I see what you're trying to say, but I think that buying food and penalties meant to deter future bad behavior are two different things. To repeat what I tried to say in my OP, both systems are inherently unfair. One way is unfair to the poor and one way is unfair to the rich. But that is the way of the world when it comes to taxes, fines, and other similiar forms of taxation. Perhaps as you've mentioned, community service is a better way.

Bravo Gracie, that was a mouthful. the ones complaining are obviously the ones that never had the wealth or made the sacrifices.
Jealousy at its best.

This is a very interesting discussion. The primary question is what is the purpose of the fine? Is it to build a tax base for the municipality? Is it to penalize? Is it to change future behavior? If it is to change future behavior, what would be a motivator for one may not be a motivator for another.

Punishment for speeding is mainly meant to be a deterrent to unsafe driving. Obviously, as one's wealth and income increase, a $50 fine becomes less and less of a deterrent. For Bill Gates, a $50 fine is not a deterrent at all. Maybe $60,000 would be, maybe not! Community service might be, but some people would not be much real help at community service they did not want to do.

When I worked for a city government (Traffic Violations Bueau) I had a drunk driver working for me doing 4 weeks of community service. When his personal phone calls looked like they might be a problem I asked if perhaps he would prefer to be outside picking up trash for his service. The calls stopped and he did a real good job for the next 3-1/2 weeks.

Think about it; our federal government goes for the big bucks when it can. Recent example: all the BILLIONS in fines imposed on the big national banks, mortgage companies, rating agencies, and brokerage firms reselling the worthless paper; all relating to the mortgage scandals. No officer, or executive, or administering employee has ever been thrown in jail because of their actions. (there is no financial return to the government in that). And very little compensation has ever made its way down to the people and investors who were actually hurt.
Tossing a few executives in jail would change the behavior of all of now and in the future.

You do the crime, you do the time or pay the fine. Finland wants the fine to hurt regardless of income. A set fine is not going to hurt someone who can afford to import a sports car. A percentage of income fine might get his attention. This law has been on Finland's books for a long time. The only difference is that now they check income tax records for income rather than having the offender simply state their income. Not sure why, but it seemed many miscreants lied about their income. DUH!

Would this work in the USA? Probably not. For one thing, we consider our income tax returns sacrosanct. For another, we are under the illusion that justice demands all be treated equally and fairly even though that rarely, if ever, happens. Personally, I like the idea of making the fine hurt a little. Not enough to force someone to choose between food on the table or paying the fine, but enough so that maybe an outing has to be skipped. We're not talking about different scales for purchases or the like, we're talking different scales for committing a misdemeanor.

It is not suppose to be fair. Justice is suppose to be blind, color race greed etc ....

The CEO of WorldCom, Bernard Ebbers, went to jail.

It's nice to imagine that penalties for speeding can be accomplished fairly and equally, but is it realistic? (Or blind justice if you prefer)

Let's say the dollar amount of the fines are reasonable and equal for both high and low income people, and the number of hours for community service are the same.

But there are a variety of community service jobs. One type of job might consist of cleaning public toilets and picking up trash along the highways on a hot summer day. Another type of public service job might be as a hospital helper in the records department, or lunch room.

Two people get caught speeding: One is a medical professional and the other is a working class person. Which one do you think will be assigned to picking up trash etc. on a hot summer day? And which one do you think will get the easier air conditioned job?

"The law,in its majestic equality,forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread"
Anatole France 1844-1924

IMO, matching the fine to income would be very fair , but probably inpractical in the US. Fairness would dictate equal impact on each offender. $60,000 might not have been enough. And then again!!!

So simple, and right on the mark!

Well, it should be based on mph over the speed limit. say 10.00 per mile over. Not rocket science? Ok some will say (mostly rich uppity types and money grubbing local, state, fed gov.) will say that's not enough so pro rate it, say 20 mph over the limit the fine triples.

Not all rich people earned it. Daddy and mommy left it to them or shelled out in weekly allowances. Some little brats will kill for it. Kind like the opposite of eat you young.
The problem with any socialist they want your money to spend, but don't want their money involved. This is where you get this outrageous BS.

Blind Justice, what does it mean?
 

Lady Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scroll down to where it says, "Blindfold....The blindfold represents objectivity,....regardless of money, wealth, power or identity...."

Sadly, justice today isn't blind, if it ever was. Money talks in the form of better attorneys, appearances more sympathetic to a judge and jury. As a very good criminal defense attorney once told me, "justice just ain't just."