Finnish man fined £83,000 for speeding because he earns £10.1 million

pinkowl said:
I can see why some think it is unfair but it really isnt. He obviously didnt learn on the first time and he should understand how the day fines work (he earns around that in 12 days as he got 12 day fines) and should have thought about it before speeding.

Also no point having same amount fine for everyone as it would hit harder those who do not earn much and the rich would just ignore the rules. It is rightly by % rather than fixed amount.

You can always refuse to pay and go to jail instead though.
Click to expand...


Start putting younger people away for longer for the same crime an older person commits.

After all, they have more years left.

:rolleyes:
 
AHarvey said:
You have finite amount of time, however you can always earn more money.

silly comparison really.
Click to expand...

Judging by some people here, money is a real soft spot... And not as easy to come by as you make out.

This whole thread is full of silly remarks anyways. Starting with punishing more severely those who are richer for the same offence, when the points system is perfectly fine.

As I said previously, £60 fines doesn't stop anyone offending... Even those less off.

Why fine rich people more 'as a deterrent' when it doesn't even deter those who have next to nothing?
 
Werewolf said:
Except that unless the fine is of a sufficient level to actually cause it to be a punishment, it's pointless.

There is zero point in fining someone earning £100k, let alone £10 million a couple of hundred quid if you want it to have the same punishing effect on them, as it would on someone earning £20k.

If it's too low and (as seems to be the case with speeding in finland) there isn't another element to it, it simply becomes a cost of driving rather than something to make you think twice about doing it again.

For example if I'm driving a £100k car and earning £10 million a year a couple of hundred pounds as a fine is probably less than the cost of a good new tyre for the car.

The UK system doesn't go to the same extremes as some of the European ones, but it does certainly recognise that the deterrent and punishment effect of fines varies depending on the income, and lets the courts decide a fine based on your weekly income for a lot of offences, specifically so that it (in theory) has the same effect regardless of if you're earning £200 a week, or £1k a week.
Click to expand...

I understand the point, I just don't agree.
 
pepsilol said:
Also those who want it on a percentage, you don't exactly want to start ****ing off the people who actually run the place.
Click to expand...

It's all politics of envy. For some reason it makes some of those who are less off feel better about themselves.

'Rich can afford it, tax them more, fine them more, charge them more!!!'

They also have the money to go elsewhere.

Clarkson nailed it once. Something along the lines of it doesn't matter what Mr Rich is doing, or what you do to them. You will still have your same house with your same car.
 
balky12 said:
As I said previously, £60 fines doesn't stop anyone offending... Even those less off.
Click to expand...

For reference, speeding is £100 fine and 3 points now.

The level of fines up and above this fixed penalty are never issued by Police but sentenced in court, indeed technically even the fixed penalties are issued by the court.

balky12 said:
It's all politics of envy. For some reason it makes some of those who are less off feel better about themselves.

'Rich can afford it, tax them more, fine them more, charge them more!!!'

They also have the money to go elsewhere.

Clarkson nailed it once. Something along the lines of it doesn't matter what Mr Rich is doing, or what you do to them. You will still have your same house with your same car.
Click to expand...

That's not why I think fines need to be proportional to income though. Take parking fines in London, you have some people who park anywhere because they know a £100 fine from the council isn't going to affect them. They treat it just as a charge because the level of the fine isn't a punishment nor a deterrent worthy of them bothering to park legally. I think fines should be proportional to be effective at enforcing the law for everyone.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
For reference, speeding is £100 fine and 3 points now.

The level of fines up and above this fixed penalty are never issued by Police but sentenced in court, indeed technically even the fixed penalties are issued by the court.



That's not why I think fines need to be proportional to income though. Take parking fines in London, you have some people who park anywhere because they know a £100 fine from the council isn't going to affect them. They treat it just as a charge because the level of the fine isn't a punishment nor a deterrent worthy of them bothering to park legally. I think fines should be proportional to be effective at enforcing the law for everyone.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with what you say re parking fines. I still think it's off to bring in a percentage fine though. Just because I'm from a view the offence is the same therefore same punishment. I.e same monetary amount. Yes rich people can afford it but that's life.

Speeding, or rather endorsed offences, the points are the real punishment.

In fact I often joke whilst out (mainly in London, as this is where you see it most) when I see a nice car parked illegally, that I can't wait to be rich enough to just park whether I want. If anything the fine is an incentive for me to get rich. Ha!
 
Last edited:
balky12 said:
Judging by some people here, money is a real soft spot... And not as easy to come by as you make out.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting into this debate again as it's all rehashing the same arguments with no-one changing their mind but it's funny you should say that money is a real soft spot as if it's just the people arguing for proportional fines that find it so - the people arguing that it should be a fixed amount and levying a proportional fine is just "the politics of envy" apparently find it equally a soft spot. They're coming at the discussion from opposite sides but if you're arguing vehemently that it's unfair for it to be anything other than a fixed fine then you're admitting that money does matter just as much as the people saying it should be proportional fines.
 
I've not read through the thread, but I totally agree with proportional fines.

I got pulled the other day for my window tints, was told to remove them or face a £100 fine.

My missus said, "How can celebs get away with it?"

Simple answer is; £100 is nothing to them. They'd rather pay the fine than remove the tints.

My take home is £300 a week. Let's take a footballer for example on £100K a week.

That £100 fine for the footballer is like me 30p in comparison. (Maths might be wrong, had a few drinks!) :rolleyes:
 
balky12 said:
In fact I often joke whilst out (mainly in London, as this is where you see it most) when I see a nice car parked illegally, that I can't wait to be rich enough to just park whether I want. If anything the fine is an incentive for me to get rich. Ha!
Click to expand...

So rich people should be above the law?
 
semi-pro waster said:
snip
Click to expand...

I see where you are coming from but my main argument is that the current fines do not deter those less off from offending. So the argument that we should increase fines for those richer because it will be a deterrent is just fantasy.

It's just bashing on the rich for the sake of bashing on the rich.
 
balky12 said:
I see where you are coming from but my main argument is that the current fines do not deter those less off from offending. So the argument that we should increase fines for those richer because it will be a deterrent is just fantasy.

It's just bashing on the rich for the sake of bashing on the rich.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, it's about making an ineffective fine effective. It's nothing about rich vs poor, it applies to everyone and anyone.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Parking illegally usually affects someone - indeed it can escalate really fast in my experience.



If the fine was 10p would it still be a punishment?
Click to expand...

Yes. It's a fine. Just because it doesn't make me destitute for the rest of the month doesn't mean it isn't a punishment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom