3 ms·
It seems backwards to me to take the bad situation that exists and make it worse to cripple more people? I generally agree that at the lower bound there the ca
by gonehome 5y ago
It seems backwards to me to take the bad situation that exists and make it worse to cripple more people?
I generally agree that at the lower bound there the cascading effect of penalties can be disproportionate and extreme, things like ending cash bail can be a way to improve this (though I'm not a policy expert). Making it similarly extreme for everyone seems bad? It also creates a disincentive for making money which seems like the opposite of what you want.
- kennywinker 5y agoOur choices are: 1) keep the current system (fixed fines) 2) proportional fines (higher fines for wealthier violators) 3) abandon penalty fines entirely for another system For most cases I'd like to see #3, since I think fines are basically a bad system of social control. However, there are going to be cases where we want to keep fines there - and for those cases #1 continues to enforce class structures, while #2 applies pressure evenly across class. Also, sorry, I don't accept that last point. Nobody is going to stop making money because their parking tickets go up in cost. That's not how people work.
- gonehome 5y agoI think there are more options available. I'd be partial to keep fines, but protect the lower bound from cascading failure. > "Nobody is going to stop making money because their parking tickets go up in cost. That's not how people work." There is evidence already of incentives changing behavior with the recent stimulus. I think it is how people work.
- kennywinker 5y agoThere is popular consensus that stimulus has change behavior. There’s very little evidence that is actually the case.