Author Topic: "Only in Finland".... (Read 7721 times)

Frogm4n · « **Reply #105 on:** February 11, 2004, 09:58:58 AM »

You see in other countrys they dont pay the cops on how many tickets they write funked. (they do here in alot of places). Finlands ticketing system is one of the fairest in the world.

Is it really fair to fine someone who makes 20k a year 300 bucks a speeding ticket and only charge 300 bucks to someone who makes 12mill. What is the incentive for the guy who makes 12mill a year to not break the law? M. Jacksons bail should have been based on his wealth.

cpxxx · « **Reply #106 on:** February 11, 2004, 10:42:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ra
No, it is an expense, and in fact an optional expense. Very different from a tax.

ra

Everyone needs medical treatment at some time. Hardly optional.

It's only optional if you can afford the bills without insurance and only optional if you can get medical treatment because tax money is used to provide medical care.

Kieran · « **Reply #107 on:** February 11, 2004, 10:58:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Frogm4n
You see in other countrys they dont pay the cops on how many tickets they write funked. (they do here in alot of places). Finlands ticketing system is one of the fairest in the world.

Is it really fair to fine someone who makes 20k a year 300 bucks a speeding ticket and only charge 300 bucks to someone who makes 12mill. What is the incentive for the guy who makes 12mill a year to not break the law? M. Jacksons bail should have been based on his wealth.

Don't kid yourself... of course the department receives more money for operation when the state takes in more money from higher-dollar tickets. It is a potential cash cow for the state. Whether or not the policeman receives direct compensation for the higher-dollar ticket, he will receive pressure to hit a quota (as part of a job performance rating), and may very well be rated on the level of offender most commonly ticketed. This is all hypothetical of course (for Finland), but the possibility certainly must have occurred to you... didn't it?

Frogm4n · « **Reply #108 on:** February 11, 2004, 11:02:51 AM »

your confusing on how we run our police departments compared to finland. I dont think something like this would work in america unless we change the way we run and fund our police stations. which will never happen.

Kieran · « **Reply #109 on:** February 11, 2004, 11:32:09 AM »

You're certainly not suggesting the monies taken from highway fines don't help fund police in Finland, are you?

Frogm4n · « **Reply #110 on:** February 11, 2004, 11:33:20 AM »

I am suggesting that the cops over there have no incentive to write tickets.

Kieran · « **Reply #111 on:** February 11, 2004, 12:51:38 PM »

Of course they would- how are they evaluated for their work? If you are a traffic cop, it is only fair to look at how many tickets you write compared to a set standard. If you don't write enough tickets, is it because you are sitting on your can eating doughnuts? In addition, there can be no question the state would become dependent on traffic violation revenue, especially in the monetary amounts discussed. What is the yearly wage for one cop? That reported ticket probably paid for 2-3 cops all by itself.

It very obviously matters. There certainly is an incentive.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #112 on:** February 11, 2004, 12:57:24 PM »

Frogman we have 2 cops in the family, neither of them are paid by the ticket. Never heard of such a thing.
The problem is that the government as a whole (including police) benefits from ticket revenues, and governments tend to evolve to milk revenue sources as much as they can. Unless you completely decouple the organization funding the police from the organization recieving the ticket revenues, you will see this effect.

What's the most effective department on any college campus? The parking nazis.
If the school owes you money you are entitled to, good luck getting it, a huge pain in the ass. But if you owe them money, they will damn sure track you down and extract it from you. Amazing that U of Illinois could never get any correspondence to my correct address, but when I had unpaid parking tickets, they managed to track me down even though I hadn't notified them of an address change.

-MZ- · « **Reply #113 on:** February 11, 2004, 01:49:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
I was hoping you'd use Janet Jacksons situation where she broke the law, $27,000 fine. Drop in the bucket!

Wrong (as usual for you).

They have no authority to fine her for that, she didn't break any federal laws.

-MZ- · « **Reply #114 on:** February 11, 2004, 01:51:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
The problem is that the government as a whole (including police) benefits from ticket revenues, and governments tend to evolve to milk revenue sources as much as they can. Unless you completely decouple the organization funding the police from the organization recieving the ticket revenues, you will see this effect.

That's why California has the 'basic speed law' that takes most authority away from local jurisdictions in setting speed limits.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #115 on:** February 11, 2004, 01:51:50 PM »

As said earlier, in finland the rich guy can always choose jailtime (which will be _exactly_ similar in length with the poor guy)

Instead he will get a government housing and 3 meals a day untill he has served the time.

So in the end the people are equal in front of the law. They have the absolute freedom to choose if they'll buy their way out or not. And the price is calculated as a percentage of their annual income.

Weight on the word percentage.

Many people quote on the 'value' of the rich. How they benefit the society more than the poor guy.. They forget a scenario.

What if you're Joe Millionaire who inherits $50mil? You get cash for free even though u used to drive a bulldozer.

How does he benefit the society more than a regular bulldozer jock? He's the same guy, only now he can afford to do what he wants, breaking the law included, unless the penalty is proportional to his real wealth.

He can always do the time if he thinks he needs the buck.

//edit

Or you can pull Mr. Rytsola stunt who hired a lawyer and an accountant to prove his true income droped to zero from, what, $20mil? Cayman islands, anyone? Therefore paying less than 5% of the original fee.

miko2d · « **Reply #116 on:** February 11, 2004, 02:01:37 PM »

Siaf__csf: What if you're Joe Millionaire who inherits $50mil? You get cash for free even though u used to drive a bulldozer.

His parent earned that $50mil by providing goods or services of equal of greater value to his customers in voluntary exchange - unless he was a criminal or linked to the government. That $50 million is his property and he can dispose of it any way he wants to - even give it to his child. The child may not have earned that property personally but the property was certainly earned - earned by that family though it could have been bequeted to anyone as legitimately.

miko

Kieran · « **Reply #117 on:** February 11, 2004, 02:06:14 PM »

The deal is, if Finland truly wanted to stop traffic violators, they would make their penalties more in the form of losing your license quicker. What you have in Finland is state sponsored extortion.

straffo · « **Reply #118 on:** February 11, 2004, 02:10:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kieran
The deal is, if Finland truly wanted to stop traffic violators, they would make their penalties more in the form of losing your license quicker

But how will the Finn be competitive in WRC ?

hu ?

That's a good question no ?

Kieran · « **Reply #119 on:** February 11, 2004, 02:23:41 PM »

To be honest, I really don't care crap about Finnish laws. If the people are happy with 'em, good. I was goofing on some guys who ordinarily get their jollies dissecting American politics and domestic policy. Quite fun to see them get their panties in a wad defending their traffic laws, ridiculous as they are.