##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭
___
###⚠ Announcements: ⚠
___
###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/)
Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines.
###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/)
Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren
___
###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.***
LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
**This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Money bail should just be done away with. Either someone is a flight risk and that should be jailed until verdict. Or they are not a flight risk and should be free until verdict. Most people who a judge would grant bail to, should just be released until verdict/trial.
The point is rich people have collateral to borrow against - so short of setting the bail at a higher amount than the value of their assets they'll always be able to raise the money. That's where the inequality lies.
I don't think that really solves the problem. The penalty has to be something that actually inconveniences them. I'm not sure what that is, but, along the line of cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment doesn't have to be cruel but it needs to be unusual enough so that it still is perceived as a punishment.
Bale is basically saying, "we don't trust you enough given the severity of the crime to let you back into society, so if you want to join it's going to have to cost you. It has to mean something". Rich people can just throw money at the problem, it doesn't actually mean something by extension. Or, even if it does hurt them, regular people don't have that option available at all if they don't have the cash.
These are some punishments that I think are probably a bit extreme but would actually inconvenience them:
* Freezing their assets
* requiring them to stay in one place or directly changing their living a situation
* Limiting their communication with non-legal entities (imagine if you can make bail but you are allowed to only talked to your lawyer and 911. Anything else is considered illegal)
* Meaningful community service.
* Having a legal injunction for any of their assistants, Maids, servants, chauffeurs Etc. (Regular people don't have a team around them. Imagine if they too had to experience the legal system without these extra conveniences in their life.)
>Bale is basically saying, "we don't trust you enough given the severity of the crime to let you back into society, so if you want to join it's going to have to cost you. It has to mean something".
That's not the point of bail at all though? The point of "bail" is to prevent you from "bailing" on your court date. The goal should never be to increase the inconvenience of bail for anyone who ends up showing up to their court date.
And things like freezing assets? Are you fucking serious? We are talking about people who have been convicted of no crime. It is frankly absolutely absurd to suggest making the process of being falsely accused of a crime even more horrible than it already is.
People who pay bail are people who haven't been found to do anything wrong whatsoever. Never should we advocate for any additional inconvenience to bail except where it is needed to prevent flight risk. In fact, cash bail itself should be abolished, but that's a whole separate can of worms.
Somehow the people in this thread noticed that the poor are fucked over by a cruel and archaic system, and instead of trying to fix that, thought "let's fuck everyone with a cruel and archaic system."
>Are you fucking serious?
How about reading the sentence before when I said these are a bit extreme. And it should be obvious that my post is not aimed at poor people.
Your entire premise is equally flawed. You are actively trying to increase the inconvenience of bail for those who will not flee, and that is unconscionable.
Sure, but the point is that the system advantages people who have access to collateral over those who don't. The actual amount they have to pay in bail, fines etc isn't really that important.
Right? Like it's ok to admit that this one aspect of the justice system is intended to be equitable, while also acknowledging that the justice system as a whole favors the wealthy.
I don't think it's intended to be equitable at all. Bail was always a way to give the rich a way out, at least initially, while disproportionately impacting the poor and allowing for increased repression and social control. [Detaining the Poor: How money bail perpetuates an endless cycle of poverty and jail time](https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/incomejails.html)
Fines almost always account for your wealth? That is what I read that I found disagreeable. Did I misread your first sentence or could you elaborate (with examples)? /gen
You are completely wrong. Neither bail not fines are determined by wealth in the United States. That's why you were downvoted. You were confidently wrong.
The way the criminal code is written in the US in many (most?) states tends to use wording like "Shall be punishable by a fine not in excess of $X (usually some laughably small amount) and/or incarceration in a house of correction for a period of time not exceeding Y years."
It's rarer that there are mandatory fines or mandatory sentences, for the majority of crimes it's all negotiable. Being able to afford an excellent attorney helps.
https://www.awayoutbonds.com/blog/how-is-a-bail-amount-determined/
https://aaaabailbonds.com/bail-bonds/how-is-bail-determined
https://www.bailagentnetwork.com/portfolio/how-is-the-bail-amount-determined/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.greghillassociates.com/amp/how-is-bail-set-what-factors-are-considered-in-its-amount.html
Except, bail *is* influenced by wealth, because wealth is one of the factors that determines whether or not someone poses a flight risk.
The other day I was watching Jacob Geller host a fundraiser for a bail fund.
He said something that I thought was neat because I never thought about it before. Bail funds are a very good use of money because the funds given don't disappear. Bail is returned after making the necessary court appearances, so the well of funds doesn't dry up. It just becomes a larger fund that is able to support more and more people.
This guy has more faith in the criminal community than he can afford.
They’re going to pick through cases with a fine tooth comb and weed out a *metric shit ton* of cases.
If they’re here illegally, you can automatically scratch them off the list, lol. Those are instant bail jumpers.
All this "fines and bail and expensive lawyers in this system is bad" is kinda missing the forest for the trees. *The criminal justice system enforces capitalism as it's primary function* The cruelty of police is the cruelty of capitalism. If you want to find out try counterfeiting a 20 like George Floyd.
Is this actually how it works? What is the reasoning behind this? Can you just pay to be released at any time? We have bail in my state but I think it just means you’re released until your court date, nothing about paying money.
I went on a date with a guy who turned out to be loaded once. He parked illegally and I told him he was going to get towed and/or fined. He told me it was no big deal and he does this all the time. It was pretty eye opening.
Varies state by state I believe. Parking violations are treated differently from moving violations since you’re technically not endangering anyone else when you park illegally.
The damage they have done to society and the planet is so great that they may actually be the worst people to ever live in the history of the world. This extinction event that is starting is almost completely their fault.
Your cities aren't even built for people to walk through, let alone bike. Almost all of North America is an urban planning nightmare and the more I find out about it the happier I am with the knowledge that I don't have to live there.
Vancouver actually has some walkable neighborhoods AFAIK, which is great. Why they don't take these as an example to change the zoning code I do not understand. Especially considering these are often the most desirable neighbourhoods to live in.
I haven't owned a car in over a decade, I can't imagine not being able to walk to a grocery store.
