So let's make this really fair. Take the fine completely out of it. You get 3 strikes on a rolling 12-mo timeframe and if you get popped for speeding, mandatory that you park your ass in The People's Traffic Reeducation School for half a Saturday. Nobody likes spending half a Saturday in traffic school...especially with the proletariat.
Sounds fair to me, I can't complain about that.
What's next? Getting TAXED based on income? 
Previous to my current job and before I ran a small business, I worked for "rich" people that owned the company I worked for.
Wouldn't it have been great to have saddled him and his company with increased taxes so he laid me off? Oh yes, much better than doing something stupid like lowering his taxes so he'd either give me a raise or omg, HIRE another employee!
In my state we have a point system. So even if the fine is pocket change to you... pretty quickly you will lose your license if you rack up tickets.
I like this better than income-based fines.
I think the key here is to avoid detection. That's what I would do to avoid the fines....avoid detection at all costs. I wouldn't stop speeding though.
ebonyandivory wrote: Wouldn't it have been great to have saddled him and his company with increased taxes so he laid me off? Oh yes, much better than doing something stupid like lowering his taxes so he'd either give me a raise or omg, HIRE another employee!
Giving the rich tax breaks doesn't make them hire more people, it makes them buy bigger megayachts. This has been proven over and over again, the rich have been making big double-digit income gains on average over the last few years and yet the world economy is still in the E36 M3ter. Again, jobs are created on the demand side.
GameboyRMH wrote:ebonyandivory wrote: Wouldn't it have been great to have saddled him and his company with increased taxes so he laid me off? Oh yes, much better than doing something stupid like lowering his taxes so he'd either give me a raise or omg, HIRE another employee!Giving the rich tax breaks doesn't make them hire more people, it makes them buy bigger megayachts. This has been proven over and over again, the rich have been making big double-digit income gains on average over the last few years and yet the world economy is still in the E36 M3ter. Again, jobs are created on the demand side.
What is your definition of "the rich"? At what income level does an individual or household become "the rich" to you?
Cotton wrote: What is your definition of "the rich"? At what income level does an individual or household become "the rich" to you?
When they have a nicer car than me. 
Use the ol' 1% if you like, that's where those numbers came from.
GameboyRMH wrote: Use the ol' 1% if you like, that's where those numbers came from.
So in Arkansas, for instance, a household with a combined income of 283k would be considered "the rich" to you? I would not consider them to be rich. What do you think would be the 1% income level on your island?
http://www.businessinsider.com/one-percent-state-map-2014-9
Cotton wrote: So in Arkansas, for instance, a household with a combined income of 283k would be considered "the rich" to you?
Hell yes! Especially since Arkansas is a relatively cheap place to live.
Cotton wrote: What do you think would be the 1% income level on your island?
At least tens of millions, we have a lot of hyper-rich living here.
"rich" is an arbitrary distinction. I'm in the upper five percent worldwide and can barely pay my mortgage. To focus on that alone misses the point. It's about proportionality.
Gameboy, Can I get you on record saying that lowering taxes on businesses/business owners is a bad thing?
And I am freaking DELIGHTED you made the mistake of mentioning the rich buying megayachts. That you did is so ironic as to make me feel bad for those that think that way.
I'll explain: the rich guys buy an insanely expensive yacht. Most likely built in the US by dozens of "us regular guys". Let's say this yacht has loads of fiberglass... Who makes that fiberglass? Who makes the resin? Who drives the truck that delivers that resin and fiberglass?
Does the yacht use paint? Yes, gallons of expensive paint. Who makes the paint? Who delivers the paint? Who manufactures the compressor and gun to apply that paint? Who maintains the compressor? Who builds the truck that the maintance guy drives, who makes the tires on that truck?
Who makes the leather and the flooring and the cabinets, the steering wheel, the fabrics, the countertops, the stainless steel, the electronics...
Think about the HUNDREDS of real people that are employed just to make one of your irksome magayachts.
Then you say jobs are created by "demand" while at the same time decrying the rich for creating the demand.
Not trying to be a jerk but you guys need to come up with a much better, entirely new argument.
"When Congress imposed a 10 percent luxury tax on yachts, private airplanes and expensive automobiles, Sen. Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share of taxes. What actually happened is laid out in a Heartland Institute blog post by Edmund Contoski titled "Economically illiterate Obama, re: Corporate Jets" (7/12/2011).
Within eight months after the change in the law took effect, Viking Yachts, the largest U.S. yacht manufacturer, laid off 1,140 of its 1,400 employees and closed one of its two manufacturing plants. Before it was all over, Viking Yachts was down to 68 employees. In the first year, one-third of U.S. yacht-building companies stopped production, and according to a report by the congressional Joint Economic Committee, the industry lost 7,600 jobs. When it was over, 25,000 workers had lost their jobs building yachts, and 75,000 more jobs were lost in companies that supplied yacht parts and material. Ocean Yachts trimmed its workforce from 350 to 50. Egg Harbor Yachts went from 200 employees to five and later filed for bankruptcy. The U.S., which had been a net exporter of yachts, became a net importer as U.S. companies closed. Jobs shifted to companies in Europe and the Bahamas. The U.S. Treasury collected zero revenue from the sales driven overseas."
Before you can talk about scaled fines or 3 strikes and you lose your license there has to be some level of equality in detection and implementation.
Here in Michigan, once out of major metropolitan areas, you can pretty much set your cruise at 80mph on the freeway and be guaranteed never to get a ticket. Head South into Ohio and the flying donut patrol (so called for their logo, not their proclivity for pastries) will nab you in an instant for the same speed.
