Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
No, thats the after thought justification of them, the logic is basically that we have to get the rich #######s, which I am fine with by the way.
|
No, it's not just justification, penalties hurt the poor more than the rich. Depending on just how poor a person is, money can really prevent them from being free. Now one could argue that a fine shouldn't matter, because they had to do something bad to earn it in the first place, but it goes way beyond that.
Take an example from my life. I have to get my licence renewed every 2 years rather than every 5 due to a health condition I was born with. Not only that, I have to have a signed medical, which also costs money. Basically I'm getting penalized for being born with a handicap.
Now that's bad enough by itself, but my handicap has also prevented me from getting many jobs. As well as that, it's been a problem in keeping jobs when I get really ill. So, not only am I able to earn less, but I have to pay more. This is a small example, but there are others. And they add up. And they affect my life in very real ways.
Any flat fee, or fine, or whatever, can become a major headache to those who don't have much money. And it's not always a choice of being able to do without. And really, in a lot of situations, it shouldn't even be a question of having to do without.
This is how all these fees truly affect someone who is sick and or poor, where they would not affect a person earning an average amount, and definitely would not even bother a person earning an obscene amount.
On the other side of the argument, we have all heard of wealthy people who have flaunted the law, because the penalties simply do not affect their lifestyle.
So no, I wouldn't call it justification.