Hot Mic

Omakase

Amazon Search

Progressive Taxation

Taken to an art form, in Switzerland:

A Swiss millionaire has been handed down a record speeding fine of $290,000 (£180,000) by a court.

The man was reportedly caught driving a red Ferrari Testarossa at 137km/h (85mph) through a village.

The penalty was calculated based on the unnamed motorist’s wealth – assessed by the court as $22.7m (£14.1m) – and because he was a repeat offender.

Ouch.

Share

8 comments to Progressive Taxation

  • Marianne Matthews

    If I were rich, which I will never be, I would follow the Sam Walton theory of living. As you all know, Sam was the founder of Wal-Mart. Practice modesty, don’t attract attention, no ostentatious anything, even a Ferrari Testarosa, which really tempted me in my younger years. Then the thieves wouldn’t come to my house, and politicians and lawyers wouldn’t target me. At least, that would be my plan. However, our present Congress, which is now planning to tax us all on healthcare, believes in stealing from everybody, so maybe that wouldn’t work, after all.

    I’d love to hear if any of you have a better alternate plan.

    Marianne

  • aeroeng

    Well if our country adopted this policy, I think you’d see far less misdemeanor crime among the more affluent. If they stood to lose a relatively substantial portion of their net worth as a result of breaking the law by driving under the influence, etc., maybe they would think twice before doing so.

    • OldT6Pilot

      How do you square this line of thinking with “equal protection under the law”?

      Let’s apply this to, say murder. A rich guy kills his girlfriend in jealous rage and he gets the death penalty while poor guys gets downgraded to manslaughter and 20 years?

      If you look at the penalty as connected to the crime you can’t get there from here. If you just want to us the crime as an opportunity to extract some sort of economic vengeance you are on the right path. Maybe that could work both ways then, huh? Rich guy drive DUI and, since he has the coin, soak him with a big fine. Poor guy does same but, lacking cash or assets, does thirty years hard labor. After all it seems to be vengeance you are asking for.

  • MaxDamage

    It’s interesting that we target people based upon their wealth, as if that wealth is a never-ending supply that cannot run dry. Income taxes take a third of what you’ve toiled for from you, but that’s not quite such a bad thing since in theory you’ll toil again next year so there will be additional cash coming in to pay those taxes. If there isn’t, you’ll pay a similar percentage but of course less overall.

    That’s not the case with wealth. Wealth is based upon not just income but all assets. You know, they stuff you want to leave your kids when you die. Wealth taxes operate under the guise that if you own a Ferrari worth $100K then you should pay the government $25K per year on it. Wealth taxes operate under the assumption that if you own your own home or land free and clear you owe 4% of what some government agent thinks it’s worth for the right to keep ownership and continue living there.

    Only in government would it make sense to tax the full value of a property purchased on a 30-year note every 25 years. You think about that — of your mortgage payment, 1/2 is interest, 3/8 is taxes, only 1/8 is principle. And once you own it, you can lose it again if you don’t pay the Danegeld to the assessors office. Which can sort of affect your retirement plans, living modestly meaning selling the home you spent 30 years paying for and moving into an apartment if you don’t have the retirement income to keep paying the property taxes.

    There was a time when a right to property meant something. No longer. Now you really only rent ownership from the state in yearly or quarterly installments.

    – Max

  • SCOTTtheBADGER

    That is very true, Max. and that has bothered me for years. I don’t understand the Progressive mindset, that seems only to want to take away money and property from the earners/owners, to give to others, that now have no incentive or desire to earn. All it accomplishes, is the Progerssives then getting the votes of the recievers, and allotting more power to themselves. What truly evil people they are.

  • I will now invoke the Heinlein zombie. RAH said that the only fair punishment for traffic infractions was, say, 20 licks on yer bare back, on the courthouse steps, at high noon.

    Of course if you’re old and frail, that might kill you, and all. It really is hard to make the punishment fit the crime, and also make it fit the criminal.

    Famous Jewish proverb: Of _course_ there’s a different law for the rich and the poor; otherwise, who would go into business?

  • Liz

    I don’t know.
    REPEAT offender going 85 in a village…that’s something akin to attempted homicide, isn’t it? Sure this wasn’t bail money? If someone were going 85 through my neighborhood I’d unleash old blue.

  • I’m with Liz on this one. It looks like the court was sending a message to the monied folks who routinely do that (and I’ve seen ‘em do that), and Red Ferrari was the messenger.

eXTReMe Tracker

View My Stats