In some countries, traffic fines are adjusted based on the offender’s income - a system known as "day fines" - to ensure that penalties are equally impactful regardless of wealth. This approach aims to create fairness by making fines proportionate to the driver’s ability to pay, rather than applying the same flat rate to everyone. Proponents argue that income-based fines make penalties more equitable, as flat fines may be insignificant to the wealthy but burdensome to low-income individuals. Opponents argue that penalties should be consistent for all drivers to maintain fairness under the law, and that income-based fines could create resentment or be difficult to enforce.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
No
@B53L79DRepublican4mos4MO
Flat fines disproportionately burden low-income individuals while barely affecting the wealthy. For example, a $200 speeding ticket might devastate someone earning minimum wage, potentially causing them to miss rent or skip meals, while for a millionaire, it’s a minor inconvenience, effectively no deterrent at all. If fines are supposed to deter dangerous driving and promote public safety, then they need to be meaningful for everyone. An income-based system ensures that the punishment fits not just the crime, but the individual's ability to feel the punishment.
@B64GS6G1mo1MO
If traffic fines, or any fines for law violations, are not scaled to wealth/income, the law in reality applies solely to the poor who it more harshly impacts.
@B4FBVGLPeace and Freedom5mos5MO
If you are rich and you are paying thousands of dollars for a traffic fine the fines would keep getting more and more expensive.
@B3VGV2T 5mos5MO
Equality Before the Law:
Critics argue that income-based fines violate the principle of equality before the law, as it suggests that wealthier individuals should be punished more severely than others, according to chsprospector.com.
Potential for Undue Hardship:
Individuals with fluctuating incomes or debts might find it difficult to pay even income-based fines, potentially leading to further financial hardship or legal consequences, according to the Centre for Justice Innovation.
Complexity of Implementation:
Some argue that implementing a comprehensive income-based fine system could be… Read more
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Yes
@B4G5S375mos5MO
You shouldn't be given a worse punishment just because you get paid more or less. A crime is a crime regardless
#1 Engaged Criminal Issues #2 Engaged Counter Argument
The point of a fine is to be a deterrent. A deterrent should be enough to hurt, but not enough to ruin someone's life. Someone making $250,000 a year isn't hurt by a $200 ticket. It means that they get to do whatever they want as long as they have the money to pay for it. Meanwhile someone who makes $15,000 a year could be ruined by a $200 ticket. It could mean they don't get to eat that month or lose their car or housing. A crime isn't a crime when you just have to pay a pittance relative to your income to get out of it.
2.6 million people are injured and 42,000 people die from reckless driving annually in the US. Victims from reckless driving don’t deserve injury or death.
People make different levels of income. If you make $500 a month, a $200 ticket has significant weight on you and is a strong deterrent for behavior. If you make $200,000 a month, a $200 ticket has almost no weight on your decision making.
Fines for civil penalties only exist as a working deterrent for behavior, therefore, a percentage-based fine would be a stronger deterrent and in this case, lead to safer driving.
@B4FBVGLPeace and Freedom5mos5MO
I think that all traffic fines should be equal and you shouldn't need to pay more if you got more money.
@B4F6WVB5mos5MO
Traffic fines should not dive below a minimum value for punitive effect even for low-income drivers. Upper-middle-class families should not have to pay more than other middle class families.
@B5RT93J3mos3MO
Not on the driver's income level, but maybe on the class or cost/value of the vehicle involved. Example: an equivalent speeding violation would cost more for a driver of a ferrari than it would for a driver of a honda.
@B63KF8Z2mos2MO
traffic laws should only be there in matters of deciding who is at fault for someone getting hurt or property getting destroyed. Speed limits should usually just be a recommendation that helps avoid property damage, death of others, or maintain optimal fuel efficiency on highways.
@B5XR5P52mos2MO
No, that will only allow police departments to financially take advantage of higher-income drivers and pose a higher risk of low-income drivers on the road.
@B5X29HV2mos2MO
Yes, speeding & any other traffic violation should result in 1% of the persons annual salary. $10K = $100 fine. $20K = $200 fine. 30K = $300 fine. Etc.
@B623TDLConstitution2mos2MO
No, and remove most traffic violations as they are just another form of taxation without representation.
@B5VWM932mos2MO
There shouldn't be a monetary fine, rather an actual jail time or course that needs to be completed. Financial punishments would be too hard to regulate. Someone may have no reported income so they might not have a fine large enough to deter a repeat offense.
@B4RTXBZ5mos5MO
Fines for low income can be life altering Fines for rich are a suggestion YES, it should be proportional to what that fine would be for low income households or it won't change anyones behaviour to laws ever.
@B6RMZKZ3 days3D
It should vary on how big the crime is and how many times the suspect has committed said crime or something similar.
