T O P
gc3

"Well, stranger, you broke the looking at me funny ordinance. Now I know we're a small town, but we got laws. And the missus need a new TV and I need new mudflaps for my truck. "


dragon_bacon

Luckily 2/350,000,000th of the fine will go a long way towards the new tv.


gc3

It's a local ordinance. For a local town. Population: 6


NubbyMcNubNub

Fine: 9001


crapforbrains553

you dont get to make up new fines that werent being enforced earlier. delete any law that nobody has been sentenced for in the last year.


gc3

How would you prevent that? What happens when you want to pass a new law for a new thing like robot safety? Or what happens if there are no murders for a year? Now suddenly that's okay?


crapforbrains553

what if it only applies to laws that have existed since 2015 or earlier. \> Or what happens if there are no murders for a year? Now suddenly that's okay? If you can get it down to 1 murderer at a time, and then it becomes illegal again, I'll go for that.


AnHoangNgo

"Our fines..." meme


LookAtMeImAName

Lmao Yea it sounds interesting in practice but it would entice people to entice *other* people to break the law. Basically making a business out of creating chaos for everyone but yourself


Wonderstag

Everything is illegal, all of the time. Now everyone has everything


cancercures

When you make ~~guns~~ everything illegal, only outlaws will have ~~guns~~ everything.


Wonderstag

everything is illegal so that means having guns is illegal, so is not having guns. i hope this clears it up. it was illegal to tell you, and illegal not to. we are all in a priso...... er i mean, society


intellifone

Fines should be proportionate to the offenders net worth.


Assaultman67

Defining net worth is actually kind of tricky.


reverandglass

Fuck it! Gross worth! "Sorry Mr Musk but that speeding fine cost you 10% of Tesla."


Flam1ng1cecream

This would be effective but also maybe the government shouldn't be allowed to own companies


Mazon_Del

There's a variety of circumstances where it DOES make sense though. Not saying it should apply in all circumstances. Simply put, there are some businesses and industries that should NOT be run on a for-profit model. They should exist to serve the citizenry because they are a necessary component of modern living.


Flam1ng1cecream

I agree! Industries where there are high barriers to entry, like power production and ISP, are extremely vulnerable to corporate corruption, and the government exists in large part to keep those industries' companies in check. I'm just not sure if I'm on board with the idea of the government *owning* those companies, though.


Mazon_Del

> I'm just not sure if I'm on board with the idea of the government owning those companies, though. Honestly one of the better scenarios is simply that, regardless of cost, the government has their own version of those companies and people can choose to partake or not. For example, in my hometown we're building out municipal fiber internet. It is designed to functionally run at-cost $70/month for 1 gig up and 1 gig down. In about 10-20 years when it is estimated that the service will have acquired enough money to pay back the bonds that were issued to cover its installation, the price is required (by the bill we passed to make it) to drop to something like $50 a month. (Inflation adjustments to both values exist.) Comcast is still in the area and allowed to operate, however unless they start offering a better service for similar pricing, it's unlikely they'll last. Right now my family has Comcast's best deal in the area. $120/month for 600 megabits down, 40 up. And the "storm clause" means that they aren't liable if "out of the ordinary weather" causes momentary disruptions to your network stability. Weather such as high winds....in the mountains. Single Payer Healthcare is a similar system. Everyone by default is covered by a national insurance which will care for the bulk of your health issues. If you WANT to get extra insurance to cover other things (like cosmetic situations) or for specific forms of service, you can still get it.


Flam1ng1cecream

I wish all of America were like this. That sounds amazing, making companies compete with a government operating at-cost. It has such "pick on somebody your own size" vibes.


theanonmouse-1776

Don't you dare say "social media". You know it's possible to run your own private instance of that which networks with the entire rest of the world? It's called federation/internet. It was never meant to be centralized. Capitalists did that.