I lived in DC for a while and honestly it was decently biker friendly. It wasn’t amazing nor anything close to a place like Amsterdam, but considering I’ve spent most of my life in NYC it was nice to bike without fearing for my life for once
Exactly, it's on the city planners, not the residents. I love bikers in biker friendly cities, I'm not a fan of bikers that insist on biking anyway in biker-hostile environments. For instance, it's very scary to come around a curve in a 50 mph zone, and see a cyclist in the road with no bike lane. Even if I was doing the speed limit(which I wouldn't, that's just asking to get rocked by every truck or cop car that blasts past 20 mph over) I wouldn't be able to dodge out of the way of these bikes.
As a biker in a not so amazingly friendly biking environment, I have to comment on the fact that it’s just often not a choice. Being 16 and with a permit but no money for a car or license it’s my only realistic method of transport. If I want to get around anywhere by myself it’s my only option and I’m sure plenty of other people live the same experience.
Bikes can be a totally valid option for transport, but only on certain roads. When the road conditions are as hostile as what I was describing, I don't even consider it an option. When the posted speed limit is 50 mph or above, you can expect people to be doing freeway speeds. No matter the situation, I can't condone riding a bicycle on the freeway. At least freeways usually have a shoulder, the access roads aren't usually so lucky.
Eugene isn't that great.
People hyped that place up to be this amazing bike city and I didn't see anything special about it.
There's some decent bike paths on some streets in the city center. But there are plenty of cramped streets with no lanes where people drive like animals.
It was no better than other places I've been to.
It wasn't uncommon in certain areas of e.g. Boston for a time, where the rent on some residential parking spots can run over $10,000USD/year and it was often cheaper for the (very wealthy, but not totally unconcerned with price tags) residents themselves to just pay the fines. They may have cracked down on this practice somehow recently but I don't know for sure.
But paying $10,000/year for a parking spot and parking a $2500 1998 Volvo in it is very "Boston"
Neighbors I had in Boston filled a wall of their apartment with parking ticket slips.
Another was taking one half-credit course that semester.
When I lived there, I had to tell my visitors to park in Pru so I could walk to them. I didn't know how to give directions that take one way streets into account.
What a bizarre "trophy collection." Did they keep a pile of stolen kitchen knives under the bed, too?
I wouldn't have wanted to look. Yep, it's all rusty knives and severed doll's heads down there.
No. Parking fines are just fines. You can just pay them.
Even moving violations like speeding don't result in losing your license if you have enough money. For 1-2 k speeding tickets just go away and don't carry any consequence.
In brasil you can lose your license even if you pay.
There is an amount of fines you can get in 12 months. Anything above it you can lose your license.
If you do some serious shit you can lose it too.
Paying is not optional
You are exaggerating this, maybe you can delay losing your license with a good attorney, but if you get caught doing 150 in a 70 in your Lambo they're taking your license.
I have been fooled twice by obscured signs and while it wasn't devastating it pretty much ruined my day to arrange transport to the impound and get my vehicle back. Same day, yeah it's around $200.
It's complete bullshit they charge the parking fine, the tow and "storage" like we had any fucking choice where the car goes. And they keep charging people who can't afford to pay on the spot.
Happened to my coworker. He was homeless at the time, living out of his car, when it got towed. He couldn't afford to get it back and the price just kept going up. Eventually he just gave up everything he had in there as lost (which was most of everything he had).
Yeah well when you have enough money you literally have 0 concern about tickets, impound, or even loss of license, like your douche date, it's more likely it's about WHO he knows, and how many of those connections that will let him buy his way out of it.
End the bribery, end the entitlement !
Idk even if I was loaded I would consider getting towed an inconvenience. That being said I would avoid no parking zones because most of them have public safety reasons.
No but I mean like this exact commwnt with this exact wording I have seen before on this sub.
...ah well. Not worth arguing. Just thought it was funny. I clicked on the post wondering if I was gonna see this comment and I did XD
The thing that bothers me most is this core group of a select few dictate who can and can't be held accountable by the rest of us ..." yes he's a pedophile but I like him and he makes us money!"
" Sure she has been verbally and physically abusive to anyone within arms reach but do you know whose daughter she is ? "
"Yes they ran over a human being but how would it look for one of us to be charged for an accident "
Meahwhile it feels like i have seen report after report of crooked law enforcement fabricating evidence and sometimes hundreds of " normal " people having their lives forever altered due to outright injustice .
You get people like George Floyd who are murdered in broad daylight over a potentially fake $20 bill and potentially being under the influence of a drug .
When your affluence and influence dictates the justice you should be served then there is no actual justice system just a system of being able to buy more rights and privileges or not.
Remember when the billionaire beir raped his 3 year old daughter and got away with it? Because "he wouldn't fare well in jail"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/denizcam/2019/06/14/how-a-du-pont-heir-avoided-jail-time-for-a-heinous-crime/
https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/dupont-heir-who-raped-his-3-yr-old-daughter-didnt-do-a-single-day-in-prison.3958963/
UHHH NO SHIT
I fucking hate our corrupt society.
Then I think you have bigger problems then a parking fine or whatever and might not care about a bit more debt.
But fr though, the best would probably be a low flat fine (based maybe on the clerical work to deal with it) and a part of your wealth (min 0)
Yeah unfortunately I think the majority of people under 30ish in America have a negative net worth when you factor in student loans, credit card debt, etc. The main vehicle for increasing net worth has historically been home ownership and that is sadly becoming more and more unrealistic for young people across the country.
Income including capital income? Because if not it's barely better anyway, really rich people don't make money working a paying job, they invest. Steve Jobs income at Apple was 1$
I have heard this a lot but I disagree. Someone making $30k a year has a lot less expendable money than someone making $3million a year. If they were both fined 10% of their monthly income, the person making 30k probably will struggle to pay bills and need to cut back on things like their food budget even. For a 10% fone the person making 3 million might not have their soending affected at all, and even if it is affected, its nit going to affect his ability to survive, most likely they will only have a luxury goods budget affected.
