On the other hand (as steve pointed out) does it indeed create an underhanded opportunity for police to pursue high income individuals because of the extra revenue they will generate for themselves! (the morale of this being if you are rich better drive a clapped out mini to not be obvious lol)

This hasn’t happened in the UK (yet!!) But either way… if you get enough points you lose your license and can’t drive whether you are rich or poor. I see that as incentive enough.

“However… one cannot help but feel this is somewhat excessive.”

Why? If we accept the logic that fines should be a function of wealth, or income or whatever, wouldn’t this be the logical extension of that?

“Conversely, it would seem that such laws have the potential to induce ridiculously low penalties to those without any assets. ”

Even in the absence of the sting of financial penalties, losing a licence will affect all drivers.

Another interesting technique for reducing speeding is demerit points. Italy used the insight that we dislike losses more than we like gains by awarding everyone 20 demerit points and subtracting them when you infringe the law (by contrast in NZ and most other juristictions you count up towards some barrier at which you lose your licence). This apparently led to a decrease in traffic infringements.

From ‘Nudge’ by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein

The problem now though is the right incentives for the law enforcers who have an incentive to catch the wealthy, but little incentive to catch the poor.

Please explain your reasoning. A speeding ticket represents a serious health risk, both to the driver and other drivers and pedestrians. A fine must be punitive; if you’re a millionaire you’re not going to care about a $10,000 fine (especially if you’re a speed freak that is a professional sports car driver.)

For instance, failing to attend a job interview = loss of benefit. Getting caught driving an unlicensed vehicle is less likely, thus a preferable course of action. Even to a somewhat dim unemployed person, let alone a smart one.

Macro forecasting still has elements of objectivity – I’m just trying to look at how little variables run around instead of saying how said variables should be distributed 😛

Interesting stuff. And doesn’t require a random social justice element such as “society wanting people to suffer equivalent welfare costs for a crime”.