Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#31

Post by robmcm »

gambiting wrote: post #25
aryehof wrote: post #14

One can surely argue that for an increasingly large proportion of the public, the level of monetary punishment does not provide any deterrent from breaking rules. Maybe I am imagining it, but (anecdotally) I tend to see mainly expensive cars parked illegally in handicapped spots. Income proportional fines seems to me like a fair way to apply a monetary deterrent to people that now get meaningless (to them) fines.

But is it really? 10% of your income if you make $500 a month is a LOT, because it can make a difference between being able to afford rent/food or not. But 10% of your income if you make 10 million is obviously huge, but is it going to have any impact on your lifestyle? No. I love how UK does it - the fines are relatively small, but your insurance rates can go up so much you can pay a small fortune over next 3 years…

Better still for some fines you are forced, or can opt (as opposed to larger fine) to go on a speed awareness course.

After all the point is to make people drive safely, not make money for the state.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#32

Post by markvdb »

ars wrote: post #10

Simple solution for the rich: Hire someone to drive for you, cover any fines, then rotate them when they get too many tickets (and a suspension risk). And actually, with the flat fines that currently exist do any rich people do this right now? http://xkcd.com/1494/

What happens in Belgium is the actual driver claiming it was their Polish/eastern European employee/acquaintance/... driving. This self-declared driver, gets something in return from the actual driver. The fine gets sent to Poland/whatever, and never arrives because of lack of communication between the national police services. The driver walks away free.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#33

Post by zurn »

tempestn wrote: post #28

One unintended consequence of this would presumably be that many more traffic tickets would be contested in court. For anything more than $1-2k, it would likely be worthwhile to hire a lawyer to help fight the ticket. Once you got nearer 5 figures, it certainly would be.

The percentage of speeding tickets written to people with huge incomes is low, so I doubt it. And taxpayers stand to gain the large fine, so the court time pays for itself.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#34

Post by zurn »

gambiting wrote: post #25
aryehof wrote: post #14

One can surely argue that for an increasingly large proportion of the public, the level of monetary punishment does not provide any deterrent from breaking rules. Maybe I am imagining it, but (anecdotally) I tend to see mainly expensive cars parked illegally in handicapped spots. Income proportional fines seems to me like a fair way to apply a monetary deterrent to people that now get meaningless (to them) fines.

But is it really? 10% of your income if you make $500 a month is a LOT, because it can make a difference between being able to afford rent/food or not. But 10% of your income if you make 10 million is obviously huge, but is it going to have any impact on your lifestyle? No. I love how UK does it - the fines are relatively small, but your insurance rates can go up so much you can pay a small fortune over next 3 years…

Yes, 10% of income would be unfair to low earners. That's why, like the article explained, the system is based on disposable income. Precise formula is described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine#Finland

For big earners it still hurts, as you can read from the article (search for rhinos).

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#35

Post by onion2k »

gambiting wrote: post #25
aryehof wrote: post #14

One can surely argue that for an increasingly large proportion of the public, the level of monetary punishment does not provide any deterrent from breaking rules. Maybe I am imagining it, but (anecdotally) I tend to see mainly expensive cars parked illegally in handicapped spots. Income proportional fines seems to me like a fair way to apply a monetary deterrent to people that now get meaningless (to them) fines.

But is it really? 10% of your income if you make $500 a month is a LOT, because it can make a difference between being able to afford rent/food or not. But 10% of your income if you make 10 million is obviously huge, but is it going to have any impact on your lifestyle? No. I love how UK does it - the fines are relatively small, but your insurance rates can go up so much you can pay a small fortune over next 3 years…

You get a 50 pound speeding fine,but your insurance goes up by a few hundred for years. It really really hurts.

Not if you make 10 million.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#36

Post by hueving »

zurn wrote: post #33
tempestn wrote: post #28

One unintended consequence of this would presumably be that many more traffic tickets would be contested in court. For anything more than $1-2k, it would likely be worthwhile to hire a lawyer to help fight the ticket. Once you got nearer 5 figures, it certainly would be.

The percentage of speeding tickets written to people with huge incomes is low, so I doubt it. And taxpayers stand to gain the large fine, so the court time pays for itself.

The court time only pays for itself if the tickets bring in enough money to cover the salaries of the court employees that have to be there to handle the burst of cases it would result in.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#37

Post by Normati »

aryehof wrote: post #14

One can surely argue that for an increasingly large proportion of the public, the level of monetary punishment does not provide any deterrent from breaking rules. Maybe I am imagining it, but (anecdotally) I tend to see mainly expensive cars parked illegally in handicapped spots. Income proportional fines seems to me like a fair way to apply a monetary deterrent to people that now get meaningless (to them) fines.

I wonder if perhaps it's a good thing that rich people can pay to use handicapped spots. We could just think of them as "priority parking", and the regular priority parking ticket costs $x while handicapped people get a coupon entitling them to free access. After all, the intention isn't to prevent healthy people using them, it's to prevent them becoming unavailable - a gaggle of handicap convention attendees would cause more trouble than an occasional CEO buying his own groceries.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#38

Post by sago »

robmcm wrote: post #31
gambiting wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it really? 10% of your income if you make $500 a month is a LOT, because it can make a difference between being able to afford rent/food or not. But 10% of your income if you make 10 million is obviously huge, but is it going to have any impact on your lifestyle? No. I love how UK does it - the fines are relatively small, but your insurance rates can go up so much you can pay a small fortune over next 3 years…

Better still for some fines you are forced, or can opt (as opposed to larger fine) to go on a speed awareness course. After all the point is to make people drive safely, not make money for the state.

Except that you have to pay for the course. And the cost is the same as the ticket. The only difference is you don't get the endorsements on your license.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#39

Post by zurn »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #26
totony wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a fine of 103,000$, I'd assume the person would be willing to pay a ton of good lawyers to try and fail the ticket. It would probably discourage wealthy people to drive fast, but the price in trial/lawyers would probably be too high for the police department for it to be feasible (also, if the ticket lacks proofs, I assume the defendant could file a suit against the departement?).

Well this of course shows how things might work in one country but not in another, for example in some countries if you fight and lose you can be ordered to pay the opposing counsel. That would nix that strategy if the Fins have such a system in place.

Yep, "loser pays" is the rule in Europe including Finland.

There are some exceptions (court can decide that each side pays their own way, or decide the winner can only reclaim a reasonable amount considering the position of the loser) but the frivolous speeding ticket challenge would not be one of them.

Re: Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

#40

Post by colin_jack »

Normati wrote: post #37
aryehof wrote: post #14

One can surely argue that for an increasingly large proportion of the public, the level of monetary punishment does not provide any deterrent from breaking rules. Maybe I am imagining it, but (anecdotally) I tend to see mainly expensive cars parked illegally in handicapped spots. Income proportional fines seems to me like a fair way to apply a monetary deterrent to people that now get meaningless (to them) fines.

I wonder if perhaps it's a good thing that rich people can pay to use handicapped spots. We could just think of them as "priority parking", and the regular priority parking ticket costs $x while handicapped people get a coupon entitling them to free access. After all, the intention isn't to prevent healthy people using them, it's to prevent them becoming unavailable - a gaggle of handicap convention attendees would c…

Some disabled people rely on access to these spaces, meaning if the spaces are full they can't do their shopping and have to go home.
Post reply on HN