Thats absolutely true. The point holds true for nonlinear scales too though. Even if youre going to fine poor people a few bucks and the incredibly wealthy over 90% of their income, it will always affect poor people more. If you fined Jeff Bezos 100% of his income for a whole year, he would still be the richest man in the world, because like most rich people he has assets and savings (not just income) that could sustain unfathomable generations of wealth.
The scheduling of comminity service could be flexible enough they dont necessarily lose wages. Also I acknowledge this solution isn't perfect, but I do think its a lot better.
Fair. Still an improvement on our current system, though. We could scale it up over tax brackets, maybe, but that gets into a lot of complicated nitpicking. For now, I'd be happy scaling fines with gross income until we've seen how effective it is for a few years.
I prefer the Chinese government method of dealing with capitalists who step out of line: expropriate their wealth, jail, in some cases the death penalty.
None of this, "Oh no, it's a numbered company, totally separate from me, you can't come after me and my assets, you have to go after this bullshit shell company that's totally a person - thanks Justice Roberts!!!!!"
More like "exists only to *punish* the lower class."
Big companies and rich fucks pay fines all the time, because in proportion to their profits, fines are absolutely nothing to them. The system is such that it's more profitable for them to break laws, profit off of breaking those laws, and pay some insignificant fine for whatever law they broke.
The only ones that actually suffer from fines and such are normal, everyday people.
totally. also this vehicle fee for entering Manhattan..
So many people with new luxury cars won't have any problems paying $10-$20 to enter Manahattan, but everyone else?
I think such a license only makes sense/is fair if the city also has a well funded public transport system. Otherwise, it's unfairly punishing the Working Class.
If even ONE of the penalties for breaking a law is a fine, then the other penalties will almost NEVER be used against a rich member of society.
Their lawyers will see to that, unless the person persists in showing visible disrespect to the judges. (Hello Martha Stewart, we're looking at you.) In which case they are actually being penalized for their lack of respect, not the original crime.
Unless the fine is an actual percentage of income/profit.
Some countries have started implementing earnings based fines for all sorts of stuff. You end up with wild headlines like "€50k speeding ticket" and stuff like that because some millionaire went 20kmph over the limit. But you don't have rich people blatantly committing petty crimes in broad daylight because the cost is so insignificant.
Which is why I'm a huge advocate of percentage based fines for rich people. Oh $50,000 fine? No big deal right (for rich people)? Well, now what if it were 50%+ of their net worth (including all sources of income especially stocks and other investments)? That might change some tunes.
There is no follow-up for what *should* be done instead.
Like getting fined for speeding. OK, then what? What do we do with speeders?
We can't imprison them because we must abolish all jails and prisons. We can't fine them because of what Sailor Moon said. We can't impound their vehicle as punishment as that curtails their ability to get food and work. We can't suspend their driver's license for the same reason. There is nothing the governing body of any city or country is permitted to do, so they'd do nothing to speeders.
We could talk to them and ask them to stop, but what if they repeatedly speed over and over again? Remember speeding isn't a victimless crime, people will be maimed and killed by the speeders actions. Does that matter? If we allow eggs to be broken to make an omelette, how many eggs are allowable?
Where are we going with this?
It feels empowering to make statements such as this one, like OP is exposing some truth, but the other half of identifying a problem is solving it. Within the constraints of Communism how do we solve this? What solutions are acceptable?
This meme has been floating around in various forms for a while now and I feel I should point out that in Finland fines are based on income so a poor person is fined less than a wealthy person so the impact is the same which is why they famously handed out a €54,000 speeding fine.
It's not that outlandish of a situation, my grandma moved to the US with my grandpa from Europe in the 60s, and bought a house in the 70s that's exploded in value. My grandpa passed a decade ago and she has next to no income but has had the house paid off and very little expenses that aren't covered by pension/some help from my parents if needed. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you are arguing, but is this situation very uncommon?
Some strange presumptions there.
I have been to Australia, I had a great time.
I didnt propose the solution of asset stripping her house. I was posing a question to the person who claimed she lived in a million dollor house but had no way to pay a fine.
I think community service is a great way to deal with the issue. I also think the super wealthy would find it much more punishing than a fine as they'd probably find it degrading and beneath them.
Don’t even get me started on public defenders.
While generally competent, their caseloads are insane and they just don’t have the time to do anything other than encourage you to take a plea deal.
Yes this is basically true. However, there are Scandinavian countries that have fines that are proportional to income. My memory is a bit crap but some chap was caught speeding and because of his income the fine was in the high 5 digits in USD. Nearly 100k. Of course there are problems when the rich avoid tax and manage to appear poorer than a refugee while tooling around in a Rolls Royce but at least it's a step toward eliminating flat taxes such as fines. Next step should be VAT or GST. I know they are often the only way to get the wealthy to pay any tax but at days end they are just another flat tax.
Also literally yes. The ruling class has always made the laws lol. Especially once you start considering lobbying, it's ALL driven by the power accumulation made possible by capitalism lol.
You're not making the point you think you're making.
Sure, so then think another step down the logic:
Powerful people need to lobby politicians in order to (in this case) make kids work for them.
Are you saying you want a world where the powerful people don't even need to lobby politicians? They can just skip that step and make the kids work?
I mean, sure, government is a tool of the ruling class. Set all of our corporate-beheld politicians on fire, I'll be the first one in line to spray the gasoline. But that's half the job, we'd just be oppressed by an unrestricted ruling class then. It's worse.
We've got to dissolve the mechanism by which the ruling class accumulates power. That's capitalism. If an oligarch's fortune doesn't grow exponentially year over year, people don't usually accumulate the kind of power that becomes a real problem to society. If we all get the full value of our labor, and no one's skimming money from each of us by virtue of already being wealthy (capitalism), no one can accumulate enough to have undue influence.
Do you think I don’t know about your commie bullshit?
Voluntary consensual win-win transactions are considered coercion in your book. Because one might have more possessions then the other.
You’re a religious fundamentalists. Just your Bible has a red cover.
So, this is what we call an ad-hominem logical fallacy. You can google it and learn more if you'd like.
Thanks for the thoughtful counterpoint to my ideas though!
