3 ms·

poor people idling their engines pollute just as much - or maybe more, depending on average vehicle age, etc. - as rich ones, and poor people are much more like

poor people idling their engines pollute just as much - or maybe more, depending on average vehicle age, etc. - as rich ones, and poor people are much more likely to suffer the negative consequences of that pollution

kennywinker 1y ago
That is probably true, but since the law doesn’t punish everyone equally it means that enforcing the law equally is oppression.
- meepmorp 1y ago
  it's for commercial vehicles, though, so your point doesn't make sense
- welshwelsh 1y ago
  It does punish everyone equally, if everyone pays the same fine. Some people having more ability to pay does not make the law unjust. I think it's important to remember that money represents debt. When someone commits a crime, they owe a debt to society. But if they have money, that means society owes a debt to them, so when they pay the fine it balances out. The system isn't perfect but the idea is that if someone makes a big contribution to society, like by practicing medicine or creating new technology, society's debt to that person shouldn't be cancelled out by a minor offense like a parking violation. But if they aren't contributing much, then breaking the rules could make them into a net negative.
  - kennywinker 1y ago
    If I make $10/hour and you take $100 from me you’ve taken away 10 hours of my labour. If I make $600 an hour and you take $100 from me you’ve taken away 10min of my labour. The $100 is equal but the impact is not. Fines are penalties, they don’t represent the cost of something - and a fixed fine is an un-equal penalty. Your analogy makes some sense, but since wealth and contribution to society aren’t actually linked in reality - only in theory - I can’t get behind it. The wealthiest people in reality are parasites, not those who contribute the most. Owners not builders, CEOs not scientists, money managers not teachers.

kennywinker 1y ago

That is probably true, but since the law doesn’t punish everyone equally it means that enforcing the law equally is oppression.

meepmorp 1y ago
it's for commercial vehicles, though, so your point doesn't make sense
welshwelsh 1y ago
It does punish everyone equally, if everyone pays the same fine. Some people having more ability to pay does not make the law unjust. I think it's important to remember that money represents debt. When someone commits a crime, they owe a debt to society. But if they have money, that means society owes a debt to them, so when they pay the fine it balances out. The system isn't perfect but the idea is that if someone makes a big contribution to society, like by practicing medicine or creating new technology, society's debt to that person shouldn't be cancelled out by a minor offense like a parking violation. But if they aren't contributing much, then breaking the rules could make them into a net negative.
- kennywinker 1y ago
  If I make $10/hour and you take $100 from me you’ve taken away 10 hours of my labour. If I make $600 an hour and you take $100 from me you’ve taken away 10min of my labour. The $100 is equal but the impact is not. Fines are penalties, they don’t represent the cost of something - and a fixed fine is an un-equal penalty. Your analogy makes some sense, but since wealth and contribution to society aren’t actually linked in reality - only in theory - I can’t get behind it. The wealthiest people in reality are parasites, not those who contribute the most. Owners not builders, CEOs not scientists, money managers not teachers.