Head over to Livonia and they'll nab you for sure doing 30 in an un-necessary 25 limit, yet there are other areas you can comfortably do 5-7mph over all day and drive straight past a cop with his radar sticking out of the window.
Also the car you drive has a big impact on your likely hood of getting a ticket. Do 10 over in a bright red Mustang, Camaro or WRX/STI and you’re in for a ticket. Do 15 over in the same area in a brand new Lincoln, Merc or Ferrari and you'll get off scott-free.
One more thing, let’s not forget that most of us here are all 1%'s. Yup, when looked at in global terms I believe the 1% set earn just under $50K per household annually
ebonyandivory wrote: Gameboy, Can I get you on record saying that lowering taxes on businesses/business owners is a bad thing? And I am freaking DELIGHTED you made the mistake of mentioning the rich buying megayachts. That you did is so ironic as to make me feel bad for those that think that way.
Yes you can get me on record and I do realize that megayacht-buying is a form of demand, but the ROI on it is absolutely abysmal.
You give the rich half the world's money and all you get out of it is a boost to the megayacht industry? That's not a thing I'd wax on about as an example of good economics.
In reply to GameboyRMH:
Please go to page 3 and read my edited post (at the bottom)
The yacht industry is just one of the many affected. And the luxury tax is just one version of how increased taxes or "punishing the rich" stagnates or kills the economy.
No shortsightedness allowed in this thread!
The answer is to ALLOW private industry to create more jobs and to hire more tax-paying employees not to raise taxes on fewer people.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: Before you can talk about scaled fines or 3 strikes and you lose your license there has to be some level of equality in detection and implementation.
I agree, but I'll take it. I'd rather have the possibility of leniency than a guarantee of prosecution.
It's a screwed up system, but the alternative is a world where cars CAN'T speed. We have the technology.
PS...the only other time I get this worked up about class struggle is when I'm browsing Pelican Parts classifieds for aircooled 911s. Daggum rich jerks need to be shopping for megayachts and leave the aircooled 911s to us. I started looking for a $15k SC about 4 years ago.
In reply to kanaric:
My comment was directed at the fact that this was going to get political and potentially ugly.
I did read your post, now including the parts about yacht production moving away from the US. What's the point? All the demand created by making a few people hyper-rich is peanuts compared to the demand destroyed by taking that money from the lower classes. Mansion builders, yacht builders, supercar builders, overpriced watch builders...all relative cottage industries serving a customer base that could fit on a cruise liner. HUNDREDS of people get jobs building megayachts while MILLIONS lose their disposable income or even their jobs...those numbers add up to a frowney face to me.
Not to be a jerk, but the great majority of yachts are made offshore. Ironically one of the death knells to the industry was the luxury tax, which had the unintended consequence of E36 M3ting up the yacht and boat-building industries in the ol' USA, which leads me to a reality: An awful lot of folks in the upper-upper income range really don't give a E36 M3e about job creation here or anywhere else. That's not politics. That's just reality. And the reason isn't that different from why many of us don't vote. In the big picture they don't see their actions as being consequential to the whole, and lack the sense of societal duty to do it anyway.
In reply to GameboyRMH:
You're again taking my one (fantastic) example and making it appear to be the ONLY one.
My example is just a drop in the bucket compared to the to what has happened nationwide and you know that. Yet you try to deflate my argument by incorrectly applying the term cottage industry as if to assume this isn't an ENORMOUS problem.
Still trying to avoid the pissing match over pro rated fines, here's something else to think about. How are the speeding fines in these other contries compared to fines/punishments for other types of crime?
Consider this thread over on FerrariChat. The fines for speeding are now worse than for drunk driving over there.
In reply to B. Choate:
I can't tell what your post meant.
Yacht production moved off-shore and we lost all those jobs and corporations and small businesses due to people's obsession with using taxes as punishment.
Yes, the rich will buy thier luxury items no matter where they're built but that's the point, allow them, entice the companies to BUILD THEM HERE, by Americans.
ebonyandivory wrote: In reply to GameboyRMH: You're again taking my one (fantastic) example and making it appear to be the ONLY one. My example is just a drop in the bucket compared to the to what has happened nationwide and you know that. Yet you try to deflate my argument by incorrectly applying the term cottage industry as if to assume this isn't an ENORMOUS problem.
Exactly.
berkeleying socialist style envy in this thread. I thought you guys were better than that. Guess not.
Why have this pretense of fining rich people more? Why not just take their money outright just because you're jealous of them and don't think they deserve to have it?
And what about iother crimes? Since the death penalty and life in prison are teh worst "fines" for theri crimes, then why make poor peopel and rich peopel suffere them the same? Since they are already as bad as they get, then only apply them to rich people and as the scale comes down by income, then let those with little or no income murder with impunity. Just so you can feel better about "sticking it to the rich."
berkeley socialism. I'm not going to work my ass off to get taxed to pay for someone that won't, more than I already do.
ebonyandivory wrote: In reply to GameboyRMH: You're again taking my one (fantastic) example and making it appear to be the ONLY one. My example is just a drop in the bucket compared to the to what has happened nationwide and you know that. Yet you try to deflate my argument by incorrectly applying the term cottage industry as if to assume this isn't an ENORMOUS problem.
You're correct that they're going to buy their luxury items somewhere, and losing luxury goods manufacture could be a big problem. But why do you think it's so important to chase after the luxury goods market rather than fix the system so that there are way more jobs available than making shinies for the rich?
You'll need to log in to post.
