5 ms·

Swiss BMW Driver Slammed with $116,000 Tailgating Fine Because He's Rich

41 points by ivewonyoung 2y ago

ivewonyoung 2y ago
How much would Bezos or Musk be charged for a similar traffic ticket
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  Article says that there is a cap of CHF3,000 for the daily rate and that the fine imposed in this case was 50 daily rates. So the maximum fine is CHF150k or about $175k.
  - IncreasePosts 2y ago
    Can they just apply as many daily rates as they want? Where does the 50 come from?
    - M95D 2y ago
      Law broken, possibly how often the individual broke it before, too.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
_the_inflator 2y ago
Rule number 1 when you go to Switzerland: it is the most anti-car country there is. There are so many possibilities to make costly "lessons" if you do not prepare in advance. I lived in Zurich - lovely country, but what in other countries is more or less tolerated or fined with a price tag of two McDonalds menus, can hit you very hard. A parking violation and driving a bit too fast downhill (it's a hilly region, isn't it?) because you overlooked a sign, and not only ordinary people will wish they were billionaires.
- klingoff 2y ago
  Switzerland is a car country that would make AAA drool. But it doesn't have the same approach to laws and flexibility of the system as the US because it didn't need to encode different outcomes for different people in authority discretion like the US did.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  > Rule number 1 when you go to Switzerland: it is the most anti-car country there is. Not even close, even for the more general superalative meaning of most. Lots of Swiss drive, car and gas prices are more affordable than the rest of Europe, many Swiss live outside of big cities where parking is harder/expensive. I even saw a drive thru at a McDonalds in Renens (suburb near Lausanne), which...I've never seen a drive thru at McDonalds anywhere else in Europe (although I only lived in Switzerland). Yes, Switzerland is very law and order, you follow the rules (like in Germany). But it is definitely a place where you can drive if you want, and many people do.
- looofooo0 2y ago
  No, Swiss love their cars, but in an orderly fashion. Most relaxed driving in Europe.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  I also lived in Switzerland for a couple of years, learn to abide by the rules, no problem.
bko 2y ago
I think the law should apply equally to all. That means you don't give special breaks or come down especially hard on someone just because of their economic circumstances. The funny thing about this opinion is that it is both extremely widely shared and extremely unpopular, depending on the context. Just seems invasive to me for a court to demand your personal monetary situation when determining how much to punish you. The flip side to this is no-cash bail and people being allowed back on the streets after committing awful anti-social crimes. In NYC some people get released on no cash bail for 2nd degree manslaughter. But you know, economic circumstances https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/all-crimes-new-york-bail-reform/ https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/all-crimes-new-york-bai...
- jgeada 2y ago
  The law should have the same consequences for everyone. $1M fine for you is likely making you bankrupt, but is a rounding error for Elon. Is that the same consequence? If fines don't scale with wealth, they mean the activity is only illegal for the poor & middle class.
  - bko 2y ago
    So in principle, different rules for different people? If you have no money you should be able to break the law more cheaply? Principles are principles for a reason. You don't hold equal treatment / punishment under the law as a principle. Equal does not mean relative to something.
    - CalRobert 2y ago
      It's the same rule, the calculation is just different. Imagine it were prison. Should we say that a rich person should get a 1 day sentence and a poor person should get a 1 year sentence simply because the rich person's time is worth more?
      - bko 2y ago
        Terrible example since equality would mean they both get N day sentence as I'm advocating keeping the fee fixed regardless of circumstances. Here is how the example would actually work: A 20 year old probably has 60 years left. Spending a year in prison for a 20 year old is only 1/60th his expected life span. But for a 50 year old it would be 1/30th his life span. So perhaps the young person should get a harsher penalty. You see why this is wrong?
hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
Compared to the person making minimum wage (say $11/hr) receiving a $450 fine paid on an installment plan, I think this sends the right message. Income proportional fines should also have an alternative minimum fine that weighs their entire liquid balance sheet value because it's entirely possible decamillionaires to billionaires keep their live expenses allowances low compared to vast assets they control.
stevekemp 2y ago
The day-fine system is kinda interesting, because it recognizes that the impact of paying a $500 fine is very different based on your income. I was surprised to learn that the UK experimented with it, briefly, but it's something that exists in several other countries for example Finland has had the system since 1921. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine
- Daviey 2y ago
  For speeding, we do have a fine based on your weekly income. It can be up to 175% of your weekly income (capped to £2,500), if doing >100 MPH on a motorway (or >76 MPH if speed restricted to 50 MPH).
jrm4 2y ago
Good. We should do more to tailor fines to income to the extent feasible. Otherwise it's just a hardship for the poor and an inconvenience fee for the rich.
- yohannparis 2y ago
  Instead of income, it should be something else, because a lot of wealthy people do not have incomes.
  - bortsampson 2y ago
    [dead]
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    Good point. You still want to punish, despite not having income. Perhaps a % of their assets should be put into government trust which is realised when they liquidate?
- _bin_ 2y ago
  No, not good. $116k is a ridiculous fine for tailgating. Fines should be at least partially related to the damage or potential damage inflicted on the public. I'd be fine with sublinear scaling but straightline increasing a fine ad infinitum is ridiculous. And/or the fine should be cut for the poor. I think there's a big difference between what people say (the poor shouldn't be massively overburdened by a traffic fine, which most people would support), and what many advocates of these policies are actually motivated by (make the rich pay reeeee), which is silly schadenfreude I won't support.
  - fwip 2y ago
    $116K is far less than the potential damage to life and property that can be caused by a car crash.
    - jazzyjackson 2y ago
richwater 2y ago
I don't care how rich you are, a $100,000 fine for tailgating is absurd. How much was the public hurt by his actions?
- Carrok 2y ago
  Do you think a fine of less than $100k would cause a billionaire to change their behavior in any way?
  - richwater 2y ago
    Is there any research that traffic fines change _anyone's_ behavior if they're a terrible driver, regardless of income?
aeturnum 2y ago
I think fines that are proportional to your income or wealth are clearly a better approach than fixed fines. In practice, that kind of stuff can be really hard to figure out, but overall it seems sensible? There are lots of downsides to a highly connected financial system for poor people, but hopefully we can move towards scaled fines as something of a consolation for all of the downsides the poor endure.
- rvnx 2y ago
  Along with the wealth tax, these revenue-based fines also pushes you to minimize the revenues that you declare to the state, ending with overall losses in collected taxes. For example, many crypto-bros are insanely poor on paper. Companies can spend on behalf of a person, etc. A more fair system is to be able to pick between jail or community service. Time is equally precious to all humans and giving some of your time to repair your mistakes is the best you can do.
  - xico 2y ago
    A poor person cannot afford to miss a day at the job, or not care for their children, when it would just be another day not working for a rich one. Not to mention the difference in life expectancy between the richest and poorest populations are 10-15 years. If anything jail sentences should be longer for wealthy people!
- Teever 2y ago
  I'd like to see progressive fines implemented as well. I'm not sure what factor we should use but I think that it should quickly become economically infeasible for anyone to keep reoffending because the cost of separate instances of doing so quickly escalates. Maybe exponentially?
  - aeturnum 2y ago
    The idea of having the fine scale based on how quickly people re-offend is also really interesting! I feel like I worry about...situations where people are pressed into breaking that law out of circumstances and then are extra-harshly punished by the mounting fines? Maybe you combine it with some kind of income-based ceiling or a loss in driving privileges (has its own problems ofc but it is a public danger for someone to always be breaking the law - even if they feel they have no choice).
ericfrenkiel 2y ago
The difference between equality under the law or equity under the law. Equity is by definition relative. Equality is at least absolutely reasoned without the interference of relativity or subjectivity. By what measure can a system of government be most fair and immune to corruption? The one where everyone has equal rights or the one one where some are “more equal” or “less equal” than others?
tqi 2y ago
> The court can impose a fine of daily rates between 30 and 3,000 francs, or roughly $35 to $3,500, in cases like these, but settled on fining the lawyer 50 daily rates of 1,970 CHF. How is the number of days determined - is it fixed by type of offense?
- KolmogorovComp 2y ago
  It's easy, many lawyers are already charging by hour/day. Otherwise take annual income and divide by number of days worked.
  - tqi 2y ago
    My question wasn't about the day rate it was about the number of days, ie is it variable or fixed for each type of offense.
- Maultasche 2y ago
  That was one thing that the article didn't explain that I was curious about. What does days mean in this context and how does the court determine the number of them? Why days combined with a variable fee vs just a variable fee?
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Very likely some table. Tail gating is one amount, running red light is an other, going over 20 km/h(Finland) is one and then you get more as the speed increases 40, 60, 80, 100 over limit...
pjmlp 2y ago
Swiss has had fines directly proportional to the income for decades, and as someone that lived there, I fully agree with them. Otherwise most rich people will only consider them a mere inconvenience, like in most countries.
- drbig 2y ago
  Precisely that. A fine is a simple non-violent way of enforcing consequences for actions we, as a society, want to discourage. Here in Poland I have met too many corpo-achievers literally bragging that they just put all their speeding tickets on the corpo-card because it's _peanuts_, so they drive as fast and as loose as they feel... And no, things are not simple, but fines being proportional to income is better than fixed fines.
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    Sounds like something that the entire EU should impose.
kergonath 2y ago
I’d be happy if people would actually get fined for tailgating around here. Even €35 would do.
johnea 2y ago
Good...
penguin_booze 2y ago
Like taxes, I'm a fan of proportional fines, at least for major offenses. The purpose of fine is to deter the perpetrator. If you fine a (m|b)illionaire 20 quid like the rest of us, how much of a deterrence can that be? I'm also a fan of increasing the fine exponentially for frequent and/or repeated offenses.

