5 ms·

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 conse

by 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?
    - CalRobert 2y ago
      We already kinda do this, old people get let out of prison if they're ill, etc. I don't really think my example is terrible, I think it depends on what you think of as "equal". If the idea is to disincentivize an action, it needs to have a similar amount of pain to all people, presumably.
  - M95D 2y ago
    In fact that's exact how the fine is calculated: day-fine = punishment financially equivalent to incarceration for one day without salary. Rich and poor get the same number of days "without salary". There's also a minimum fine. People with no income will still pay a fine.
- op00to 2y ago
  > If you have no money you should be able to break the law more cheaply? Yes, the total value of the fine is less for someone with no money, but has the same impact the same because it is the same portion of their overall income. Just like "if you have no money, you should be able to live in country more cheaply by paying less in taxes".
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    And realistically poor will always have more impact due to any fine. As they have almost always both in relative and absolute terms less disposable income. It is not like taking 9 million from someone on net earning 10 million will make them starve, but try to do same with someone making 20k and taking 18k from that...
    - op00to 2y ago
      Huge point! This fine will not affect the lawyer’s ability to provide for his family at all. Maybe one less fancy BMW.
- add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
  The point is that it achieves, proportionally, the same rule for different people.

by jgeada 2y ago

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?
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    We already kinda do this, old people get let out of prison if they're ill, etc. I don't really think my example is terrible, I think it depends on what you think of as "equal". If the idea is to disincentivize an action, it needs to have a similar amount of pain to all people, presumably.
- M95D 2y ago
  In fact that's exact how the fine is calculated: day-fine = punishment financially equivalent to incarceration for one day without salary. Rich and poor get the same number of days "without salary". There's also a minimum fine. People with no income will still pay a fine.
op00to 2y ago
> If you have no money you should be able to break the law more cheaply? Yes, the total value of the fine is less for someone with no money, but has the same impact the same because it is the same portion of their overall income. Just like "if you have no money, you should be able to live in country more cheaply by paying less in taxes".
- Ekaros 2y ago
  And realistically poor will always have more impact due to any fine. As they have almost always both in relative and absolute terms less disposable income. It is not like taking 9 million from someone on net earning 10 million will make them starve, but try to do same with someone making 20k and taking 18k from that...
  - op00to 2y ago
    Huge point! This fine will not affect the lawyer’s ability to provide for his family at all. Maybe one less fancy BMW.
add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
The point is that it achieves, proportionally, the same rule for different people.