@B6R77564 days4D
Depending on the severity of the violation. If the violation is more minor, the cost should be compared with the drivers income. If the violation is more major, the fine will not be compared and will result in a much more expensive fine.
Yes, but better remove financial penalty, and instead use privilege-punitive escalation system -- e.g. expand on current points system. I.e. 3-points imposes some small limitation, if accumulate 6-points, can drive highways, 9-points, can't drive after dusk, or drive only home/work/school destinations, 12-points loses license for a period of time. This way, rich don't get out with (for them) minor penalty, while poor aren't hit with penalty that may cause inability to pay rent and other far severe adverse penalties outside vehicle operation penalties.
@B6KC36Z2wks2W
Yes, I believe the penalty for traffic violations should depend on the drivers income in a general stance. However, if someone is speeding and they're going 90 mph in a 45 mph zone, then I think there shouldn't be such leniency on the traffic violation penalty because then that's just negligent driving.
This is very nuanced. I think that they should be the same, but I think that income should be a consideration at the least. Payment plans also help with this.
@B6GQP2M4wks4W
No. The fine should be based on the severity of the crime itself, not the offender's ability to pay.
@B6GLV9B4wks4W
Yes, except for violations like a DUI in which the person very well could have led to serious harm to others.
@B6DZSMY1mo1MO
No they shouldnt lets be honest that seems extortionate you might have cops start pulling over wealthy poeple can taking a bribe that costs less than the ticket. Its honestly a bad not thought out policy opinion
@B5MTSBH3mos3MO
Traffic cops are racketeering. Violations should only ever include wreckless driving or drunk driving.
@B63X6TP1mo1MO
Kind of, if they are poor yes they should pay less, if they are rich they should pay 5% more, middle class, no.
@jacob.brandSocialist 2mos2MO
Yes, traffic violations should not be "legal for a price" for people who can easily afford to pay the fine
No, but the share of people getting traffic violations should be as close to equitable of a population as possible.
@B5ZGVNGRepublican 2mos2MO
Absolutely Not if low income people have lesser penalties it encourages them to not follow traffic laws as seriously because they won’t be punished
@ProudJew 2mos2MO
Penalties should be based on actual harm and severity, not income. However, the current system creates disproportionate punishment for the poor through cascading consequences (insurance suspension, impoundment, inability to fight tickets). Reform should focus on eliminating poverty-based license suspensions and providing payment plans/community service options rather than income-based fines that could be gamed by the wealthy.
@B5WWGRXRepublican2mos2MO
Yes, do it if the driver is ALWAYS going over the speed limit in my city streets. And even if they're using their smartphones while driving, PENALIZE THEM.
@8PZG6MWProgressive 2mos2MO
Yes, but within reason. Not necessarily a sliding scale, but a higher percentage for high-net-worth individuals on repeat offenses. It should also increase for repeated offenses in a certain time frame in general, but not to the point of financially locking low-income individuals.
@B5VFL5H3mos3MO
I believe their should be a cap, but low-income individuals should be able to receive lower fines (have them answer questions)
@B5TJKDW3mos3MO
Yes, but only for reducing the amount payed, not increasing it for regular or high income individuals
Deleted3mos3MO
The traffic violation penalties shouldn't be based on income, instead give them a cohesive warnings and fines based off their actions.
Yes, a lot of traffic violations like speeding tend to only be illegal if you don’t have the money to spend hundreds of dollars on a fine
@B5G7TH6Libertarian4mos4MO
Yes, but it should only lower the penalty for below average income individuals, not raise them for higher income individuals.
@B5F6VCZ4mos4MO
Yes only for repeating offenders and the penalty amount hasn't stopped them from repeating the crime
@B5DN8N54mos4MO
Yes, but only when statewide minimum fines by offense are set. It would not be a program to punish lower income individuals but to end the perceived notion that for the ultra wealthy fines are merely a paid pass to break the law.
@B58Z9BHLibertarian4mos4MO
Drivers should be given the option to take a drivers education course to erase the fine and points, or the driver can keep the points and do community service to pay off the fine. Have options for repayment that do not handicap the driver base on income.
@B57RWF24mos4MO
Yes, and it should be reasonable to where the person in question can pay it all off in under a month.
@B54GC834mos4MO
No, but it should be taken into consideration. It’s not fair that the wealthy can buy their way out & the poor end up in jail over traffic violations
For serious traffic violations, the penalty (jail and/or fines) should be whichever would deter repeated violations the most
@B4WYC6R 4mos4MO
Yes, unless they are repeat offenders the fines and penalties should increase based on the income first and then should move to an exponential growth and penalty base to deter further infractions
Yes, but dependent on how severe/dangerous the violation was. If it was speeding on a highway (like 10-15 over the speed limit) where no one was endangered by the violator's actions, then it should be based to how they can pay it.
