In case my wording wasn't clear enough: level of deterrent obviously shouldn't depend on your income, which this system roughly achieves. (Doesn't totally achie

In case my wording wasn't clear enough: level of deterrent obviously shouldn't depend on your income, which this system roughly achieves. (Doesn't totally achieve it: a poor person can't in truth afford to lose any of their income, while a rich one could easily temporarily let go of over 90% without it affecting anything; for that I don't see an easy fix.) As said, I can't imagine a moral justification for not implementing some similar scheme.