Should Criminals pay higher taxes?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by TimeTraveler, Jan 30, 2007.

  1. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    Example, if someone is convicted of selling drugs, such as marijuana, should they pay the Marijuana tax after they do their time?

    Let's look into this with more detail,

    http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/01-07/01-18-07/12local.htm

    I think it's a brilliant idea. If a person is convicted of a crime, paying a fee is actually a very good way to punish them for the crime. Prison seems like a punishment but really the prison system does not work very well. Take for example a thief, that robs a bank, and makes millions, Prison is not a big deal because they'll have millions of dollars as a trade off, however if they had to pay the bank robbery tax, or the robbery tax, then when they get out, they'd be paying extra taxes for every crime they commited. More convictions = more taxes.

    The result of this would be, that a rational person should come to the conclusion that crime does not pay, and that if convicted, it's going to result in your taxes being raised. I think it's actually a brilliant idea to link high taxes to criminals, think of it this way, if you've never commited a crime in your life, and you know someone has to pay the taxes to pay for the police and all the other stuff the society needs, shouldnt it be the criminals who pay these taxes?

    Overall I think it is a good idea because it links the funding of the police department and crime fighting, with the activities of the criminals, so that if a city or town has a crime spike, it will also fund the police. Therefore if criminals get out of prison, they'd be paying taxes to fund the police department.

    As far as tax status goes, I think it would be great if someone can get a tax deduction for having no criminal record. Imagine if you could get a 25% tax cut for having no criminal record, and another person who is a career criminal gets their taxes raised 25%?

    I don't think convicted criminals will like this idea, and it does depend on how much money criminals can make when out of prison to pay these taxes or fees, and it depends on the crime, but I think different crimes should require different amounts in fees.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Oniw17 ascetic, sage, diogenes, bum? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,423
    Most of the time no, because they've already had punishment. However, in the case of people who constantly go in and out of prison for robbing houses or whatever, I think they should pay a tax, because they are taking something away from the community. Also, do you know how hard it is already for people coming out of prison? Most of the time they have to do labor-ready work where they get paid $40-60 a day and only get to work 3 days a week. Many of them have children to support aswell, an extra tax likely won't keep them out of trouble. It would probably make them more likely to start selling drugs or robbing people again, because they'll need more money.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    I prefer a system of corporal punishment for all felonies. Fines should only be rendered for misdemeanor offenses and prisons should not exist outside of short-term facillities.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    So add it to their income tax. And allow room for negotiation of the fee. If they for example, manage to stay out of trouble, perhaps you could drop the fee, but if they get arrested again you could double the fee and force them to pay.

    Ultimately though, it should cost the criminal to be a criminal, not the community.
     
  8. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    What is corporal punishment, what kind I mean? and for what sentences?
    Also how do you deal with economic types of crime if you can't use fines?
     
  9. 098 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22
    I am all for that.
     
  10. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I assume capital punishment would be included in this scheme for murder. But what would the punishment be for things such as bank robbery, grand theft auto. rape, etc under your plan?
     
  11. zenbabelfish autonomous hyperreal sophist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    961
    No, we should pay them not to commit crime - it would be cheaper.
     
  12. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    That's sorta' what we do now .....we give out welfare checks, but they continue to commit the crimes anyway. And we still keep giving out more welfare checks.

    No, Zenbabelfish, it don't work ....we know from experience!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Baron Max
     
  13. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    For those interested:

    My system of punishment consists of four tiers. Misdemeanor, minor, moderate, and severe.

    Misdemeanors are punished with fines.

    Minor crimes are punished first by 20 lashes/strokes with a scourge/cane, second 40, third to death. Minor crimes include most of the white collared crimes, unprovoked assault and battery (not brawling and such), minor theft,
    small time drug crimes, perjury, et cetera.

    Moderate crimes begin on at 40 lashes/strokes with a scourge/cane, second time to death. This includes heavier crimes, but not the major ones. Non-injurious arson, grand theft, larceny, et cetera.

    All major crimes would be punished through lashes/strokes with a scourge/cane unto death. This includes treason, injurious arson, murder, rape, child rape/molestation, espionage, et cetera.

    All long-term prisons would be abolished and only short term facillities for the holding of prisoners (who cannot pay for bail) should be established. These will be clean and relatively nice, as the majority of the prisoners will be not proven to be guilty, whereas more jail like conditions can prevail for those awaiting their punishment, which should come no more than one month after sentencing.

    All felonious will be public and done completely nude.

    The benefits of this system are two fold:

    Economic: A cane/scourge, a strong man, and some shackles are that is needed to perform the punishment, compared to tens of thousands of dollars a year for prisoners, or even a lot of money for executions.

    Social: The fear of intense, agonizing, and scarring pain wedded to public humiliation is likely to cause actual results. Singapore's extremely low recidivism rate is obviously linked with its implementation of corporal punishment. This is held tob e a superior system to Singapore by also wedding the shame of humilation and upping its severity.
     
  14. zenbabelfish autonomous hyperreal sophist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    961
    A scheme was seriously mooted in the UK to pay several hundred pounds sterling a week - I tend to agree with you about this although on paper it looks the cheaper option.
    However crime is the new rockn'roll...
     
  15. Ray9 Registered Member

    Messages:
    3
    Our society is out of control. We can't build prisons fast enough to contain the dregs that plague us. No branch of government, state or federal is willing to appraach the problem in realistic or meaningful way. The protection of the innocent is lost to politics and corruption. Charging extra fines to career criminals is a joke. This is just another liberal idea that will cause more problems than it will solve. Does anyone seriously believe that this will deter drug dealers or aid in the fight against the use of controlled substances? Once again the state of Massachussets has provided comic relief for the nation.
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    About 95% of people in prison are in for non-violent offences. Many are in for possession of drugs. Putting these people in prison is a waste of resources.

    The solution is not more prisons.
     
  17. zenbabelfish autonomous hyperreal sophist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    961
    So we can tax them instead?
     
  18. Cardin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    171
    Most of the people who commit crimes, are already on a low-end income. Without jobs, they turn to crime for source of income (robbing banks, selling drugs) ..so instead of putting them in jail, they get an extra tax that they couldn't pay before? The whole purpose of crime was to make cash. Plus getting a job after getting felony charge is near impossible, unless it's minimum wage job at a gas station - but who can live off that, especially when they would have to pay more?

    Prison = gold mine. The more inmates, the more money is made. The state already is making a killing by having inmates work in the kitchens and cleaning the roads, so that they save money by not having to hire the law abiding citizens.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2007
  19. zenbabelfish autonomous hyperreal sophist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    961
    If a person is employed instead of prison then revenue can be raised on the products they buy rather than a taxation on income.
     
  20. Cardin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    171
    So, you're suggesting a big brother system to keep track and know who are and who aren't criminals?
     
  21. zenbabelfish autonomous hyperreal sophist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    961
    No...not at all...what made you think that?
     
  22. Lord Hillyer Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,777
    Good idea, Prince James. But I would include eating animal products as a minor crime. If people must reckon with the equation: 'eat a steak, and twenty lashes', then humanity's trophic footprint would shrink considerably. Also, not only would the criminal justice budget drastically shrink, but so would health care costs and illness-related economic losses. We should also promote domestic agriculture. With peak oil on our doorstep, the age of the three-thousand mile Caesar salad is almost over in any event.
     
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Criminals often do have to pay money as a consequence of their crimes. Adding an extra tax is not a good idea. What if they paid years ago and are let free? It's hard enough making a living as an ex-con.
     

Share This Page