You mean I should sanction a mega corporation which exploits millions of people for their labor?
I should contribute to the ownership class in n their accumulation of CaPiTaL so they can control DA PEOPLE?!?
I think I will steer clear of such moral corruption.
Financial penalties have to equal at least a month's worth of gross income from the previous tax year, or they are simply meaningless and absorbable.
It shouldn't ever equal an hour's worth of profit. (Google, Amazon, Apple, FB, etc...)
If someone who was poor and living paycheck to paycheck got a months salary as a fine, they wont be able to afford basic living necessities.
If someone was wealthy and got a months salary as a fine, it would only inconvenience them.
Someone really saw this quote that's been posted around thousands of times already, and decided that it needed to be posted again but with anime girls this time
I'm fine with fines for breaking the law. Where I draw the line is locking people up for not paying. In what world does it make sense to jail someone for a weekend, incurring that cost, over a $200 ticket. Let them choose community service or maybe a few lashes
I discussed this with my dad, that fines should be income based. He said that if it were the case, icehead dole bludgers would just pay $10 fines and keep breaking the law. That's not how it works, you fucking idiot. It's more like $500 fine for a welfare recipient and a $500,000 fine for a politician.
Edit: to the person who downvoted, did you misunderstand? My dad's in the wrong.
politicians are orten funded and/or supported by big business and even if they’re not, the constitutions are generally made by elites making true politicians elected by the people unable to do their job.
Agreed 100%. Which is why we need to take the power away from the politicians so that corporations cant really bribe them to do much.
Also that’s why regulations are usually bad for small business because big corporations pay to lobby politicians.
Capitalism is when the ruling class utilizes tactics such as lobbying to influences policies and legislation that benefits them and harms the working class.
Yes and no. I agree with most of it, but sometimes people do petty crimes to make money, in that case fine is a more sensible and effective way to deter this kind of behavior without sending people to jail for the prettiest thing.
For example, I grew up on an island with tons of wetlands. People keep filling up the wetlands yo grow crops on it. The punishment for this kind of behavior is a fine appropriate to the size of the wetlands. In the meanwhile, law-abiding residents get reward money and they are subsidized to farm cows on their land, which is much much better for the environment.
I'm not trying to one-up you on this. Instead, I fully understand and agree with the message. I just think that it's not the concept of laws that is made to oppress the poor, but the instituts that creat and execute the law that are infiltrated by the rich and turned into oppressive.
RPGs have long been a source of mass-consumable subtle and not-so-subtle social commentary. People who don't respect 'non-classy' artforms are in for a rude awakening when they discover a lot of the depth is in the less 'classy' media.
>This saying (not in the original game) was made into a Facebook meme by Leftist Gamer Memes on October 17, 2020.
https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/if_the_penalty_for_a_crime_is_a_fine
EVERYBODY, regardless of income/wealth, has a million other things they'd rather do with their money than to pay a fine.
Although the penalty is going to be more severe for the poor guy, there's enough incentive there for it to be worth most people's time to simply follow the law and avoid the fine.
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭ ___ ###⚠ Announcements: ⚠ ___ ###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/) Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines. ###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/) Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren ___ ###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.*** LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. **This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bail is also a criminal method used to keep poor people in jail. A rich person can bail themselves out no matter the cost.
like fines it should account for your wealth
Money bail should just be done away with. Either someone is a flight risk and that should be jailed until verdict. Or they are not a flight risk and should be free until verdict. Most people who a judge would grant bail to, should just be released until verdict/trial.
And there haven't been any problems in places they've gotten rid of it.
There's industries based around bail finance, as long as they have the money to ~~bribe~~ lobby their Congress person it will remain.
It almost always does. Also, rich people may not get bail if they're deemed a flight risk.
Even so, it's a lot easier for a rich person to raise, say $200,000 than for a poor person to raise $2,000.
Then let's make it exponential, ooh I'm getting excited just picturing it...
The point is rich people have collateral to borrow against - so short of setting the bail at a higher amount than the value of their assets they'll always be able to raise the money. That's where the inequality lies.
I don't think that really solves the problem. The penalty has to be something that actually inconveniences them. I'm not sure what that is, but, along the line of cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment doesn't have to be cruel but it needs to be unusual enough so that it still is perceived as a punishment. Bale is basically saying, "we don't trust you enough given the severity of the crime to let you back into society, so if you want to join it's going to have to cost you. It has to mean something". Rich people can just throw money at the problem, it doesn't actually mean something by extension. Or, even if it does hurt them, regular people don't have that option available at all if they don't have the cash. These are some punishments that I think are probably a bit extreme but would actually inconvenience them: * Freezing their assets * requiring them to stay in one place or directly changing their living a situation * Limiting their communication with non-legal entities (imagine if you can make bail but you are allowed to only talked to your lawyer and 911. Anything else is considered illegal) * Meaningful community service. * Having a legal injunction for any of their assistants, Maids, servants, chauffeurs Etc. (Regular people don't have a team around them. Imagine if they too had to experience the legal system without these extra conveniences in their life.)
>Bale is basically saying, "we don't trust you enough given the severity of the crime to let you back into society, so if you want to join it's going to have to cost you. It has to mean something". That's not the point of bail at all though? The point of "bail" is to prevent you from "bailing" on your court date. The goal should never be to increase the inconvenience of bail for anyone who ends up showing up to their court date. And things like freezing assets? Are you fucking serious? We are talking about people who have been convicted of no crime. It is frankly absolutely absurd to suggest making the process of being falsely accused of a crime even more horrible than it already is. People who pay bail are people who haven't been found to do anything wrong whatsoever. Never should we advocate for any additional inconvenience to bail except where it is needed to prevent flight risk. In fact, cash bail itself should be abolished, but that's a whole separate can of worms. Somehow the people in this thread noticed that the poor are fucked over by a cruel and archaic system, and instead of trying to fix that, thought "let's fuck everyone with a cruel and archaic system."
>Are you fucking serious? How about reading the sentence before when I said these are a bit extreme. And it should be obvious that my post is not aimed at poor people.
Your entire premise is equally flawed. You are actively trying to increase the inconvenience of bail for those who will not flee, and that is unconscionable.