@SpaceManBob 5mos5MO
Yes, as the purpose of fines for traffic violations is to deter and to punish, both of which only work when the fine is relative to the individual's wealth
@B4FH92K5mos5MO
It depends on whether the driver does traffic violations often or not. I think if it is often then it does not matter what their income is, but if it rarely happens maybe their income could matter.
@B4FDFX25mos5MO
I don't think many traffic violations should exist at all. Penalties for causing damage or injury only.
@B4FD45S5mos5MO
It depends on what traffic law it is and how it happened/why it happened, however, some people would abuse the power of being able to pay the fines if their income suddenly grows and their system isn't updated OR those who are wealthy enough will easily be able to pay their fines and overcome their cases. So it would be nice for those in the lower-middle class should be given a smaller amount for their fines but overall it depends.
@B4FCD3J5mos5MO
should not allow the offender to go into debt if it is not serious but for more serious crimes they may be charged however
@B5488HC4mos4MO
If the person who violates traffic they should have to pay whatever amount they have to because they made that decision when they violated traffic laws in the first place.
@RobinHoudeSocialist 4mos4MO
Yes, this prevents traffic violation penalties from merely being a slap on the wrist for the wealthy
No, I think penalties should be different depending on income (ex: community service as an alternative for lower-class)
@B4QPJ2P5mos5MO
Sliding scale based on severity of offense and driving record with flexible payment plans depending on income
for the most part yes. There are different circumstances such as someone going 100 in a 25, than clearly a much higher ticket should be given regardless of income
@B4HXVRF5mos5MO
No, when you commit a crime, you must be punished regardless of your income. The punishment must fit the crime for all.
@B4GDX2YIndependent5mos5MO
Yes, day-fines should be more widely implemented to stop the rich from overstepping the law just because they can easily afford the fines.
Yes, however if there is no income, then community service should be given but if habitual then should receive jail time relative to the offense
@B4G3JVX 5mos5MO
We should never lessen a charge, but increase it for extremely wealthy who wouldn’t otherwise feel the effects of a monetary punishment. Prison time though, should be irrelevant of income.
@B4FZTP95mos5MO
No, but a non-payment option should be available if the person can prove economic hardship (I.e., community service, education, etc.)
@B4FNB5QIndependent5mos5MO
Yes, so long as the amount is capped so as to not exceed that which is cruel and unusual and the judge is to decide that what amount is appropriate.
@Dry550Independent 5mos5MO
No, if you can afford a car and a license, you should be able to pay whatever fine for the traffic violation, payment plans can be set up, but it should go by a specific court basis
@B4F492Q5mos5MO
Yes, because some people could be living paycheck to paycheck, and if they get a parking ticket they might not be able to eat or get goods that they need for them elves or their family.
@B4DWBPG5mos5MO
Yes, in the context of any rich egotistical citizen undeniably commiting repeat violations for the fact it won't hurt the way they live their life after putting others at risk.
@B4G5WRRRepublican 5mos5MO
it should be on a case to case system like if someone doesnt stop at a stop sign but theres no one else around then i think it should be based on the drivers income.
@B4G428T5mos5MO
Income dependence would be discrimination. However, if one was to continue getting traffic violations after a warning, they should be charged the same amount and more if they continue to violate traffic laws. Depending on severity is also a possible factor.
@B4G3Y6W5mos5MO
should be where it is enough to cover it but not so much that it will leave a big delt in someones bank so yes
@B4FVDDG5mos5MO
depends on the severity of the traffic violation- lesser violations the fee should depend on income- but like drinking and driving the fee should be high and the same
@B4FTM3HIndependent5mos5MO
Yes, as this is the only way to prevent higher-income individuals from committing traffic violations.
@WildManBagginzIndependent 5mos5MO
Yes. It should be a penalty and punishment. But not put one at jeopardy of not being able to provide for their themselves or family. They should be stressed to by their normal wants. But they shouldn't be punished so severly that it prevents them from purchasing their needs.
@B4DNG9J5mos5MO
if they have low income and it wasnt like GTA violations or anything to bad they should be giving the chnage to have a lower penalty
@B4FVXQN5mos5MO
Based off financial income I believe if the fine is fair and constitutional of the law, then it is fair for the wealthy to get the same treatment as well, and to pay the proper fine of their actions.
@B4W552L4mos4MO
Traffic violations should not be based on money, but on community service or other forms of punishment.
@B4G5XXG5mos5MO
If it is a major issue, like a death due to a car crash, the punishment should be the same regardless of income. Otherwise, I'm fine with based-on-income penalties.
@B6KB3RZ2wks2W
Yes, this will hold people who make a lot of money accountable and keep poorer people from paying too much of their income when they're held accountable.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