41 points by ivewonyoung 2y ago

ivewonyoung 2y ago

How much would Bezos or Musk be charged for a similar traffic ticket

mytailorisrich 2y ago
Article says that there is a cap of CHF3,000 for the daily rate and that the fine imposed in this case was 50 daily rates. So the maximum fine is CHF150k or about $175k.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  Can they just apply as many daily rates as they want? Where does the 50 come from?
  - M95D 2y ago
    Law broken, possibly how often the individual broke it before, too.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

_the_inflator 2y ago

Rule number 1 when you go to Switzerland: it is the most anti-car country there is. There are so many possibilities to make costly "lessons" if you do not prepare in advance. I lived in Zurich - lovely country, but what in other countries is more or less tolerated or fined with a price tag of two McDonalds menus, can hit you very hard. A parking violation and driving a bit too fast downhill (it's a hilly region, isn't it?) because you overlooked a sign, and not only ordinary people will wish they were billionaires.

klingoff 2y ago
Switzerland is a car country that would make AAA drool. But it doesn't have the same approach to laws and flexibility of the system as the US because it didn't need to encode different outcomes for different people in authority discretion like the US did.
seanmcdirmid 2y ago
> Rule number 1 when you go to Switzerland: it is the most anti-car country there is. Not even close, even for the more general superalative meaning of most. Lots of Swiss drive, car and gas prices are more affordable than the rest of Europe, many Swiss live outside of big cities where parking is harder/expensive. I even saw a drive thru at a McDonalds in Renens (suburb near Lausanne), which...I've never seen a drive thru at McDonalds anywhere else in Europe (although I only lived in Switzerland). Yes, Switzerland is very law and order, you follow the rules (like in Germany). But it is definitely a place where you can drive if you want, and many people do.
looofooo0 2y ago
No, Swiss love their cars, but in an orderly fashion. Most relaxed driving in Europe.
pjmlp 2y ago
I also lived in Switzerland for a couple of years, learn to abide by the rules, no problem.