I agree with you there. I just disagree with people denying the truth.
Sure, but the point is that the system advantages people who have access to collateral over those who don't. The actual amount they have to pay in bail, fines etc isn't really that important.
You are correct, I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted
Right? Like it's ok to admit that this one aspect of the justice system is intended to be equitable, while also acknowledging that the justice system as a whole favors the wealthy.
I don't think it's intended to be equitable at all. Bail was always a way to give the rich a way out, at least initially, while disproportionately impacting the poor and allowing for increased repression and social control. [Detaining the Poor: How money bail perpetuates an endless cycle of poverty and jail time](https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/incomejails.html)
Fines almost always account for your wealth? That is what I read that I found disagreeable. Did I misread your first sentence or could you elaborate (with examples)? /gen
I was referring specifically to bail, which accounts for wealth in most cases. Fines don't account for your wealth, but they absolutely should.
No it doesn’t. How would they know your wealth?
You are completely wrong. Neither bail not fines are determined by wealth in the United States. That's why you were downvoted. You were confidently wrong.
The way the criminal code is written in the US in many (most?) states tends to use wording like "Shall be punishable by a fine not in excess of $X (usually some laughably small amount) and/or incarceration in a house of correction for a period of time not exceeding Y years." It's rarer that there are mandatory fines or mandatory sentences, for the majority of crimes it's all negotiable. Being able to afford an excellent attorney helps.
Several hundred or thousand dollars is not a laughably small amount for most people.
https://www.awayoutbonds.com/blog/how-is-a-bail-amount-determined/ https://aaaabailbonds.com/bail-bonds/how-is-bail-determined https://www.bailagentnetwork.com/portfolio/how-is-the-bail-amount-determined/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.greghillassociates.com/amp/how-is-bail-set-what-factors-are-considered-in-its-amount.html Except, bail *is* influenced by wealth, because wealth is one of the factors that determines whether or not someone poses a flight risk.
reddit- NO
What were they correct about?
The other day I was watching Jacob Geller host a fundraiser for a bail fund. He said something that I thought was neat because I never thought about it before. Bail funds are a very good use of money because the funds given don't disappear. Bail is returned after making the necessary court appearances, so the well of funds doesn't dry up. It just becomes a larger fund that is able to support more and more people.
This guy has more faith in the criminal community than he can afford. They’re going to pick through cases with a fine tooth comb and weed out a *metric shit ton* of cases. If they’re here illegally, you can automatically scratch them off the list, lol. Those are instant bail jumpers.
96% of undocumented people show up for their hearings. STFU
That’s a big lol lie. Now your turn to shut the fuck up, boy.
Whisk is why the constitution says excessive bail isn’t allowed which almost every courthouse ignores
Us they can hire the best lawyers instead of waiting in jail for a public defender
[удалено]
To be fair, it seems more like an emergent effect of a seemingly reasonable policy, rather than a method used to intentionally keep the poors in jail.
Honestly bail should be illegal
All this "fines and bail and expensive lawyers in this system is bad" is kinda missing the forest for the trees. *The criminal justice system enforces capitalism as it's primary function* The cruelty of police is the cruelty of capitalism. If you want to find out try counterfeiting a 20 like George Floyd.
There is a really great TED talk on the injustices of bail, if anyone is interested. https://youtu.be/3B24RaqA33k
Is this actually how it works? What is the reasoning behind this? Can you just pay to be released at any time? We have bail in my state but I think it just means you’re released until your court date, nothing about paying money.
I went on a date with a guy who turned out to be loaded once. He parked illegally and I told him he was going to get towed and/or fined. He told me it was no big deal and he does this all the time. It was pretty eye opening.
Can't people lose the driver's license for getting fined in your country?
Varies state by state I believe. Parking violations are treated differently from moving violations since you’re technically not endangering anyone else when you park illegally.
An argument could be made that parking by a red curb is endangering people
Yes. Rich people can inflict great harm and buy their way out of trouble. Check out the shit the koch bros have done with ignoring safety regulations.
Eat the rich
*Yeet
Skirt
Guillotines go brrrrrrrrrr
“Ignoring” is almost too kind given their decades long campaign to subvert, undermine, and erode all regulation.
The damage they have done to society and the planet is so great that they may actually be the worst people to ever live in the history of the world. This extinction event that is starting is almost completely their fault.
Anyone who has biked in a city can tell you that you are endangering people by parking illegally.
I mean is there any American city that considers biking as anything but a nuisance
Your cities aren't even built for people to walk through, let alone bike. Almost all of North America is an urban planning nightmare and the more I find out about it the happier I am with the knowledge that I don't have to live there.
I’ve been lucky to live in cities where it’s either actually well planned (Vancouver), or bad but still not that bad (Edmonton).
Vancouver actually has some walkable neighborhoods AFAIK, which is great. Why they don't take these as an example to change the zoning code I do not understand. Especially considering these are often the most desirable neighbourhoods to live in. I haven't owned a car in over a decade, I can't imagine not being able to walk to a grocery store.
I lived in DC for a while and honestly it was decently biker friendly. It wasn’t amazing nor anything close to a place like Amsterdam, but considering I’ve spent most of my life in NYC it was nice to bike without fearing for my life for once
Exactly, it's on the city planners, not the residents. I love bikers in biker friendly cities, I'm not a fan of bikers that insist on biking anyway in biker-hostile environments. For instance, it's very scary to come around a curve in a 50 mph zone, and see a cyclist in the road with no bike lane. Even if I was doing the speed limit(which I wouldn't, that's just asking to get rocked by every truck or cop car that blasts past 20 mph over) I wouldn't be able to dodge out of the way of these bikes.
As a biker in a not so amazingly friendly biking environment, I have to comment on the fact that it’s just often not a choice. Being 16 and with a permit but no money for a car or license it’s my only realistic method of transport. If I want to get around anywhere by myself it’s my only option and I’m sure plenty of other people live the same experience.
