A bill in the State Legislature would make California the first state to assess traffic fines by income level: The poorer you are, the less you would pay.

So there are circumstances where a person's net worth is disregarded when setting fines? These circumstances happen to coincide with the demographic that is most reckless and likely to repeat offend?

It's almost as though this weighted fine business is purely a class-warfare tactic, sticking it to the rich, and not a way of making a better deterrent. When you create an exception like that -- but's he's a minor -- you're pretty much admitting the purpose.

You already can fine minors. Make them pay money for breaking the law. The state already charges tuition based on parent's income. The precedent is there. An exception for minors is just for preventing all those exploding heads I described earlier.

...

Since money is worth less to rich people, you fine them more to make it fair.

You may as well say that time is worth less to poor people, you need to make their jail sentences longer to keep it fair.

...

Two years out of a successful professional's life? Why, he might never recover the lost time. A life ruined. On the other hand, what's the effect of five years prison for a day labourer? Much less. He can pick right back up where he left off.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/16/oxford-university-lavinia-woodward-stabbed-boyfriend-may-avoid-jail

/r/California Thread Parent Link - nytimes.com