I'm on the fence. I understand the logic, but it just doesn't seem right or fair. Speeding is speeding. Your income level should have no bearing on the fine amount. Yet I also understand the disparity in how much a fixed fine hurts some more than others. I could equally argue both sides. 🤷‍♂️

You're not punishing wealthy people with fines. You're selling them a speeding. They just calculate this into the trip like a gas stop. Do you want them to stop speeding or is this a side hustle? Egalitarian is not equity.

I get your point. Still not entirely convinced this is the right approach. Just my opinion...

Someone drove their Porsche at 321km/h in a speed limit 120km/h area. This person doesn't care about the 700€ fine. In Denmark (iirc) behaving like that would mean losing the car, fine based on your wealth ... That hurts a lot more. If the fine isn't able to influence behaviour, you gotta adjust.

Seems similar to income level should have no bearing on the length of a prison sentence. And indeed, assuming all lawyers had the same level of competence, both the rich and the poor would serve the same punishment for the same crime.

If we frame the fine punishment in terms of how financially uncomfortable it makes a person, then a proportional fine by some qualitative metric of financial comfort would be equitable.

And since the goal is deterrence, the difference in punishment between income brackets would be more about how tolerant a person is to financial discomfort. Addressing this remaining inequity seems much blurrier since it’s so subjective.

"but it just doesn't seem right or fair." that's because you've been propagandized by capitalists. Punishment should mean something, no matter the perpetrator.