You are assuming that people will still break rules at fixed pace after introduce a raise in fines, which is not how people(even corporates) would have responded.
You can’t budget things on income that would change depending on how people behave themselves. It’s like budget with income from pan handling.
You are assuming that people will still break rules at fixed pace after introduce a raise in fines, which is not how people(even corporates) would have responded.
Have you seen how fast automated traffic cams have paid for themselves? Speeding and red light infractions alone, at 10x the current fine, would cover at least funding for the homeless.
You can’t budget things on income that would change depending on how people behave themselves.
I agree, but people will always be breaking rules, and we are under-ticketing the majority of them.
I’m not saying that my model would eliminate taxes, but it would prevent or reverse these increases. 10% causes harm to a huge chunk of Durham Region families, so why not tap into this revenue?
Nobody is going to defend people breaking laws, so let them pay for stuff.
You are assuming that people will still break rules at fixed pace after introduce a raise in fines, which is not how people(even corporates) would have responded.
You can’t budget things on income that would change depending on how people behave themselves. It’s like budget with income from pan handling.
Have you seen how fast automated traffic cams have paid for themselves? Speeding and red light infractions alone, at 10x the current fine, would cover at least funding for the homeless.
I agree, but people will always be breaking rules, and we are under-ticketing the majority of them.
I’m not saying that my model would eliminate taxes, but it would prevent or reverse these increases. 10% causes harm to a huge chunk of Durham Region families, so why not tap into this revenue?
Nobody is going to defend people breaking laws, so let them pay for stuff.