bko 2y ago

I think the law should apply equally to all. That means you don't give special breaks or come down especially hard on someone just because of their economic circumstances. The funny thing about this opinion is that it is both extremely widely shared and extremely unpopular, depending on the context. Just seems invasive to me for a court to demand your personal monetary situation when determining how much to punish you. The flip side to this is no-cash bail and people being allowed back on the streets after committing awful anti-social crimes. In NYC some people get released on no cash bail for 2nd degree manslaughter. But you know, economic circumstances https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/all-crimes-new-york-bail-reform/ https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/all-crimes-new-york-bai...

jgeada 2y ago
The law should have the same consequences for everyone. $1M fine for you is likely making you bankrupt, but is a rounding error for Elon. Is that the same consequence? If fines don't scale with wealth, they mean the activity is only illegal for the poor & middle class.
- bko 2y ago
  So in principle, different rules for different people? If you have no money you should be able to break the law more cheaply? Principles are principles for a reason. You don't hold equal treatment / punishment under the law as a principle. Equal does not mean relative to something.
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    It's the same rule, the calculation is just different. Imagine it were prison. Should we say that a rich person should get a 1 day sentence and a poor person should get a 1 year sentence simply because the rich person's time is worth more?
    - bko 2y ago
      Terrible example since equality would mean they both get N day sentence as I'm advocating keeping the fee fixed regardless of circumstances. Here is how the example would actually work: A 20 year old probably has 60 years left. Spending a year in prison for a 20 year old is only 1/60th his expected life span. But for a 50 year old it would be 1/30th his life span. So perhaps the young person should get a harsher penalty. You see why this is wrong?

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

Compared to the person making minimum wage (say $11/hr) receiving a $450 fine paid on an installment plan, I think this sends the right message. Income proportional fines should also have an alternative minimum fine that weighs their entire liquid balance sheet value because it's entirely possible decamillionaires to billionaires keep their live expenses allowances low compared to vast assets they control.

stevekemp 2y ago

The day-fine system is kinda interesting, because it recognizes that the impact of paying a $500 fine is very different based on your income. I was surprised to learn that the UK experimented with it, briefly, but it's something that exists in several other countries for example Finland has had the system since 1921. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

Daviey 2y ago
For speeding, we do have a fine based on your weekly income. It can be up to 175% of your weekly income (capped to £2,500), if doing >100 MPH on a motorway (or >76 MPH if speed restricted to 50 MPH).

jrm4 2y ago

Good. We should do more to tailor fines to income to the extent feasible. Otherwise it's just a hardship for the poor and an inconvenience fee for the rich.

yohannparis 2y ago
Instead of income, it should be something else, because a lot of wealthy people do not have incomes.
- bortsampson 2y ago
  [dead]
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  Good point. You still want to punish, despite not having income. Perhaps a % of their assets should be put into government trust which is realised when they liquidate?
_bin_ 2y ago
No, not good. $116k is a ridiculous fine for tailgating. Fines should be at least partially related to the damage or potential damage inflicted on the public. I'd be fine with sublinear scaling but straightline increasing a fine ad infinitum is ridiculous. And/or the fine should be cut for the poor. I think there's a big difference between what people say (the poor shouldn't be massively overburdened by a traffic fine, which most people would support), and what many advocates of these policies are actually motivated by (make the rich pay reeeee), which is silly schadenfreude I won't support.
- fwip 2y ago
  $116K is far less than the potential damage to life and property that can be caused by a car crash.
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago

richwater 2y ago

I don't care how rich you are, a $100,000 fine for tailgating is absurd. How much was the public hurt by his actions?

