4 ms·

Oh, give it a break. People don't choose to be poor.

cle 8y ago
Some do, some don't. Blanket statements in either direction are incorrect and unproductive.
arghwhat 8y ago
I did not say that people chose to be poor. However, it does not seem fair to be punished for working harder than required.
- askvictor 8y ago
  This is assuming wealth/income is cause by hard work; while that's true for some people, many are rich because their parents are rich (would be curious to see stats around this)
  - arghwhat 8y ago
    I cannot say much about the stats, but I only really know of rich-by-work rather than rich-by-luck. But I do not think we should design a system to cater for outliers with immense wealth. We should cater for the general population, and I believe that for non-Dubai prince wealth, it is likely that it likely came through work.
    - qw 8y ago
      You need to add social factors too. If you are born into poverty, it is not simply enough to work a bit harder than the average. The weight of all the factors against you will probably increase the workload by a magnitude compared to someone born into an average family.
      - arghwhat 8y ago
        We are not working in absolutes here. Working twice as much does not make you Bill Gates, but it does double your income for an hourly paid job.
- monadgonad 8y ago
  You're not being punished for that, you're being punished for a crime. That happens to be proportional to what you can give. What's not fair is fines that barely impact wealthy people.
  - arghwhat 8y ago
    Neither does it seem fair that I'll be fined twice as much if I work twice the hours, does it?
    - qw 8y ago
      A fine is supposed to discourage people from breaking the law. Is it fair that wealthy people can ignore the laws because they do not feel any real consequenes? I have heard drivers who constantly break the rules, because they can easily afford the fine. To them the occasional fine is just the price they have to pay for easy parking, or saving a minute on their drive. What alternative do you suggest?
      - arghwhat 8y ago
        Several ideas: 1. Given a problem with people continuously ignoring the law, a simple serial-offender system should deal with it fairly. We already have that up here, with you having three "marks" on your license. Some offenses take a mark, with 3 marks costing you your license. Driving without a license has increasing penalty for repeated offenses, including jail-time after the first or first two offenses. We do not have the absurd concept of "bail", and with lifespans being roughly similar, poor and rich end up with similar pains if they are repeat offenders. 2. Given that very wealthy people being able to ignore laws appear to be outliers, with the average person not being able to do this, I would say that you could create special cases for these outliers. For example, average/rich brackets. Or even poor/average/filthy rich. 3. Just not designing laws that govern entire countries to deal with a few outliers. There will always be outliers, and people with enough money to get out of any situation, whether that is paying fines or paying good lawyers to wiggle their way out. There will also always be people parking illegally, or speeding. Hell, if I recall correctly, the Finnish government had stated that the speeding fines are important income, so you also suddenly end up with fines being necessary, rather than them being only a tool to stop an offense, which is absurd. (And for reference, for #3, I am talking about outliers within those that violate traffic laws. A serial killer is obviously an outlier which laws should be designed for, but I consider this a very different case.)
- qw 8y ago
  I don’t think there is proof that a there is a connection between the salary level and how hard someone works. A person who works at minimum wage may work as hard as anyone else. Just look at all those who have to work two jobs to feed their family. I would think that if they had the opportunity to work harder at a single job and make more money, they would.
  - arghwhat 8y ago
    I did not say that salary = work. However, given your salary, increasing your effort increases your reward. A lazy banker earns more than a productive grocery store employee, but a grocery store employee taking twice as many shifts earns twice as much money as the regular grocery store employee. And they should not be punished for doing so. To roughly quantify a salary, it would be something like salary = base salary of trade x negotiation factor x hard work factor. Hard work should not be punished. If you want to equal out various types of work, you could say "based on average income for your position", rather than your income, but then other problems appear.

cle 8y ago

Some do, some don't. Blanket statements in either direction are incorrect and unproductive.

I did not say that people chose to be poor. However, it does not seem fair to be punished for working harder than required.

askvictor 8y ago
This is assuming wealth/income is cause by hard work; while that's true for some people, many are rich because their parents are rich (would be curious to see stats around this)
- arghwhat 8y ago
  I cannot say much about the stats, but I only really know of rich-by-work rather than rich-by-luck. But I do not think we should design a system to cater for outliers with immense wealth. We should cater for the general population, and I believe that for non-Dubai prince wealth, it is likely that it likely came through work.
  - qw 8y ago
    You need to add social factors too. If you are born into poverty, it is not simply enough to work a bit harder than the average. The weight of all the factors against you will probably increase the workload by a magnitude compared to someone born into an average family.
    - arghwhat 8y ago
      We are not working in absolutes here. Working twice as much does not make you Bill Gates, but it does double your income for an hourly paid job.
monadgonad 8y ago
You're not being punished for that, you're being punished for a crime. That happens to be proportional to what you can give. What's not fair is fines that barely impact wealthy people.
- arghwhat 8y ago
  Neither does it seem fair that I'll be fined twice as much if I work twice the hours, does it?
  - qw 8y ago
    A fine is supposed to discourage people from breaking the law. Is it fair that wealthy people can ignore the laws because they do not feel any real consequenes? I have heard drivers who constantly break the rules, because they can easily afford the fine. To them the occasional fine is just the price they have to pay for easy parking, or saving a minute on their drive. What alternative do you suggest?
    - arghwhat 8y ago
      Several ideas: 1. Given a problem with people continuously ignoring the law, a simple serial-offender system should deal with it fairly. We already have that up here, with you having three "marks" on your license. Some offenses take a mark, with 3 marks costing you your license. Driving without a license has increasing penalty for repeated offenses, including jail-time after the first or first two offenses. We do not have the absurd concept of "bail", and with lifespans being roughly similar, poor and rich end up with similar pains if they are repeat offenders. 2. Given that very wealthy people being able to ignore laws appear to be outliers, with the average person not being able to do this, I would say that you could create special cases for these outliers. For example, average/rich brackets. Or even poor/average/filthy rich. 3. Just not designing laws that govern entire countries to deal with a few outliers. There will always be outliers, and people with enough money to get out of any situation, whether that is paying fines or paying good lawyers to wiggle their way out. There will also always be people parking illegally, or speeding. Hell, if I recall correctly, the Finnish government had stated that the speeding fines are important income, so you also suddenly end up with fines being necessary, rather than them being only a tool to stop an offense, which is absurd. (And for reference, for #3, I am talking about outliers within those that violate traffic laws. A serial killer is obviously an outlier which laws should be designed for, but I consider this a very different case.)
qw 8y ago
I don’t think there is proof that a there is a connection between the salary level and how hard someone works. A person who works at minimum wage may work as hard as anyone else. Just look at all those who have to work two jobs to feed their family. I would think that if they had the opportunity to work harder at a single job and make more money, they would.
- arghwhat 8y ago
  I did not say that salary = work. However, given your salary, increasing your effort increases your reward. A lazy banker earns more than a productive grocery store employee, but a grocery store employee taking twice as many shifts earns twice as much money as the regular grocery store employee. And they should not be punished for doing so. To roughly quantify a salary, it would be something like salary = base salary of trade x negotiation factor x hard work factor. Hard work should not be punished. If you want to equal out various types of work, you could say "based on average income for your position", rather than your income, but then other problems appear.