quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

You can spin it anyway you like but the bottom line is you want to punish people for having more money than you.

Actually, joether makes a very valid point. The purpose of a fine is to both punish and act as a deterrent. Let's say a fine for whatever infraction is $500. For a person making $20 per hour it takes 25 hours of labor...more than three days of work...to pay that fine. But if the person that commits the infraction makes $300 per hour it only takes them an hour and forty minutes of work. Exactly how is that fair? For the rich person the punishment isn't nearly as severe as the hardship presented to the common worker, and as a result it doesn't present nearly as much of a deterrent to keep them from doing it again.

So, using the Mercedes-Benz example, what if the car was given to a poor person by a rich one? How do we value that? If a poor person is given a really nice car, should they give it away in order to avoid being considered "rich" and therefore subject to heavier fines and/or costs? Doesn't that sort of tell people that moving up the income ladder isn't worth doing?

Personally, I don't care for the "car" basis. I think a more appropriate method would be a percentage of income, perhaps based on the previous years taxes. Just a suggestion. Other methods are certainly possible. I don't know that there is a perfect way of doing it, but the current method definitely favors the people with higher incomes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

You can spin it anyway you like but the bottom line is you want to punish people for having more money than you.

Actually, joether makes a very valid point. The purpose of a fine is to both punish and act as a deterrent. Let's say a fine for whatever infraction is $500. For a person making $20 per hour it takes 25 hours of labor...more than three days of work...to pay that fine. But if the person that commits the infraction makes $300 per hour it only takes them an hour and forty minutes of work. Exactly how is that fair? For the rich person the punishment isn't nearly as severe as the hardship presented to the common worker, and as a result it doesn't present nearly as much of a deterrent to keep them from doing it again.

So, using the Mercedes-Benz example, what if the car was given to a poor person by a rich one? How do we value that? If a poor person is given a really nice car, should they give it away in order to avoid being considered "rich" and therefore subject to heavier fines and/or costs? Doesn't that sort of tell people that moving up the income ladder isn't worth doing?

Personally, I don't care for the "car" basis. I think a more appropriate method would be a percentage of income, perhaps based on the previous years taxes. Just a suggestion. Other methods are certainly possible. I don't know that there is a perfect way of doing it, but the current method definitely favors the people with higher incomes.

Why stop at fines if we really want things to be fair. After all a lobster dinner costs me a bigger percent of my income than it does someone like Obama. Why should I have to pay more to eat. That's not fair. So maybe we should start basing all costs on what a person is worth. And those who make under poverty can just get shit for free. That way little johnny will have the proper motivation to sit on his ass and collect a state check instead of trying to support himself. But that's only fair right? Or even better, lets put a cap on how much money a person can have. When they hit that cap any extra is just deposited in an account for those who don't have. In fact didn't Rosanne or someone like that just suggest this. I think they put the cap at about 2 mil more than they were worth. What a surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

It is fun to see an expensive car parked in front of a hydrant when a fire breaks out and the FD needs that hydrant. The hose ALWAYS gets routed through the car.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

It is fun to see an expensive car parked in front of a hydrant when a fire breaks out and the FD needs that hydrant. The hose ALWAYS gets routed through the car.

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
You can spin it anyway you like but the bottom line is you want to punish people for having more money than you.

Actually, joether makes a very valid point. The purpose of a fine is to both punish and act as a deterrent. Let's say a fine for whatever infraction is $500. For a person making $20 per hour it takes 25 hours of labor...more than three days of work...to pay that fine. But if the person that commits the infraction makes $300 per hour it only takes them an hour and forty minutes of work. Exactly how is that fair? For the rich person the punishment isn't nearly as severe as the hardship presented to the common worker, and as a result it doesn't present nearly as much of a deterrent to keep them from doing it again.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
You can spin it anyway you like but the bottom line is you want to punish people for having more money than you.

Actually, joether makes a very valid point. The purpose of a fine is to both punish and act as a deterrent. Let's say a fine for whatever infraction is $500. For a person making $20 per hour it takes 25 hours of labor...more than three days of work...to pay that fine. But if the person that commits the infraction makes $300 per hour it only takes them an hour and forty minutes of work. Exactly how is that fair? For the rich person the punishment isn't nearly as severe as the hardship presented to the common worker, and as a result it doesn't present nearly as much of a deterrent to keep them from doing it again.

So, using the Mercedes-Benz example, what if the car was given to a poor person by a rich one? How do we value that? If a poor person is given a really nice car, should they give it away in order to avoid being considered "rich" and therefore subject to heavier fines and/or costs? Doesn't that sort of tell people that moving up the income ladder isn't worth doing?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
As for parking in front of a hydrant, dont firemen have those saws that will cut through anything, why not cut the car in half?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
What does this have to do with deporting a person who is clearly a Canadian plot against humanity?

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
It would be the base line of the fine plus the current worth of the car. One would hope that rich person is helping the poor person out in life, instead of screwing him/her. And also the judge/jury may impose a different type of penalty that is more 'reasonable'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

But he's Canadian, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

But he's Canadian, eh?

ummmm.. so? Would ya'll still want to deport him to Canada if he was American? Ha, you wouldn't be able to do that tho.. no matter how damn much ya wanted to!..

Quite frankly, he is an embarrassment, imo.. however, he is doing some of the same shite Americans do.. so really,.. its all your fault! ya'll have been a bad influence on a previously nice clean-cut Canadian boy! He wasn't this way until America got ahold of him and corrupted him with your wild American ways!

I hope he smartens up cuz his sleazy hangers-on are gonna leave him alone & broke one day when he runs outta money..

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

But he's Canadian, eh?

ummmm.. so? Would ya'll still want to deport him to Canada if he was American? Ha, you wouldn't be able to do that tho.. no matter how damn much ya wanted to!..

Quite frankly, he is an embarrassment, imo.. however, he is doing some of the same shite Americans do.. so really,.. its all your fault! ya'll have been a bad influence on a previously nice clean-cut Canadian boy! He wasn't this way until America got ahold of him and corrupted him with your wild American ways!

I hope he smartens up cuz his sleazy hangers-on are gonna leave him alone & broke one day when he runs outta money..

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

But he's Canadian, eh?

ummmm.. so? Would ya'll still want to deport him to Canada if he was American? Ha, you wouldn't be able to do that tho.. no matter how damn much ya wanted to!..

Quite frankly, he is an embarrassment, imo.. however, he is doing some of the same shite Americans do.. so really,.. its all your fault! ya'll have been a bad influence on a previously nice clean-cut Canadian boy! He wasn't this way until America got ahold of him and corrupted him with your wild American ways!

I hope he smartens up cuz his sleazy hangers-on are gonna leave him alone & broke one day when he runs outta money..

What do you mean, ummm so? You said it's the American way, I said he's Canadian.

Try to follow your own points! ;-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Are you for real? Let me guess, John Candy, Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Eugene Levy, Seth Rogen, Celine Dion and Shania Twain turning into adult delinquents and not so good singers is our fault too?

Keep that up and we will exile George Bush, Obama, and Cliven Bundy to our wonderful neighbor country up north.

(Yeah I know, the United States cannot technically exile people, however we may make an exception for the ones, listed, Bush claims to have God telling him what to do, Obama is clearly delusional, and Cliven Bundy, well the Canadians need some nut case to challenge the government.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery