




When you stop laughing why dont you tell us how many countries have a Libertarian form of government.


All Western countries have, in some form, a Libertarian government.. the question is not "who is Libertarian" the question is "How Libertarian" .. Libertarian being in the US context, individual rights over Governing rights. Slapping a, say, 10% fee (on monthly income) would serve to be Libertarian in the context of an equal penalty for an equally enforced law. Of course, assuming it's equally enforced, which I would doubt it is. Either way, a Socialist view would say penalize the poor at 1%, the middle class at 9% and the rich at 15% .. the poor wouldn't be lucrative, the rich would be to much of a hassle, so the middle class would most often get pulled over and ticketed.
That's what Socialism is, the easiest way for a Government to rip off the working class to cover the wealthiest members asses and appeasing the poorest (as they are the largest caste)

Also, it's not about "amount" it's about PERCENTAGE .. almost anything dealing with money is about %, the amount taken as per the whole. We ticket a millionaire 250k you say, wow, that's a lot.. but if he's worth nearly a billion, and that's only 10% of his monthly income, you would think in a socialist society he should have a larger % ticketed, due to his massive fortune. So you'd take a larger percentage per the whole, because he can "survive" missing a larger percentage, where as the working class or poor could not.

Fair Doctrine (Fair Law, Fair Tax etc) are Libertarian in the sense that as taxes are set at, say 25% of total income for the year, regardless of how much or how little you make you only pay the same amount as percentage. A billionaire pays 25%, a 16yr old kid working at mcdonalds pays 25%, no refunds, no credits, just 25%.

Another way to look at it, regardless of how much the wealthy pay per the ticket, the poor still pay the same percent.. and the percentage is very high, the average cost of a ticket for middle income earners just went through the roof.. seeing as there are more middle income earners, 500 euro speeding tickets will be a norm .. who got hit harder?

The poor and the middle class..



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by RRokkyy
 




When you stop laughing why dont you tell us how many countries have a Libertarian form of government.


All Western countries have, in some form, a Libertarian government.. the question is not "who is Libertarian" the question is "How Libertarian" .. Libertarian being in the US context, individual rights over Governing rights. Slapping a, say, 10% fee (on monthly income) would serve to be Libertarian in the context of an equal penalty for an equally enforced law. Of course, assuming it's equally enforced, which I would doubt it is. Either way, a Socialist view would say penalize the poor at 1%, the middle class at 9% and the rich at 15% .. the poor wouldn't be lucrative, the rich would be to much of a hassle, so the middle class would most often get pulled over and ticketed.
That's what Socialism is, the easiest way for a Government to rip off the working class to cover the wealthiest members asses and appeasing the poorest (as they are the largest caste)

Also, it's not about "amount" it's about PERCENTAGE .. almost anything dealing with money is about %, the amount taken as per the whole. We ticket a millionaire 250k you say, wow, that's a lot.. but if he's worth nearly a billion, and that's only 10% of his monthly income, you would think in a socialist society he should have a larger % ticketed, due to his massive fortune. So you'd take a larger percentage per the whole, because he can "survive" missing a larger percentage, where as the working class or poor could not.

Fair Doctrine (Fair Law, Fair Tax etc) are Libertarian in the sense that as taxes are set at, say 25% of total income for the year, regardless of how much or how little you make you only pay the same amount as percentage. A billionaire pays 25%, a 16yr old kid working at mcdonalds pays 25%, no refunds, no credits, just 25%.

Another way to look at it, regardless of how much the wealthy pay per the ticket, the poor still pay the same percent.. and the percentage is very high, the average cost of a ticket for middle income earners just went through the roof.. seeing as there are more middle income earners, 500 euro speeding tickets will be a norm .. who got hit harder?

The poor and the middle class..


Libertarianism is a stew never served cold or hot. Libertarian governments can never exist since they can only consist of one person per country.

The libertarian is an independent personality. As such they will always believe they have the answers.
Libertarianism is not a philosophy but a personality.

Thus Libertarianism is a contradiction.
The Libertarian is Pro choice . The Libertarian is Pro Life.

Libertarianism is the right to be totally free. But can you be so free as to own slaves? No. The slave owning Capitalist cannot be a Libertarian.

Western socialism is hardly libertarian,nor is communism,nor fascism.

The fact that the rich corrupt the government to their own ends is not the fault of the socialist theory of government. It is the fault of human nature.

