60 replies to this topic

[Alex]

Capitalism like totally alienates the worker. Why should a movie star get paid more than a garbage man! Which job is more important to the existence of society?

On a more serious note. What do you think about equal punishment under the law? For example, which of the following is more fair:
A) A poor man driving an old Honda gets a $100 speeding ticket. A millionaire driving a Bentley gets a $100 speeding ticket.
B) A poor man dricing an old Honda gets a $100 speeding ticket. A millionaire driving a Bentley gets a $1500 speeding ticket.

[Tetiel]

What about a millionaire driving an old Honda?

[Sweeney]

A

[pyke]

I don't think I'd like partying with Stalin. It'd be all fun and games till you looked at him wrong. Then you'd get the cement boots.

[Hydrogen]

I don't think I'd like partying with Stalin. It'd be all fun and games till you looked at him wrong. Then you'd get the cement boots.

Doesn't sound like a very fun party to me.

[zpoy]

A, him speeding has nothing to do with his income. Making someone who makes more money pay more is rediculous. Just because he is succesful economically doesn't mean he should be penalized.

[nox]

A

[Hydrogen]

What is A?

[ShadowLink64]

What is A?

The choice that they picked. Either A or B.

As for the Communist "party"... it sure doesn't look that fun. I'm not going.

[Voltron]

C.

[Melchoire]

"A" is obviously more fair because they both committed the same crime. What if they both committed murder then what?

PS: Castro is da shit!

C.

phail!

Edited by FlashGM, 18 April 2008 - 06:35 PM.

[Tim]

I didn't get invited.

[Alex]

Why A?
Thats not equal punishment under the law.
$100 to someone who makes $2000 dollars a month is a lot. He probably wont be speeding again.
$100 to someone who makes $50,000 dollars a month is nothing. You think thats really punishment for him? Who would be more likely to speed again?

Edited by Alex, 18 April 2008 - 06:38 PM.

[Tim]

It's the same crime, it deserves the same punishment. Simple as, really.

[Alex]

It's the same crime, it deserves the same punishment. Simple as, really.

But its not the same punishment...
Are you saying someone who makes $50,000 a month receives the same amount of punishment as someone who makes $2000 a month when each is fined $100?
No, its not the same at all. To someone making $50,000 a month, $100 is not punishment at all.

Edited by Alex, 18 April 2008 - 06:44 PM.

[Melchoire]

But its not the same punishment...
Are you saying someone who makes $50,000 a month receives the same amount of punishment as someone who makes $2000 a month when each is fined $100?
No, its not the same at all. To someone making $50,000 a month, $100 is not punishment at all.

That's democracy, it may seem unfair but that's the way it and that's the way it always will be. I think it's totally fair, like I said before what if they both committed murder?

[Alex]

That's democracy, it may seem unfair but that's the way it and that's the way it always will be. I think it's totally fair, like I said before what if they both committed murder?

What does it have to do with democracy....
We're not talking about murder, we're talking about money, financial punishment, not prison terms.

Edited by Alex, 18 April 2008 - 06:49 PM.

[Melchoire]

What does it have to do with democracy....
We're not talking about murder, we're talking about money, financial punishment, not prison terms.

Democracy is essentially equality before the law, equal crimes call for equal punishments no matter the person's financial status.

Edited by FlashGM, 18 April 2008 - 06:52 PM.

[SupermanFTM]

That's actually a really tough one... I'm trying not to be bias because I am rather well off and my first choice was A... but after thinking about it... since speeding fines are a form of PUNISHMENT in order for it to fulfill it's role it has to be something that will change the person's view of committing that offense. As such a percent of income would work better than a set fine amount like $100 to both. The thing is, although it is different punishment for the same crime, the fact that it's a punishment for not adhering to the law kind of restricts the right to a complete democratic system and works instead as a preventative measure as it is meant to. Thus, B seems to be the better choice now. Simply because it's something neither driver should be doing in the first place and it's not in accordance with the government they'd like to use as cover to lessen their fine.

[Alex]

Democracy is essentially equality before the law, equal crimes call for equal punishments no matter the person's financial status.

No...democracy is a form of government where citizens have power... lets keep that out, we're just talking about this incident.
No one still has addressed my point that $100 for poor person and $100 for a rich person does not have the same power in punishing so then its not equal punishment.

Edit: ok I see some people agree finally

Edited by Alex, 18 April 2008 - 06:58 PM.

[Melchoire]

Let's be rational here. A is not the same in terms of punishment. Think of it this way. The poor guy is getting charged about 40% of his income while the rich guy is probably getting charged less then 1% of his income. As you can see, it's not the same punishment. The poor guy can get 2 tickets and get fined the majority of his paycheck while the rich man can get 20 tickets and still have over 80% of his paycheck left.

Simple logic always prevails

But anyways, in a democracy such as the U.S, B would never fly because it would immediately be taken to court as most likely discrimination.

thank you =P

No...democracy is a form of government where citizens have power... lets keep that out, we're just talking about this incident.
No one still has addressed my point that $100 for poor person and $100 for a rich person does not have the same power in punishing so then its not equal punishment.

I'm just broadening the meaning. The fact that it will not have the same effect on the persons is pure speculation. For all you know the rich person does learn his lesson because he knows the value of money and how hard it is to earn it. <- probably how he got rich in the first place.

[Tim]

Let's be rational here. A is not the same in terms of punishment. Think of it this way. The poor guy is getting charged about 40% of his income while the rich guy is probably getting charged less then 1% of his income. As you can see, it's not the same punishment. The poor guy can get 2 tickets and get fined the majority of his paycheck while the rich man can get 20 tickets and still have over 80% of his paycheck left.

Simple logic always prevails

But anyways, in a democracy such as the U.S, B would never fly because it would immediately be taken to court as most likely discrimination.

Okay, the numbers convinced me. Guess it's not a good night of debating for me . I still think that "same crime, same punishment" is the most reasonable way to handle things, but I can see why it should be different in that situation.

Edited by Timothy!, 18 April 2008 - 07:02 PM.

[Alex]

The fact that it will not have the same effect on the persons is pure speculation. For all you know the rich person does learn his lesson because he knows the value of money and how hard it is to earn it. <- probably how he got rich in the first place.

I don't know what world you live in.

And again, democracy has little to do with this. yes this would get turned down in America, but because of how American culture currently is, nothing to do with it being a democracy. Something like this could still pass in a democratic state.

Edited by Alex, 18 April 2008 - 07:04 PM.

[Amagius]

It sounds like most people are confused on what speeding penalties are meant to be. They are meant to be a deterrent. As such, B is the much more sound choice, at least in the vacuum. But, an added layer of bureaucracy becomes necessary just to give out a traffic ticket. I'd pass.

The murder analogy is quite flawed, in that, if you murder someone, time or life is being taken. Time and life are subjects that, even though one person may use their's differently, are constant among everyone.

[Melchoire]

I don't know what world you live in.

And again, democracy has little to do with this. yes this would get turned down in America, but because of how American culture currently is, nothing to do with it being a democracy. Something like this could still pass in a democratic state.

And again I was just broadening the meaning of democracy because in most democratic countries everyone is equal in front of the law. I'll have you know earning money isn't easy at all, at least it used to be difficult. If you're saying the rich may not be deterred by a $100 fine, that's just speculation, you don't know for sure.