volvoxvsmarla

That's actually a great story and I will keep it close to my heart

Kinda same

"I'm just rational and I don't like when people suffer"

So true, I always hear Fight Club's narrator say "I wanted to destroy something beautiful" when I cut that new sponges

Same. We actually cut them in half before we use them (no this is not a way to save up $10k in a year) and then quarter them when they turn to crap sponges xD

We use a combination of brushes with wooden heads (I don't like stuff with handles though), structured cotton towels from the drug store, and sponges from Ikea called "Pepprig" which I think work best for most things. They are also plastic but you can wash them easily.

Tbh we wash them and use them for really dirty stuff. Like when you need to remove mold with a chlorine spray or poop from your shoes. Then they get tossed because there's no way I am washing that again.

We're phasing out single use sponges though, but now I don't know what to use for the really dirty stuff.

the opposite seems to be the case here

Cries in Lindner

Do you have one or two examples of recipes from the book that you think are good?

Well we went down a road that I think we need to track back.

Poor people committing "necessary" crimes is not the focus and should not be. The whole idea of necessary crimes that should not be punished is awful - we should focus on building a society where people don't end up in a position where they have to steal (etc.) to survive. If we are already thinking of how to better jurisdiction I'd argue we have space to assume we can also better their situation in general. We want to deter them from crimes the most, yes, but not by scaring them with the consequences of being caught - we want to deter them by making them unnecessary. No person should be poor, period.

I think what this comes down to is the question of fines themselves. It has almost something catholic about it. You buy yourself out of punishment. I'd argue that this concept is flawed in itself, no matter how you adjust it.

My guess is that this is what the post was supposed to say. Money in itself isn't too much of a fair concept, or a just one. But punishment, law enforcement, etc, should be, despite taking place in a capitalist society.

What it comes down to would probably be something like social service (my guess). Is the crime committed violent and does the perpetrator pose a severe security risk to society? Then a correction facility that focuses on healing, mental and physical health, rehabilitation and reintegration into society should be the choice. The crime was something that could also be fined? Cut the fine, make it a social service. Picking up trash from sideroads, cleaning public toilets. This will benefit the public/society and no one can buy their way out of it.

It doesnt make a difference if the person who committed the crime has more or less money

Of course it does. A poor person might find themselves in a situation where they have to steal groceries or other necessities for pure survival. If I were poor and needed diapers and there was no governmental support program available I would also steal them. Or formula or whatever. A rich person can afford all of that. If they steal groceries it is for the thrill, not out of necessity.

Also, note that really bad crimes (murder for example) are not fined. In that sense it does not matter what the financial status of the perpetrator is. Although filthy rich people can sometimes even buy their way out of these crimes.

Great idea but still unfair. It is the same as a high salaried person being able to afford quitting their job and take a couple of months to look for another or go on parental leave. They can afford it because they have savings. A day fine will also hit the poorest the most, because they don't have savings to afford paying such a fine.

And as @brisk pointed out, wealth isn't income