The question isnt Who is Libertarian,or How Libertarian,it is always What is Libertarian? Pro choice ,Pro life, Right wing property libertarians,Left wing morality libertarians.

The Libertarian is a Pacifist, on his own side.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE LIBERTARIAN:not what he believes but how he thinks.

If you do not understand the Libertarian you CANNOT understand politics.

There is no such thing as a fair tax. All taxes discriminate. To say that a flat tax of 25% is Libertarian is totally arbitrary. But that is OK to the Libertarian. Individuality is Arbitrary.


How do libertarians feel about taxes? Americans already obtain a host of services from private providers. There is every reason to think that other services, from postal delivery to education to road building and maintenance, could be provided more efficiently and at lower cost by the private sector. We should support all moves to reduce and repeal taxes because taxes are obtained immorally, by force. The income tax is particularly evil, since it penalizes productivity and forces all of us to expose our private affairs to government snoopers. We had no income tax before 1914 and America prospered. Replacing the income tax with voluntary methods for financing services should be our goal, and we should begin right now.


Wiki: "Libertarian socialists, including Noam Chomsky and Colin Ward, argue that the term "libertarianism" is globally considered a synonym for anarchism and that the United States is unique in widely associating it with free market ideology".




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRokkyy
When you stop laughing why dont you tell us how many countries have a Libertarian form of government.

Socialism is the redistribution of wealth to create a greater degree of equality. Fining a a millionaire speeder, $250,000 seems to fit that idea.


It is to a degree but fair penalties isn't a redistribution of wealth. Where does the wealth go? And if the wealthy person didn't commit the crime, then their wealth wouldn't be taken from them. Also, the equivalent in wealth would have been taken from a poor person and 'Redistributed' - this is not creating a greater degree of equality.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by RRokkyy
 


First off: I said US Context.

Secondly, there is no such thing as Libertarian Socialism ... it's an oxymoron. Regardless of what your ... (lol) wiki site says.
Your response is filled with straw man fallacies and poorly associated claims.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   
This is a great idea! Too bad it will never make it to the U.S., the cowardly politicians and judges in the pockets of the rich will see to that.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
The point of this is IMO that rich people can drive their Ferrari's at any speed they want and just pay their way out of the fines, where if a middle class person takes their Honda or whatever and hits 125, the ticket will crush them for awhile.

The fines are there for a few reasons. To prevent and to punish (along with generate tax revenue). Rich people aren't really being prevented or punished...kinda.

Depends at how you look at it.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


Thats pretty much it.. someone worth 500mil isn't going to give a damn about a $100 ticket.. in fact, after he sets his Lawyer dogs on the police in that city, the city ends up paying more than the ticket is worth and the officer gets yelled at for pulling a Bentley over. It effects the rich in two main ways... one, cost more.. two, the cost is so high, the city NEEDS that money, and is far, far, far less likely to give in to some lawyer in an armani suit, because now it's worth it to proceed.



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 05:16 AM
link   
While you're at it, why don't you charge the rich $10,000 for a loaf of bread, and $900,000 for a bottle of aspirin?

After all, they can afford it, right?

So that's what you call socialism? You can keep it, thank you.



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


That's great.

They fine you based on your wealth.

So...if i'm as poor as a church mouse, scrape together a years savings and hire a Ferrari for a day or two and drive 180MPH, i should only be fined about £10.00!

Result! Where's the nearest power car hire place?!

Seriously though..this has NOTHING to do with clamping down on motorists , rich or poor and has EVERYTHING to do with thinking up new and innovative ways to claw back the trillions tptb have just given away to their mates in the banks.

When they try this tactic on the middle and lower income people, they'l discover it will actually cost the state more money than they'l earn.

Most people, of 'normal' financial means (i realise 'normal' is relative) when slapped with a fine for hundreds of pounds or even the low thousands of pounds, will opt to go to prison for a month or two rather than pay.

This will cost the state about £1000 a week to keep them locked up in lieu of paying the fine...work it out.




[edit on 12/1/2010 by spikey]

[edit on 12/1/2010 by spikey]



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 



Seriously though..this has NOTHING to do with clamping down on motorists , rich or poor and has EVERYTHING to do with thinking up new and innovative ways to claw back the trillions tptb have just given away to their mates in the banks.


Not all rich peopl have had their wealth handed to them by 'tptb'. Most have earned it over a lifetime of hard work, risk, and sacrifice.

There is no moral justification for impounding someone's wealth simply because they are rich. None.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join