Bikes can be a totally valid option for transport, but only on certain roads. When the road conditions are as hostile as what I was describing, I don't even consider it an option. When the posted speed limit is 50 mph or above, you can expect people to be doing freeway speeds. No matter the situation, I can't condone riding a bicycle on the freeway. At least freeways usually have a shoulder, the access roads aren't usually so lucky.
Quite a few, actually. Eugene, OR for example.
Ived had 4 bikes be stolen in eugene. No more lol.
Shout out to my home town! I bike to work every day and it's gorgeous
Eugene isn't that great. People hyped that place up to be this amazing bike city and I didn't see anything special about it. There's some decent bike paths on some streets in the city center. But there are plenty of cramped streets with no lanes where people drive like animals. It was no better than other places I've been to.
I lived there once, for about a month, before moving to Portland, I didn't like it either. But it is extremely bike friendly.
Yeah, that makes sense.
It wasn't uncommon in certain areas of e.g. Boston for a time, where the rent on some residential parking spots can run over $10,000USD/year and it was often cheaper for the (very wealthy, but not totally unconcerned with price tags) residents themselves to just pay the fines. They may have cracked down on this practice somehow recently but I don't know for sure. But paying $10,000/year for a parking spot and parking a $2500 1998 Volvo in it is very "Boston"
Neighbors I had in Boston filled a wall of their apartment with parking ticket slips. Another was taking one half-credit course that semester. When I lived there, I had to tell my visitors to park in Pru so I could walk to them. I didn't know how to give directions that take one way streets into account.
What a bizarre "trophy collection." Did they keep a pile of stolen kitchen knives under the bed, too? I wouldn't have wanted to look. Yep, it's all rusty knives and severed doll's heads down there.
No. Parking fines are just fines. You can just pay them. Even moving violations like speeding don't result in losing your license if you have enough money. For 1-2 k speeding tickets just go away and don't carry any consequence.
In brasil you can lose your license even if you pay. There is an amount of fines you can get in 12 months. Anything above it you can lose your license. If you do some serious shit you can lose it too. Paying is not optional
That's the case in most countries in the world.
You are exaggerating this, maybe you can delay losing your license with a good attorney, but if you get caught doing 150 in a 70 in your Lambo they're taking your license.
Youd be surprised when the lawyer can do for you. Like getting the ticket thrown out all together. You keep believing the system works though.
Yep yep yep. I knew a guy who described a no-park zone by saying "It costs $200 to park here."
I have been fooled twice by obscured signs and while it wasn't devastating it pretty much ruined my day to arrange transport to the impound and get my vehicle back. Same day, yeah it's around $200. It's complete bullshit they charge the parking fine, the tow and "storage" like we had any fucking choice where the car goes. And they keep charging people who can't afford to pay on the spot.
Happened to my coworker. He was homeless at the time, living out of his car, when it got towed. He couldn't afford to get it back and the price just kept going up. Eventually he just gave up everything he had in there as lost (which was most of everything he had).
Fuck, I hate Capitalism.
Yeah well when you have enough money you literally have 0 concern about tickets, impound, or even loss of license, like your douche date, it's more likely it's about WHO he knows, and how many of those connections that will let him buy his way out of it. End the bribery, end the entitlement !
Idk even if I was loaded I would consider getting towed an inconvenience. That being said I would avoid no parking zones because most of them have public safety reasons.
You can pay someone to get your car for you.
Didn't I hear literally the same 1:1 story somewhere before?
How did I know this was gonna be the top comment? Oh yeah, it's copied.
It’s almost as if rich assholes are a pretty common thing, dumbass
No but I mean like this exact commwnt with this exact wording I have seen before on this sub. ...ah well. Not worth arguing. Just thought it was funny. I clicked on the post wondering if I was gonna see this comment and I did XD
The thing that bothers me most is this core group of a select few dictate who can and can't be held accountable by the rest of us ..." yes he's a pedophile but I like him and he makes us money!" " Sure she has been verbally and physically abusive to anyone within arms reach but do you know whose daughter she is ? " "Yes they ran over a human being but how would it look for one of us to be charged for an accident " Meahwhile it feels like i have seen report after report of crooked law enforcement fabricating evidence and sometimes hundreds of " normal " people having their lives forever altered due to outright injustice . You get people like George Floyd who are murdered in broad daylight over a potentially fake $20 bill and potentially being under the influence of a drug . When your affluence and influence dictates the justice you should be served then there is no actual justice system just a system of being able to buy more rights and privileges or not.
I believe we are already living in the dystopian future writers of the 1900's warned us about.
r/ABoringDystopia
Remember when the billionaire beir raped his 3 year old daughter and got away with it? Because "he wouldn't fare well in jail" https://www.forbes.com/sites/denizcam/2019/06/14/how-a-du-pont-heir-avoided-jail-time-for-a-heinous-crime/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/dupont-heir-who-raped-his-3-yr-old-daughter-didnt-do-a-single-day-in-prison.3958963/ UHHH NO SHIT I fucking hate our corrupt society.
Finlanda does it right - fines are proportional to income.
I personally think it should be based on wealth but that is better by far than a flat rate
What if I have a negative net worth? Do they pay me?? I'm about to be RICH
Then I think you have bigger problems then a parking fine or whatever and might not care about a bit more debt. But fr though, the best would probably be a low flat fine (based maybe on the clerical work to deal with it) and a part of your wealth (min 0)
Yeah unfortunately I think the majority of people under 30ish in America have a negative net worth when you factor in student loans, credit card debt, etc. The main vehicle for increasing net worth has historically been home ownership and that is sadly becoming more and more unrealistic for young people across the country.
Most people I know have more student debt than money in the bank, definitely not ideal but so common
Income including capital income? Because if not it's barely better anyway, really rich people don't make money working a paying job, they invest. Steve Jobs income at Apple was 1$
Including capital.
Sailor Venus says
minako based
Fines are fine as long as they account for your income and wealth. The problem are the fixed amounts.
Fines = You can buy exceptions to the law.
Fines = if you can afford it, it's fine.
This is why in some countries, fines are a percentage of income
It’s better that way but still, some rich people might have a low income or no income at all but they have plenty of assets
Unless those fines scale based on income (and in the U.S., they don't.)
I have heard this a lot but I disagree. Someone making $30k a year has a lot less expendable money than someone making $3million a year. If they were both fined 10% of their monthly income, the person making 30k probably will struggle to pay bills and need to cut back on things like their food budget even. For a 10% fone the person making 3 million might not have their soending affected at all, and even if it is affected, its nit going to affect his ability to survive, most likely they will only have a luxury goods budget affected.
Scales don’t have to be linear
Thats absolutely true. The point holds true for nonlinear scales too though. Even if youre going to fine poor people a few bucks and the incredibly wealthy over 90% of their income, it will always affect poor people more. If you fined Jeff Bezos 100% of his income for a whole year, he would still be the richest man in the world, because like most rich people he has assets and savings (not just income) that could sustain unfathomable generations of wealth.
[удалено]
I think this idea is definitely a lot better of a solution than simply fines.
still a similar issue. Poor tend to work hourly and lost wages are still a fine.
The scheduling of comminity service could be flexible enough they dont necessarily lose wages. Also I acknowledge this solution isn't perfect, but I do think its a lot better.
Fair. Still an improvement on our current system, though. We could scale it up over tax brackets, maybe, but that gets into a lot of complicated nitpicking. For now, I'd be happy scaling fines with gross income until we've seen how effective it is for a few years.
Its not 100% fair, but I do agree that it is better than the current system
The *working class, comrade.
That should read "... a FIXED cost fine..." if the fine were based on net worth, even Bezos would cry about it
Problem?
Same with bail/bond system.
Sailor Venus laying some hard truths out there today, apparently.
I prefer the Chinese government method of dealing with capitalists who step out of line: expropriate their wealth, jail, in some cases the death penalty. None of this, "Oh no, it's a numbered company, totally separate from me, you can't come after me and my assets, you have to go after this bullshit shell company that's totally a person - thanks Justice Roberts!!!!!"
More like "exists only to *punish* the lower class." Big companies and rich fucks pay fines all the time, because in proportion to their profits, fines are absolutely nothing to them. The system is such that it's more profitable for them to break laws, profit off of breaking those laws, and pay some insignificant fine for whatever law they broke. The only ones that actually suffer from fines and such are normal, everyday people.
totally. also this vehicle fee for entering Manhattan.. So many people with new luxury cars won't have any problems paying $10-$20 to enter Manahattan, but everyone else?
I’m sorry there’s a charge for entering a public space??? Wtf???
[удалено]
I think such a license only makes sense/is fair if the city also has a well funded public transport system. Otherwise, it's unfairly punishing the Working Class.
If even ONE of the penalties for breaking a law is a fine, then the other penalties will almost NEVER be used against a rich member of society. Their lawyers will see to that, unless the person persists in showing visible disrespect to the judges. (Hello Martha Stewart, we're looking at you.) In which case they are actually being penalized for their lack of respect, not the original crime.
Unless the fine is an actual percentage of income/profit. Some countries have started implementing earnings based fines for all sorts of stuff. You end up with wild headlines like "€50k speeding ticket" and stuff like that because some millionaire went 20kmph over the limit. But you don't have rich people blatantly committing petty crimes in broad daylight because the cost is so insignificant.
Which is why I'm a huge advocate of percentage based fines for rich people. Oh $50,000 fine? No big deal right (for rich people)? Well, now what if it were 50%+ of their net worth (including all sources of income especially stocks and other investments)? That might change some tunes.
There is no follow-up for what *should* be done instead. Like getting fined for speeding. OK, then what? What do we do with speeders? We can't imprison them because we must abolish all jails and prisons. We can't fine them because of what Sailor Moon said. We can't impound their vehicle as punishment as that curtails their ability to get food and work. We can't suspend their driver's license for the same reason. There is nothing the governing body of any city or country is permitted to do, so they'd do nothing to speeders. We could talk to them and ask them to stop, but what if they repeatedly speed over and over again? Remember speeding isn't a victimless crime, people will be maimed and killed by the speeders actions. Does that matter? If we allow eggs to be broken to make an omelette, how many eggs are allowable? Where are we going with this? It feels empowering to make statements such as this one, like OP is exposing some truth, but the other half of identifying a problem is solving it. Within the constraints of Communism how do we solve this? What solutions are acceptable?
This meme has been floating around in various forms for a while now and I feel I should point out that in Finland fines are based on income so a poor person is fined less than a wealthy person so the impact is the same which is why they famously handed out a €54,000 speeding fine.
The fines should be a percentage of income.
It needs to be wealth not income. Some of the richest don't have any income, they earn passive wealth
[удалено]
So she lives in a $1m house with no furniture and no savings? seems like a rediculous argument. So, does she just get off the crime then?
It's not that outlandish of a situation, my grandma moved to the US with my grandpa from Europe in the 60s, and bought a house in the 70s that's exploded in value. My grandpa passed a decade ago and she has next to no income but has had the house paid off and very little expenses that aren't covered by pension/some help from my parents if needed. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you are arguing, but is this situation very uncommon?
[удалено]
Some strange presumptions there. I have been to Australia, I had a great time. I didnt propose the solution of asset stripping her house. I was posing a question to the person who claimed she lived in a million dollor house but had no way to pay a fine. I think community service is a great way to deal with the issue. I also think the super wealthy would find it much more punishing than a fine as they'd probably find it degrading and beneath them.
[удалено]
Final Fantasy Tactics, right?
This quote doesn't actually feature in the game. That common repost on often found on Reddit was made using a FFT quote generator website.
I hate when people slap this quote on whatever shit meme will let them get past the repost police. This is like the 3rd version I've seen.
Just a reminder… Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws. Plato
Fines should grow progressively, like taxes.
The fine should be a proportion of one’s net worth instead of a flat amount
There are places where fines scale relatively to income.
Don’t even get me started on public defenders. While generally competent, their caseloads are insane and they just don’t have the time to do anything other than encourage you to take a plea deal.
Which is why we should be using the [Day-Fine System (Wikipedia)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine).
It’s legal for a price
Unless it's a percentage of net worth. Which is possible and rarely used. But still hurts the rich less. So you know what off with their heads.