Carrok 2y ago
Do you think a fine of less than $100k would cause a billionaire to change their behavior in any way?
- richwater 2y ago
  Is there any research that traffic fines change _anyone's_ behavior if they're a terrible driver, regardless of income?

aeturnum 2y ago

I think fines that are proportional to your income or wealth are clearly a better approach than fixed fines. In practice, that kind of stuff can be really hard to figure out, but overall it seems sensible? There are lots of downsides to a highly connected financial system for poor people, but hopefully we can move towards scaled fines as something of a consolation for all of the downsides the poor endure.

rvnx 2y ago
Along with the wealth tax, these revenue-based fines also pushes you to minimize the revenues that you declare to the state, ending with overall losses in collected taxes. For example, many crypto-bros are insanely poor on paper. Companies can spend on behalf of a person, etc. A more fair system is to be able to pick between jail or community service. Time is equally precious to all humans and giving some of your time to repair your mistakes is the best you can do.
- xico 2y ago
  A poor person cannot afford to miss a day at the job, or not care for their children, when it would just be another day not working for a rich one. Not to mention the difference in life expectancy between the richest and poorest populations are 10-15 years. If anything jail sentences should be longer for wealthy people!
Teever 2y ago
I'd like to see progressive fines implemented as well. I'm not sure what factor we should use but I think that it should quickly become economically infeasible for anyone to keep reoffending because the cost of separate instances of doing so quickly escalates. Maybe exponentially?
- aeturnum 2y ago
  The idea of having the fine scale based on how quickly people re-offend is also really interesting! I feel like I worry about...situations where people are pressed into breaking that law out of circumstances and then are extra-harshly punished by the mounting fines? Maybe you combine it with some kind of income-based ceiling or a loss in driving privileges (has its own problems ofc but it is a public danger for someone to always be breaking the law - even if they feel they have no choice).

ericfrenkiel 2y ago

The difference between equality under the law or equity under the law. Equity is by definition relative. Equality is at least absolutely reasoned without the interference of relativity or subjectivity. By what measure can a system of government be most fair and immune to corruption? The one where everyone has equal rights or the one one where some are “more equal” or “less equal” than others?

tqi 2y ago

> The court can impose a fine of daily rates between 30 and 3,000 francs, or roughly $35 to $3,500, in cases like these, but settled on fining the lawyer 50 daily rates of 1,970 CHF. How is the number of days determined - is it fixed by type of offense?

KolmogorovComp 2y ago
It's easy, many lawyers are already charging by hour/day. Otherwise take annual income and divide by number of days worked.
- tqi 2y ago
  My question wasn't about the day rate it was about the number of days, ie is it variable or fixed for each type of offense.
Maultasche 2y ago
That was one thing that the article didn't explain that I was curious about. What does days mean in this context and how does the court determine the number of them? Why days combined with a variable fee vs just a variable fee?
Ekaros 2y ago
Very likely some table. Tail gating is one amount, running red light is an other, going over 20 km/h(Finland) is one and then you get more as the speed increases 40, 60, 80, 100 over limit...

pjmlp 2y ago

Swiss has had fines directly proportional to the income for decades, and as someone that lived there, I fully agree with them. Otherwise most rich people will only consider them a mere inconvenience, like in most countries.

drbig 2y ago
Precisely that. A fine is a simple non-violent way of enforcing consequences for actions we, as a society, want to discourage. Here in Poland I have met too many corpo-achievers literally bragging that they just put all their speeding tickets on the corpo-card because it's _peanuts_, so they drive as fast and as loose as they feel... And no, things are not simple, but fines being proportional to income is better than fixed fines.
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  Sounds like something that the entire EU should impose.

kergonath 2y ago

I’d be happy if people would actually get fined for tailgating around here. Even €35 would do.

johnea 2y ago

Good...

penguin_booze 2y ago

Like taxes, I'm a fan of proportional fines, at least for major offenses. The purpose of fine is to deter the perpetrator. If you fine a (m|b)illionaire 20 quid like the rest of us, how much of a deterrence can that be? I'm also a fan of increasing the fine exponentially for frequent and/or repeated offenses.