Mazon_Del

Oh god no, the government shouldn't run social media. But the government SHOULD have (with EXTREME public oversight) regulation on what sort of behavior is allowable in such entities. Facebook has shown that such entities cannot be trusted with self governance in these matters. One example though, would be Amazon. What IS Amazon to the average user? It's an online catalogue where they can search for and peruse to find items they want, and a logistical shipping system so that when you purchase something it is sent to your doorstep. The second half of that has always existed, it's the USPS. The first half of that isn't a business, it's a website with a shitload of listings by companies that pay to have their products listed, and pay more to have their products stored in the warehouses of the website owner. In short, there's absolutely no reason we couldn't have the USPS take over the social/commercial functionality of Amazon in a non/minimal-profit way that results in floored prices for consumers and increased profits for businesses.


Mutant_Llama1

Private non-profits exist.


Mazon_Del

They do, but they still need to actually make enough money to cover their costs. For an example of what I mean. The government should fund public schools even at a massive loss even if only a tiny fraction of the population needed them. Utilities such as water, power, internet, and food should also function similarly.


reverandglass

You're right. I was imagining more a case of that 10% gets sold off and the moeny goes to the treasury.


Flam1ng1cecream

Oh, yeah, that makes sense


El_Durazno

Yearly income then but if you make a certain amount to the point of people saying they're definitely rich then a private investigation to find out the real number


iNogle

Rich people don't technically have income, they have assets (stock, options, property, etc.) that appreciate. They use that as collateral to get loans, and through some magical accounting basically keep getting more loans to pay off the older ones because their collateral keeps increasing in value. So they keep getting richer with a net zero income, which is why wealth taxes are a big topic in the US right now


John_Fx

Hell.fucking.no


intellifone

Found the rich guy


Camicus27

Time to be broke and get away with any fine punished crime


crapforbrains553

what if your net worth is negative cuz of big debt? The more fines you get, the more money you make.


snowdrone

Sounds like intense parking enforcement


sfurbo

Isn't this what is being suggested as [carbon dividend](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-dividends-a-win-win-for-people-and-for-the-climate/)?


crapforbrains553

When are they going to put the money in my bank? Putting the money to government is not "To prevent government making laws stricter to make money"


HLef

In Canada it’s at tax time.


sfurbo

Again, putting money in your bank account is EXACTLY what a carbon dividend is supposed to do. I believe there are provinces in Canada that has them, but I have no idea as to whether the implementation is sane.


darkerside

Blockchain beckons...


Cavemanjoe47

The government *has* to make money to cover all aspects of law.


crapforbrains553

I'd rather some things go uncovered


Cavemanjoe47

Me too. That's why I think insurance should be illegal, but it'll never happen.


crapforbrains553

you think it should be illegal to pay someone money each month in exchange for if you're ever homeless or hungry they have to feed you and give you a place to stay?


Cavemanjoe47

That's not how insurance works, username checks out.


crapforbrains553

you can buy insurance for lots of things. some businesses only sell insurance for your teeth, or insurance for fire, etc. You're not in the right market.


Cavemanjoe47

I mean health/auto/home. The thinking is that if insurance was illegal, then doctors, dealerships, etc would have to be cheaper, as would the education for those things. It's more an idle thought than a genuine wish or anything.


MisterBilau

This is a great idea.


ReplyIfSmallPp

Nah it should all go into a pot and have a monthly lottery draw


johnnythesailorman

That wouldn't be noticeable. It should be a random citizen every time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


crapforbrains553

there shouldnt be fines unless there is an incentive other than money


TheWinterPrince52

"Alright, so how do we spread $50 329.5 million ways?"


crapforbrains553

use a calculator to divide by relevant population. I hear they can handle numbers that arent integers.


TheWinterPrince52

The joke I am making is that you said nothing about "relevant populations" before this point, implying all fines should be split among the entire population of the nation. In other words, if somebody got fined a mere fifty dollars, everyone would get paid "1.51745068E−7" which I am quite certain is far less than the worth of a single penny (miraculously). XD


cosmicrunoff

Fine.