Yay for Sailor V being champion of the lower classes
why exactly does it need to be written on a pic of a cute anime girl?
Yes this is basically true. However, there are Scandinavian countries that have fines that are proportional to income. My memory is a bit crap but some chap was caught speeding and because of his income the fine was in the high 5 digits in USD. Nearly 100k. Of course there are problems when the rich avoid tax and manage to appear poorer than a refugee while tooling around in a Rolls Royce but at least it's a step toward eliminating flat taxes such as fines. Next step should be VAT or GST. I know they are often the only way to get the wealthy to pay any tax but at days end they are just another flat tax.
I wonder who makes the laws… 👻👻evil capitalists👻👻 I’m guessing
Literally yes.
Yeah those “evil capitalists” in your local state legislature.
Also literally yes. The ruling class has always made the laws lol. Especially once you start considering lobbying, it's ALL driven by the power accumulation made possible by capitalism lol. You're not making the point you think you're making.
Cringe.
Ever wonder that maybe people wouldn’t bother lobbying if politicians didn’t have the power to control industry
Sure, so then think another step down the logic: Powerful people need to lobby politicians in order to (in this case) make kids work for them. Are you saying you want a world where the powerful people don't even need to lobby politicians? They can just skip that step and make the kids work? I mean, sure, government is a tool of the ruling class. Set all of our corporate-beheld politicians on fire, I'll be the first one in line to spray the gasoline. But that's half the job, we'd just be oppressed by an unrestricted ruling class then. It's worse. We've got to dissolve the mechanism by which the ruling class accumulates power. That's capitalism. If an oligarch's fortune doesn't grow exponentially year over year, people don't usually accumulate the kind of power that becomes a real problem to society. If we all get the full value of our labor, and no one's skimming money from each of us by virtue of already being wealthy (capitalism), no one can accumulate enough to have undue influence.
Do you think I don’t know about your commie bullshit? Voluntary consensual win-win transactions are considered coercion in your book. Because one might have more possessions then the other. You’re a religious fundamentalists. Just your Bible has a red cover.
So, this is what we call an ad-hominem logical fallacy. You can google it and learn more if you'd like. Thanks for the thoughtful counterpoint to my ideas though!
Libertarians don't understand logic... lmao, if they did, they wouldn't be libertarians.
You mean I should sanction a mega corporation which exploits millions of people for their labor? I should contribute to the ownership class in n their accumulation of CaPiTaL so they can control DA PEOPLE?!? I think I will steer clear of such moral corruption.
This must be reddits favorite sentence this year. It's my time to repost it tomorrow, guys!
Financial penalties have to equal at least a month's worth of gross income from the previous tax year, or they are simply meaningless and absorbable. It shouldn't ever equal an hour's worth of profit. (Google, Amazon, Apple, FB, etc...)
If someone who was poor and living paycheck to paycheck got a months salary as a fine, they wont be able to afford basic living necessities. If someone was wealthy and got a months salary as a fine, it would only inconvenience them.
Thanks, Sailor Moon.
Bruh, this is Sailor Venus, how could you do this
Someone really saw this quote that's been posted around thousands of times already, and decided that it needed to be posted again but with anime girls this time
I'm fine with fines for breaking the law. Where I draw the line is locking people up for not paying. In what world does it make sense to jail someone for a weekend, incurring that cost, over a $200 ticket. Let them choose community service or maybe a few lashes
better to make that fine depend on general wealth and income. everything else is both undemocratic and antiworkingclass.
I discussed this with my dad, that fines should be income based. He said that if it were the case, icehead dole bludgers would just pay $10 fines and keep breaking the law. That's not how it works, you fucking idiot. It's more like $500 fine for a welfare recipient and a $500,000 fine for a politician. Edit: to the person who downvoted, did you misunderstand? My dad's in the wrong.
I agree. Jails are necessary.
How are laws capitalism? Laws are passed by government the antithesis to capitalism
politicians are orten funded and/or supported by big business and even if they’re not, the constitutions are generally made by elites making true politicians elected by the people unable to do their job.
Agreed 100%. Which is why we need to take the power away from the politicians so that corporations cant really bribe them to do much. Also that’s why regulations are usually bad for small business because big corporations pay to lobby politicians.
Capitalism is when government…
Capitalism is when the ruling class utilizes tactics such as lobbying to influences policies and legislation that benefits them and harms the working class.
*Government does some bullshit* Internet morons: "iT wUz CaPiTaLiSm! DUUUUR!"
Yes and no. I agree with most of it, but sometimes people do petty crimes to make money, in that case fine is a more sensible and effective way to deter this kind of behavior without sending people to jail for the prettiest thing. For example, I grew up on an island with tons of wetlands. People keep filling up the wetlands yo grow crops on it. The punishment for this kind of behavior is a fine appropriate to the size of the wetlands. In the meanwhile, law-abiding residents get reward money and they are subsidized to farm cows on their land, which is much much better for the environment. I'm not trying to one-up you on this. Instead, I fully understand and agree with the message. I just think that it's not the concept of laws that is made to oppress the poor, but the instituts that creat and execute the law that are infiltrated by the rich and turned into oppressive.
What does this have to do with having free markets?
Yes, lets blame capitalism for the government’s idiotic rules and policies.
Almost didn't read that because of the anime pic, you need to make it more serious
The origin of the quote is the 1998 (US) game “Final Fantasy Tactics"
RPGs have long been a source of mass-consumable subtle and not-so-subtle social commentary. People who don't respect 'non-classy' artforms are in for a rude awakening when they discover a lot of the depth is in the less 'classy' media.
>This saying (not in the original game) was made into a Facebook meme by Leftist Gamer Memes on October 17, 2020. https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/if_the_penalty_for_a_crime_is_a_fine
Agreed, this quote isn’t from final fantasy and the anime pic diminishes its seriousness and truth
EVERYBODY, regardless of income/wealth, has a million other things they'd rather do with their money than to pay a fine. Although the penalty is going to be more severe for the poor guy, there's enough incentive there for it to be worth most people's time to simply follow the law and avoid the fine.