iNow Posted January 6 Posted January 6 17 minutes ago, TheVat said: Had to Google this. Wow. $500-1000 fine for first offense and then it doubles again. Seems to fit your falls heavier on the poor scenario. Admit that I laughed when I got to the trafficking penalties. Gum trafficking, what a concept. The better story I should’ve referenced instead was how in 1994 they caned a 19 year old boy from Ohio USA with a hard ratan cane (I believe 6 lashes) for something like spray painting the door of someone’s parked car. 25 minutes ago, Sensei said: Welcome to China and its points system. Has it helped litter go down at least? Or are such effects lost in the noise of that broader social engineering experiment they’ve been conducting?
Sensei Posted January 6 Posted January 6 1 hour ago, iNow said: Has it helped litter go down at least? I don't believe that this system was installed to combat littering or minor misbehaviors..
dimreepr Posted January 7 Posted January 7 16 hours ago, Sensei said: I don't believe that this system was installed to combat littering or minor misbehaviors.. It's designed to combat self expression, so by extention littering, everyone carries their own straining whip, and most people would prefer it was used on someone else; a little heavy handed but largely effective, until it's used as a weapon by the likes of Banksie, and classically backfires... The only real solution, if you care, is to pick up some rubbish, and forget about who dropped it...
AIkonoklazt Posted January 7 Posted January 7 On 1/5/2024 at 6:57 PM, iNow said: What would happen is the wealthier citizens would continue littering and carrying on with their day $1,000,000 a pop for those special snowflakes.
iNow Posted January 8 Posted January 8 1 hour ago, AIkonoklazt said: $1,000,000 a pop for those special snowflakes. At what graduated wealth thresholds are you recommending the snowflakes will progressively melt?
AIkonoklazt Posted January 8 Posted January 8 8 minutes ago, iNow said: At what graduated wealth thresholds are you recommending the snowflakes will progressively melt? 99% of their wealth for the fine They can afford it
iNow Posted January 8 Posted January 8 Just now, AIkonoklazt said: 99% of their wealth for the fine They can afford it You didn’t understand my question, or if you did I don’t understand your answer Simplified: what is the wealth threshold for paying $1M vs $100?
AIkonoklazt Posted January 8 Posted January 8 1 hour ago, iNow said: You didn’t understand my question, or if you did I don’t understand your answer Simplified: what is the wealth threshold for paying $1M vs $100? Wouldn't have to do that if you just do it as a percentage at tax time, it's "litter tax" Think you asking this sorta stuff is missing the forest for the trees
iNow Posted January 8 Posted January 8 Trees. Forests. Timbers, whatever. You suggested different thresholds for different people. Unless you’re not serious, I’m curious which people will be asked to pay which fines. We shouldn’t have to guess at it.
AIkonoklazt Posted January 8 Posted January 8 Like, everyone? Like I've said, a percentage "litter tax." Are we going to argue about the "litter tax brackets" now?
dimreepr Posted January 8 Posted January 8 8 hours ago, AIkonoklazt said: Like, everyone? Like I've said, a percentage "litter tax." Are we going to argue about the "litter tax brackets" now? Only if you don't understand the difference between a tythe and a tax...
zapatos Posted January 8 Posted January 8 10 hours ago, AIkonoklazt said: Like I've said, a percentage "litter tax." Well, that's what you say now. It isn't what you said that prompted iNow's request for more information. Wouldn't it have been easier to say "Upon further consideration I'm modifying my position on how to apply litter penalties" instead of hoping no one would notice when you moved the goalposts? 1
AIkonoklazt Posted January 8 Posted January 8 4 hours ago, zapatos said: Well, that's what you say now. It isn't what you said that prompted iNow's request for more information. Wouldn't it have been easier to say "Upon further consideration I'm modifying my position on how to apply litter penalties" instead of hoping no one would notice when you moved the goalposts? How about no "goalpost" at all and say "I'll let the gummit figure out how to apply the financial penalty, since mere financial disincentive is what I offered in the first place"? I buy the bonsai, you peeps can prune it -3
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now