Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I thought "debtor's prisons" referred to being locked up for private debt, not fines and fees owed the government.

There's nothing new about breaking the law and going to jail when you can't pay the fines. You'll typically sit in jail at a given rate until the debt is paid (for example, $50/day, and there's multipliers for working while in jail)



The article made reference to a 1983 US Supreme Court case Bearden v. Georgia which held that states may not imprision a person if he is legitimately unable to pay a fine or restitution.

Ref: http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/461/660/case.html


For regular debt owed the government you can't usually be jailed, if it's not as a result of fraud: the IRS can try various ways to coerce you into paying, but they cannot jail you for an outstanding debt that you really can't pay. Instead they resort to negotiating repayment plans, garnishing wages, etc.


The funny thing is that when someone is locked up for not paying their debt, the government very likely ends up having spent more money doing that than just leaving that debt alone.


Unless it has a deterrence effect and makes people pay faster in the future.


Because we all know that deterrence is so effective. We should put a jaywalker in the stockades in the town square every day as a warning to the other pedestrians out there.

The problem with your suggestion (deterrence to "encourage" others to pay up faster), these folks can't pay up faster. You ever been to one of these small towns? There's no money, a several hundred dollar fine is a month or more of labor for the ones that have a job. They have to forgo food, insurance, electricity, water or some other essential in order to pay off these debts. You want them to pay faster? Get rid of the fucking speed traps and corrupt officials that screw them.


I responded to an unfounded assertion with an unfounded assertion, it wasn't a suggestion. The point I was very obliquely trying to make is that if you choose policy based on consequences, you don't control the universe so you might not like the results. I agree that the best course of action would be to demolish the parasitic government, but for moral reasons, not to achieve specific consequences.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: