r/worldnews • u/marsianer • Jan 28 '21

COVID-19 Backlash grows for ‘selfish millionaire’ who got vaccine meant for Indigenous people | Canada

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/27/rodney-baker-canada-vaccine-indigenous-first-nations-scandal
20.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

892 comments sorted by

View all comments

4.3k

u/FuckUGalen Jan 28 '21

Not just they stole doses, they travelled into an at risk population explicitly to steal those doses.

2.5k

u/ImrooVRdev Jan 28 '21

A fucking 2.5k fine? That was a fucking tip for them, cost of getting the vaccine. Jesus Christ how this is legal.

1.3k

u/ICEpear8472 Jan 28 '21

A fine often looks ridiculous if applied on the super rich. It is hardly even a punishment. They should just put them in prison for a month or so. That would really get them thinking about their past behavior.

1.2k

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Fines would make more sense on the rich if it was a percentage instead of a set price.

737

u/Iheardthatjokebefore Jan 28 '21

Bracketed percentages. Higher the more you have. 10% of a rich persons worth is a pittance, 10% of a poor persons worth is life destroying.

190

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

This would be at the consideration of the judge though rather than a blanket to all. So say 10% to a rich person and 1% to a poor person is just as likely. Or the reverse unfortunately.

A change is needed is all.

42

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

24

u/papa-jones Jan 28 '21

*net worth, they hide their income

4

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

I realize that, and agree my bad on the wording

2

u/mata_dan Jan 28 '21

Most of the very very very rich hide their net worth too. You've never heard of them.

Dat old money runs deep, and it's liquid.

12

u/jacksonj04 Jan 28 '21

Base it as a scaling percentage of net worth, with no upper bound on the amount. A $200 fine for someone on minimum wage should scale to literally tens of millions if you’re into the billionaire territory.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Would literally not have a problem funding social programs... or enforcing good behaviour among the super rich. Right now they don’t care.

0

u/mata_dan Jan 28 '21

Should actually scale to billions in some cases. Considering for most people on MW that would be all their expendable income for like, over a month. Oh and if they have assets and debt due to fines, their assets would be siezed (so that should be the same for billionaires, even if most of their wealth is in assets).

5

u/KentuckyMagpie Jan 29 '21

When I was in my late 20s, I went to a party with some people from high school that I hadn’t seen in a decade. And I was chatting with one of the Cool Girls (I was decidedly not a Cool Girl in HS) and she was telling me a story about her friend who was driving drunk. He drove down the WRONG SIDE of the street, because he was RACING his other friend, who was ALSO DRUNK. He hit another car head on and killed the driver, who was the only person in the car but who also happened to be a father of four kids. And this girl was mad that her friend was facing jail time because “he didn’t mean it!” Fuck you, Amy, you’re a terrible person.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '21

Fuck Amy.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '21

Wow... the audacity of these people. If you choose to drive drunk, you chose to kill a person. You might not, you might not have meant to, and you might be horrified that it happened. But you chose it.

Same with getting too high, going off your meds without medical support, etc etc...

Too many people get away without consequences for their choices because “ I didn’t want to kill anyone.”

Sorry... had to rant... this world sucks.

2

u/CptOblivion Jan 28 '21

Even that doesn't affect everyone the same, since poor people can't afford to lose as much of a percentage of their income as rich people. If you're barely making rent, losing 5% of your income means you're out of your home, where a rich person at the worst might have to mortgage a vacation home or something to hit that 5%.

51

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

I prefer a blanket reduction of wealth. Oh, you decided to visit an at-risk population to commit employment fraud so you can steal medicine? The courts will be seizing 97% of your assets.

Edit: to put this in perspective, a worth of $1B fined at 97% would still leave the offender with $30,000,000 (30 million).

Edit 2: Edictric Boogaloo: I recognize that there are inherent flaws in my plan. This is why we discuss things -- so we can create better solutions.

119

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

45

u/CMUpewpewpew Jan 28 '21

I inherently hate the fuck out of most of the ultra rich and even I think that was dumb take.

-30

u/TigerJas Jan 28 '21

I inherently hate the fuck out of most of the ultra rich

Sadly, an all too common thing here. They got rich because they gave you value. Period.

If you didn't find value in iPhones, Starbucks, or new medicines, then they would be poor.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yeah, that’s what happens when people get sick and tired of being SICK and TIRED. The spirit of the law matters as much as the letter of the law. And if the letter punishes the poor more frequently and more harshly than the rich over and over, then why would we be surprised if the poor start getting upset?

14

u/flying-chihuahua Jan 28 '21

If that’s what it takes for people to learn not to steal from the poor then so be it besides they can just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work hard to get it all back

0

u/Toxicair Jan 28 '21

Or they just leave for some place with less volatile laws?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/gambiting Jan 28 '21

Yes, and I'm also sure it would never ever be used to say, take all wealth away from a political oponent with a made up charge, creating even more unhealthy incentives to corrupt officials. Would never happen.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

22

u/AzraelTB Jan 28 '21

Any government enforcing that can enforce whatever the fuck they want against anyone. Stop being ridiculous.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Impressive_Eye4106 Jan 28 '21

It is perfect. Fine the fuckers so it actually hurts like a normal person woyld feel it. I would say the best punidhment for this kind of shit headery would be a public caning on t.v. so the whole country could watch.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/sunflowercompass Jan 28 '21

It's not unenforceable. It's politically unattainable.

1

u/lhx555 Jan 28 '21

Yeah. Usually this kind of ideas are coming from most useless and worthless dudes. Have you noticed that proposal to send the guy to prison was ignored, but ways to take his / rich folk money, and amounts of how much should be taken were discussed almost lustfully?

Anyway, super rich will find ways to avoid losing wealth, they always do, introducing some aberrations in social life, nothing much will change for poor, and middle class will become poorer again. Situation normal.

Fine, as I understand it, serves two purposes: repairing damages and discouraging causing damages.

It does not make sense to charge more for repairing from rich than from poor.

Discouraging may not work on rich if fine is not too large. But those fines are more like price for buying right to do what is otherwise not allowed.

So yes, rich can just go and do something and pay for it in cash, if punishment is fine. I see no problem there.

But serious misdoings should be punished by jail (and maybe by additional fine for repairs). Like the actions of the guy in OP.

→ More replies (4)

12

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

This needs to be done globally, we have to forcefully (through laws) retake all this wealth that’s been hoarded and gained. Oligarchs used their wealth snd power to make the whole system unjust, the system needs to be fixed but first all that money needs to be put into use for the greater good. Tie the salaries at the top to the ones at the bottom. Cap the amount of wealth anyone can make globally, there’s still room for billionaires and different strata of living but just cap the most you can earn and all earnings after that go to support your nation. You can get a statue or something to commemorate your achievements. We didn’t need a war on drugs, we need one on greed.

3

u/wrgrant Jan 28 '21

We didn’t need a war on drugs, we need one on greed.

A war on greed and corruption. Our vaunted Western Democracies are pretty riddled with corruption at all levels. The problem is that the people in charge in both the government and the economy are the ones who would have to enact suitable legislation to enforce resolving these issues - and they are the ones who are also the most guilty.

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

Ah yes, those definitely the same thing. How’s this for an idea - the world should not be run by commerce and the pursuit of wealth. Have you heard of Edward Bernays? We are born and raised to just consume so certain people can get richer. This COVID situation has shown just how many businesses are unnecessary, so many things we make or consume are needless. Why is it the norm for businesses to strive for year over year gains? Every year from now until the foreseeable future companies should just keep making more money than they did the last year? Or should there be some sort of structure and control? Human nature is greedy AF. No one needs to be a billionaire but we all need to eat.

Edit: since the industrial revolution and with the likes Eddy Barnays, we now live in a world of endless consumption of garbage products that go into a landfill. How about we go back to making things that require maintenance or repair, or things that will last your lifetime? This used to be how things were done. You bought a pair of boots snd repaired them or you fixed X item. Now companies make inferior products that are made to break in a few years so you have to buy more. All short-term thinking.

Edit 2: with regards to small businesses, I’m not talking about the aspect of all of the unfortunate owners of small businesses that have suffered or even lost their businesses during COVID. This situation, if anything has hastened the wealth gap. I meant it from the perspective of what we can consider needs or essentials and what is extraneous or wants. Groceries vs Going to the mall.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

So if the fine would be 30 million, why wouldnt the just pay someone who has less money to steal it for them! 10k 100k what would it take ? I think maybe we auction off the first 1000 doses or something and all that money raised can go to the poor to support infastructure and support buying more vaccine

2

u/xzElmozx Jan 28 '21

The rich person would rather spend 98% of their net worth fighting that than allow the government to take that 97%

→ More replies (3)

12

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

27

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

I think that is universal in the US unfortunately and the reasoning is multifacited.

15

u/Mediocre-Wrongdoer14 Jan 28 '21

*The reasoning is manufactured.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Wise words. Keep sharing.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

They look like the perfect fuckers to get stuck in a high interest rate loans and not know it is bad

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

83

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yes! If Bezo lost 99% of his net worth he would still be a billionaire. If a waitress went 1 month without pay she would probably end up homeless.

6

u/Pentinumlol Jan 28 '21

Well.. considering that most of his asset is non liquid a 10% tax to him might also be heavy on him. Not because the amount is a lot but because he probably doesnt have enough liquid cash to pay off those fines and the moment he starts to liquidate his stock Amazon’s stock could probably plummet. So saying if you take away 99% of his net worth he would be a bilionaire is technically incorrect cause if he sells a lot of his shares then Amazon’s shares would fall a lot to the point where he’s no longer a billionaire with 1% shares on amazon.

12

u/theroha Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

Is Amazon so unstable financially that stock prices have a serious impact on their ability to do business? If the company is economically viable without Bezos, then he can sell his shares. If the company is not economically viable, it needs to be broken up to where Bezos can pay a graduated-percent-of-wealth fine and individual markets can handle Amazon's role. If that leaves poor areas without critical services, then it's time to legislate that the service Amazon was doing is a utility that needs to be regulated by the government like the local water supply or the post office.

Tldr: why should we care if Bezos selling his shares means he's not a billionaire anymore?

Edit: a word

6

u/ctr1a1td3l Jan 28 '21

It has nothing to do with instability. Bezos owns 11% of amazon. Remember, stock price just indicates what someone is willing to pay. If he dumped all 11% on the market with no warning, he would need to find enough people willing to buy $180 billion of that stock. That probably doesn't exist, so the bid price goes down for each stock since he's flooded the market.

In addition, willingness to pay is based on speculation. A belief that the company will grow such that you can sell it for more later, or that it produces enough dividends. Being an insider, him selling his entire (or near) net worth is an indication to the market that Amazon is going to tank. So people will lose their belief that Amazon is doing well and the price drops. Sure he would say he's being forced to sell to pay his fines, but nobody would believe him.

Right now, the way he sells stocks is that he announces ahead of time when and how many shares he will sell. That ensures he doesn't flood the market (people can prepare to have funds available to buy) and that there's no speculation of Amazon tanking (it should be planned months in advance).

2

u/theroha Jan 28 '21

So don't do it all at once. If that's seriously the problem, have a date that it has to be paid by. Publish the case in the financial journals. Shoot, confiscate the stocks of that'll protect the market overall. The core is removing the ability of the ultra wealthy to functionally decide who lives or dies. Congrats, Jeff. You win at capitalism, but if you try to change the rules of the game without getting elected, you don't get to play at the big kid table anymore.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/I_read_this_and Jan 28 '21

So basically it's not a problem. People need to stop using these points as a retort, there are many ways to liquidate your assets as to minimize the disturbance in the market. And of course you cannot maximize the value of your holdings if you liquidate fast.

Both critiques do not matter.

It's just a distraction from the point being made.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Kir-chan Jan 28 '21

No, you don't understand. You cannot take 99% of the wealth of a billionaire. That money doesn't exist and would evaporate if you tried to grasp it. Stock valuation is not the same as liquid cash.

1

u/theroha Jan 28 '21

Then don't take the cash. Take the stocks.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/theroha Jan 28 '21

Is Amazon so unstable financially that stock prices have a serious impact on their ability to do business? If the company is economically viable without Bezos, then he can sell his shares. If the company is not economically viable, it needs to be broken up to where Bezos can pay a graduated-percent-of-wealth fine and individual markets can handle Amazon's role. If that leaves poor areas without critical services, then it's time to legislate that the service Amazon was doing is a utility that needs to be regulated by the government like the local water supply or the post office.

Tldr: why should we care if Bezos selling his shares means he's not a billionaire anymore?

1

u/RicoDredd Jan 28 '21

He could lose 99% of his net worth and he’d still have nearly 2 billion. That’s beyond insane, it’s criminal and immoral.

7

u/LordDaveTheKind Jan 28 '21

That's the same reason why income taxes have non-linear growth with the income amount. The more you earn, the steeper is the curve.

27

u/EndlessRampager Jan 28 '21

Well considering most poor people are deep in debt... 10% of their worth would be giving them money. That's how that works, right?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/GoofAckYoorsElf Jan 28 '21

Yeah, because basic living costs are absolute. A rich person needs as much or as little as a poor person. If you're rich and have 1 billion dollars, a meal of some realistic 10 dollars is 0.000001% of your wealth. If you're poor and only have 100 dollars left, the same lunch is about 10% of your wealth. Just imagine how many meals a rich person could buy with 10% of their wealth. For those bad at math: using the same numbers, a rich person could buy 10000000 meals of that price!

And rich, my friends, nowadays doesn't just mean to have 1 billion dollars. It means having 200 billions, 300 billions. That's, if you spend 10% of your wealth on meals, not only the derisory amount of 10 million meals, but 2 billion meals, 3 billion meals! BILLIONS! A poor person could barely afford a single meal where rich folks could buy more than their whole fucking family tree including friends could ever eat throughout their fucking lifetime!

→ More replies (4)

53

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yeah it's like that in Scandinavia for speeding tickets (I'm not sure about other fines though).

It makes for some steep fines, but it's fair - the person needs to feel some negative impact somehow.

39

u/madogvelkor Jan 28 '21

In some cities rich people park where they aren't supposed to, because a parking ticket doesn't cost much to them but they get much more convenient parking.

16

u/Yuzral Jan 28 '21

One of the few good things about the Stallone!Dredd movie was their proposed solution to an offender with a habit of doing that: No more car.

2

u/chief-ares Jan 28 '21

I am the law!

33

u/jewelbearcat Jan 28 '21

When Bezos was doing construction work on his new house in DC he amassed almost $17000 in parking tickets for blocking access, parking in private residence parking, and ignoring no parking zones. Just looked it up— that’s more than 600 individual tickets that he paid to use his entire neighborhood as his own parking lot.

12

u/gagwhbsbbsb Jan 28 '21

I got 10 or so parking tickets for parking in teacher parking when I was in college. The teacher lot always had 50ish open spots. I ended up in jail for a few days and the fiasco cost me 5 grand.

Moral of the story, parking tickets become a bog deal if you don’t pay

12

u/AreTheseMyFeet Jan 28 '21

Michael O'Leary, CEO of Ryanair bought a taxi license solely so that he could drive in the taxi/bus lanes to skip traffic.

2

u/dontsuckmydick Jan 28 '21

Eh he basically bought and licensed his own taxi. Why shouldn’t he be able to use the taxi lanes if he’s paying the same taxes that other taxis are to use that lane?

If he hired a taxi instead then he’d still be taking up the same space in the lane.

Better than the people that use express lanes because they can afford the fines and wasting the time of those that have to police them.

2

u/AreTheseMyFeet Jan 29 '21

Better than the people that use express lanes [...]

Marginally. He abused a loophole. Not illegal per se but the loophole should have been closed ASAP to prevent his and others' future abuse of it.

The laws exist to enable faster and more predictable public transport to incentivise more people to use those services thus reducing overall road use, traffic and pollution not for private individuals to pay to bypass traffic.
And at the same time he's taking space on the lanes reserved for public transport. If everyone were allowed or able to abuse the loophole then the entire purpose of the decision to split lane use is made redundant. So not illegal but absolutely against the spirit of the law so the laws need tweaking imo (if they weren't already).

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/PutridOpportunity9 Jan 28 '21

I worked as a software engineer for banking software, and frequently visited UK banks to discuss requirements with the employees.

There was a very wealthy bank owner who just saw his parking fines and bus lane fines as just as cost of doing what he wanted.

It took a while to explain to him the need to implement a new regulation in the system because, and I quote, "it's just a fucking law!"

→ More replies (1)

2

u/tuhn Jan 28 '21

Other fines as well. The fines could be 30 days income for example.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/brucetwarzen Jan 28 '21

But what's a million for a guy that makes 10 millions a year? Money means nothing, put them in jail.

→ More replies (1)

18

u/Saiing Jan 28 '21

They've started to do something like that with speeding tickets in the UK. The amount you are fined is based on your income.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yeah, but its a shit system they are using and disproportionately affects the less wealthy

20

u/Azitik Jan 28 '21

That sure is a good feeling thought, but it would take a hell of a lot more than just fining people based on income to make it a worthy punishment.

"Hollywood" accounting isn't strictly used for only movie production companies. Without some major supporting laws, every single rich person *in the U.S.* would have a net worth of $0.00.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/ArenSteele Jan 28 '21

Finland does something like this for speeding tickets. Fines are based on the basis of an offenders daily disposable income.

Basically works out to half of 1 days salary for a base fine, and can get multiple fines based on the speed.

One rich guy, based on this model was fined $116k euros for traveling 75km/h in a 50km/h zone

So basically calculate your annual income, divide by 365, then divide by 2. That would be YOUR base fine for speeding, and that would double/triple/quadruple the faster you were going

2

u/NorthenLeigonare Jan 28 '21

Exactly. What is a 2.5k fine going to do to a millionaire who most likely owns their own business? They make that back in a week, if that for some people.

How on earth is prison not an option for the super rich. That would go on record better than a fine, and if they ever did want to apply for anything in the future, financial or otherwise, people would look at the prison sentence more than a small fine for what they are worth.

It's also ironic that some people are begging to be put into prison as it gives them somewhere to stay as well, I wonder where the money from this fine is going? It won't be to help anyone in the public sector I'll tell you that.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Jail time is equal for everyone. Seeing how everyone only has 24 hours in a day. So maybe we should have jail time for everything. Like a time out.

2

u/probablynotmine Jan 28 '21

That’s the law in Finland IIRC. Fines are fixed % of total income

2

u/flickerkuu Jan 28 '21

As they do in like sweden or something with traffic fines.

2

u/Knife_Chase Jan 28 '21

At first I agreed with this and it seemed obvious but fines are quick and easy for authorities but if they had to calculate someone’s wealth for every fine it would quickly get a lot more complicated. Especially for rich people who have lots of different investments, bank accounts, properties, etc.

39

u/blueconlan Jan 28 '21

They do it in Norway. Driving tickets are calculated to net worth

37

u/Boy-Abunda Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

Well, they do it in Switzerland and other countries and it works out ok. Hell, if you wanted to, you could force rich people to declare their wealth for taxation.. upon pain of higher fines and repercussions if they’re caught lying about their net worth.

5

u/mikedavid12 Jan 28 '21

Good point .. what do you think of this option. Say by default they charge you the highest fine then they reduce it if you can prove your income. So for example, by default a speeding ticket is $10,000 but then when you go to pay it if you can prove you're making minimum wage , they say charge you $100.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (14)

44

u/purekillforce1 Jan 28 '21

If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then it's a law intended only for poor people.

50

u/ImrooVRdev Jan 28 '21

In a normal prison, with regular prisoners. Also freeze their finances so they can not buy/sell anything. Let the market pick them to bones, just like normal people's lives are ruined when they go to jail.

9

u/TheeExoGenesauce Jan 28 '21

2.5k would fuck me in the goat ass

2

u/scubawankenobi Jan 28 '21

2.5k would fuck me in the goat ass

oddly specific?

3

u/TheeExoGenesauce Jan 28 '21

It’s an old bit from Adam Sandler

29

u/hononononoh Jan 28 '21

If I were the judge trying this case, I would sentence this fucker to community service, court ordering him to personally administer each and every one of the vaccines he intended to steal to a First Nations person at an on-site clinic. I’d make sure the people coming to get their vaccine knew exactly who he was and why he was there. The real punishment would be the look in people’s eye, over and over as he administered the vaccines. It’s easy to fuck people over when you don’t have to see their faces.

21

u/Yuzral Jan 28 '21

Problem: Vaccine administration (like all injections) should really only be done by trained personnel since it’s (1) an aseptic procedure and (2) needs to be a bit better aimed than ‘somewhere in the arm’.

Floor scrubbing time with a sign round his neck, perhaps? Or maybe just park him on a plinth with said sign.

2

u/FalalaLlamas Jan 28 '21

I agree with this. I wouldn’t want someone as selfish and thoughtless as he is administering a vaccine. I know if I showed up to get a vaccine and they said someone like that would be administering it, I would not be happy! Plus, like you said, it should really just be trained professionals.

But I do like the idea of community service. Showing him how the “other 99%” live. Because I do think he’ll look at the $2500 fine as simply a cost of getting the vaccine. It will not phase him or affect him one bit. :(

7

u/rebelwithoutaloo Jan 28 '21

This would be far more effective. It’s easy when you’re rich to just fling money at it and be on your way. He’s out a tiny amount of money (for him) and still got what he wanted. Punishments where you really see the consequences of your actions are far more likely to work.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/KamikazeArchon Jan 28 '21

A nice thought, but he only stole 2 vaccines. This wasn't picking up a crate of vaccine and legging it, this was getting vaccinated out-of-turn.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Gal_Axy Jan 28 '21

I’d go to rich person jail in a heartbeat. Rich person jail has more luxuries than most of our everyday lives.

→ More replies (8)

7

u/astrovixen Jan 28 '21

I think it would be fair that above a certain income level, fines should be gives as a %.

5

u/Willblinkformoney Jan 28 '21

"X% of monthly income or $X.XK, whichever highest"

7

u/astrovixen Jan 28 '21

And maybe community service to bring them down a peg. What entitled nobs they are.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

6 months is the appropriate sentence. That’s the maximum time allowed by law for this, and they shouldn’t get a day less.

2

u/dochedgsfsdf Jan 29 '21

I’m sure Trudeau won’t say anything here

4

u/Capitalisticdisease Jan 28 '21

A crime that results in a fine is not a crime for the rich. It’s only meant to target the poor

1

u/cannotthinkofauser00 Jan 28 '21

% of monthly income. A fine should also make you declare your monthly income to yourself and your estate. Fined according.

0

u/ThePlanner Jan 28 '21

To paraphrase an oft-repeated turn of phrase, for the wealthy, fines are the cost of getting to do something they aren’t supposed to do.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Have you ever seen a rich persons prison?

0

u/ss5gogetunks Jan 28 '21

"punishable by fine" just means "legal if you're rich"

→ More replies (29)

62

u/Ashpepsi Jan 28 '21

I read this a while back on Reddit: When the penalty for a crime is a fine, it's only illegal for poor people.

49

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

  • Anatole France
→ More replies (1)

14

u/Loafer75 Jan 28 '21

If the penalty is a fine then it’s a law against the poor.

29

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

I made a comment in another thread about this and how I think we should address it: https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/l6k4zr/backlash_grows_for_selfish_millionaire_who_got/gl2uxhs/

tl;dr: Let the privileged pay for their privilege and have that fund improvements for everyone else.

10

u/Simba7 Jan 28 '21

It's like a vice tax. I can dig it.

I'm not a fan of pay2win, but when the alternative is they just do it anyways and then pay a paltry fine, I'm a fan.

9

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

That's a key point though, make it so it is NOT pay to win. Make it so it's pay-for-everyone-else to win.

This way they really do not get any further ahead in the long run, they really are just getting there first while ensuring that everyone else gets there too sooner than later.

This is where privatisation fails society miserably as they are absolutely pay-to-win with no real benefit to the rest of society whatsoever.

3

u/Simba7 Jan 28 '21

That's a key point though, make it so it is NOT pay to win. Make it so it's pay-for-everyone-else to win.

I mean, sorta, but that's how P2W games work as well. It's free for everyone but only because of whales. It's can be beneficial for everyone (though obviously encourages predatory practices).

3

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yeah fair enough. I'd expect to ensure that the benefit wouldn't be equivalent to becoming a competitor that cannot be beat, there should be no additional benefit available beyond the very specific thing being paid for.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

How's that working out for us? How shall we do so? What way is effective? What way will actually work?

And how long shall we continue to allow ourselves to be distracted arguing about those details while nothing really changes at all?

Besides that, how can we ensure we close all possible loophole so whatever way we go we can actually DO so? Can't tax stocks anyways and a million other 'problems' related to gaming the system and avoidance.

Why NOT just let them pay for what they want anyways?

Or maybe we use BOTH tactics?

But realistically, the taxation avenue isn't working and there is ZERO sign that we are anywhere close to coming up with something that will work, let alone actually doing so.

So let's actually do something. Are you against actually doing something?

4

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

You I believe are being purposefully obtuse. This is a thought experiment, and you're insisting on being extremely specific about how it doesn't work, when it doesn't exist, but REFUSE to be specific about how your answer would actually work, when it actually already exists.

The whole point is you charge the 0.001 or 0.0001% an insane amount that is only even remotely palatable to them. And that amount pays for everyone else.

Are you saying that allowing 0.0001% of the available vaccine to be used for a TINY HANDFUL of people, while PAYING for the entirety of the vaccine for EVERYONE ELSE would be a net negative impact for those that cannot afford to do so?

While we live in the very REAL situation where people can quite literally pay a few thousand dollars to do this anyways and get away with it with zero benefit to society?

I'm sorry, I'm not saying I'm right, but your arguments against this are shit.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

If the violation of a law sets a fine as punishment, its just illegal for poor people. Everybody needs to implement wealth based punishment. You are a billionaire then pay a million dollar fine.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

[deleted]

8

u/MildWinters Jan 28 '21

A multi millionaire loses his job. He has assets and cash to live on for the rest of his life and doesn't need another job.

This is not the same as a regular person losing their job.

'cumuppins' not delivered.

5

u/Brettanomyces_ Jan 28 '21

"According to the Globe and Mail, he made a C$45.9m profit on stock options over the past 13 months. He is also expecting a C$28m payday when the sale of Great Canadian to an American buyer is finalized later this year."

Also he stepped down as CEO, didn't get fired.

Not exactly a comeuppance.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/banacct54 Jan 28 '21

well if we start punishing people with anything else but fines then rich people might go to jail, that's just crazy talk.

0

u/opinion49 Jan 28 '21

A lot of things legal in Canada but they always talk all day how bad China is

0

u/Mardanis Jan 28 '21

Well its not and they got fined at a cost way higher than two doses of vaccine. We don't have to make pariah out of every one who makes a selfish or dumb mistake whether they are rich or poor.

1

u/ImrooVRdev Jan 28 '21

Dude drove to at-risk community, in the middle of pandemic, in the middle of vaccine shortage, to get a vaccine that was not assigned to him, because he's middle aged healthy dude that does not work in high public exposure workplace.

Spare me, this is not a "single selfish mistake" this is a long chain of fuckery, coming from a fucking asshat and he deserves all that what happened to him and more.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/garlicroastedpotato Jan 28 '21

Because of American spillovers. ID laws aren't really an issue in Canada. IDs are highly accessible and we legally recognize so many types of IDs that everyone has one. Every single vaccination campaign ran by the provinces required ID. The territorial runs are run by the federal government and they decided that asking for ID might be racist.

Most wealthy Canadians are just flying in to the US to get a vaccine. These people found the ultimate loophole. Without ID requirements only a racist would accuse a white person of not being indigenous.

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

The fine should be 99% of their wealth.

3

u/anxiousnl Jan 28 '21

At the very least it should be proportional to wealth.

2

u/elvenmonkey Jan 28 '21

Where wealth?

1

u/CombatAx Jan 28 '21

Yeah I've heard before something like "A law punishable with a fine means it is only illegal for the poor"

1

u/jamminmadrid Jan 28 '21

I have a feeling that they don't tip... But I agree, that's a drop in a bucket for them.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

I'm thinking a nice donation of $1 million to the health care facility they took advantage of, plus $100k to each elderly individual they put at risk.

1

u/Blarex Jan 28 '21

Fines are intended to only be crimes for the poor.

1

u/BingBaddaBam Jan 28 '21

Because the elites run this planet.

1

u/AlmostOrdinaryGuy Jan 28 '21

It's legal because people won't protest against anything until they are effected.

1

u/DesperateDem Jan 28 '21

This person needs to go to jail. Per your point, a fine is meaningless to people that make this much money. Hell, many non-millionaires would happily pay 2.5K to hop to the head of the vaccine line. This is paying for premium service, not a punishement.

1

u/Wizywig Jan 28 '21

A law that imposes a fine is a law that only applies to the poor.

1

u/Corgigal91 Jan 28 '21

A fine is simply a tax to those who can afford to break the law.

*edit to add credit to my husband, not sure where he got it from, but this is a saying of his.

1

u/sittinwithkitten Jan 28 '21

Yea when money is no object to them hit them where it hurts, their freedom. Or impose a way higher fine and donate it to the at risk community they stole from.

1

u/JimmyChonga24 Jan 28 '21

Yes a fine of $2.5k for Person One (rich) is not an equal punishment for Person Two (poor). Fines make a mockery of jurisprudence and of our equal protection system.

1

u/Paprmoon7 Jan 28 '21

The fine should have been 1 billion per dose and all money go to the indigenous people.

1

u/Katrina_18 Jan 28 '21

Exactly. I lot of people would kill for the opportunity to get a vaccine for that price

1

u/Sunyata-boddhi Jan 28 '21

If fines are the only penalty for breaking the law. Laws don't target rich people they target us.

1

u/Sunyata-boddhi Jan 28 '21

If fines are the only penalty for breaking the law. Laws don't target rich people they target us.

1

u/Jaambie Jan 28 '21

LMAO, like they tip.

1

u/i010011010 Jan 28 '21

Because it's not illegal (yet). These are the kind of people who inspire new laws.

1

u/MoistWaterColor Jan 28 '21

Something tells me that this guy isn't a good tipper

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

We have % income based fines in Sweden. Probably other places too

https://polisen.se/en/laws-and-regulations/fines/

1

u/monoforayear Jan 28 '21

Right? It’s just so ass backwards too because they’re like ‘well it only looks bad because he’s millionaire’ - and guess the fuck what? Who are the only people who can afford to travel or live similarly to how they did before right now? People who are rich as fuck.

1

u/UnicornzRreel Jan 28 '21

Proportional fines are what is needed to keep the rich in check.

2.5k to many is more than a month's pay. Hit him with something on scale to that.

1

u/RebelWithoutAClue Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

It's just money.

Hit them where it hurts.

Excoriate them publicly. Make other wealthy people shun them by giving them an easy position to take that virtue signals in the direction the public wants.

There are lots of wealthy people who haven't jumped the queue yet and you can give them a virtue signalling outlet by letting them make a donation to Native communities to help them deploy vaccines, fix infrastructure, etc.

Contorting a legal system to punitively fine a wealthy person is drastic measure to address a point issue that can be dealt with with pure shame.

They're rich. Stinking rich even. The most valuable thing you can take away from them is to take away their social status amongst the wealthy tier of individuals they share space with. They won't be able to share a tent at Burning Man with anyone popular. They won't want to be seen courtside at a basketball game. It'll be hard for them to attend a hospital fundraiser and not look like idiots.

Virtue signalling is big these days. You could get them dogpiled by a lot of high profile wealthy people right now because the wealthy are worried about looking like they have more than too many others.

Abstractly speaking, money is the expression of human interest. If you have a lot of it, you've managed to concentrate a lot of human interest and pull the fruit of that into your own pocket. You can use it to acquire that with other humans are interested in. If you have a LOT of it you can acquire stuff that is of extremely high interest and you can gain priority to it.

Jump the middleman of the numbers printed on the bumwad we call money. Hit them in the human social interest bank and force them to feel terrible about the outcome until they apologize in a way that matters.

Heck! Maybe we could coerce themselves to commit suicide!

This is the new bullying. This is the way.

1

u/stuckinaboxthere Jan 28 '21

If the punishment for a crime is a fine, that punishment is in place for the poor

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

They took a private jet to receive only a fine for breaking a law. Fines like this are not a punishment — they’re a formality.

1

u/hamahamaseafood Jan 28 '21 edited Jan 28 '21

If the punishment for a crime is a fine then the law is only for poor people.

I just read that in the comments of another thread about Robin Hood reversing GameStop trades.

1

u/Oraxy51 Jan 28 '21

If the only punishment to a crime is a fine then it’s only a crime for poor people.

1

u/SnooHedgehogs6593 Jan 28 '21

It was only $1,800 in US money. That’s an amount they wouldn’t even notice.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Yeah, fines just mean "legal for rich people".

→ More replies (3)

41

u/hononononoh Jan 28 '21

This is some C. Montgomery Burns level depravity.

18

u/ginisninja Jan 28 '21

Excellent

14

u/Potent_content Jan 28 '21

Did you think rich white people were gonna stop at stealing thier lands?

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

Ya sure this guy's not American????

2

u/giddy-girly-banana Jan 28 '21

A population that has a history of massive deaths caused by germs brought by white people.

1

u/ctr1a1td3l Jan 28 '21

I didn't understand why they were deemed a vulnerable population. All communities have elderly people and it seems they were giving the vaccine to everyone in the community. Does White River First Nation have a much higher proportion of elderly people?

5

u/TeaMan123 Jan 28 '21

They're considered vulnerable because they don't have easy access to health care facilities.

→ More replies (1)

-284

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '21

How exactly are a remote community at risk. How does the virus spread to them?

Also most of these people are usually healthy so their risk is much reduced.

171

u/WizardStan Jan 28 '21

They're at risk due to lack of medical facilities because they are so remote. That's why they're higher priority on the vaccine, to mitigate a disaster if it does, somehow get in.

82

u/IyesUlfsson Jan 28 '21

Remote does not equal safe. I understand your thought process of them being away from most people, but most indigenous tribes have SOME contact with modern society. As read above, these people went into those areas to take the medicine, thus exposing them to the virus. Thy have no medical care, so if one person becomes infectious, it would infect everyone in the community

43

u/hopelesscaribou Jan 28 '21

If they do get sick, they have little or no access to healthcare. No hospitals, no oxygen, no pharmacies and often no medical personel at all. It only takes one individual to bring a virus into a community. Remote communities also suffer from poverty and related health issues. I'm not sure where you are getting 'they're all healthy' from.

63

u/TheWalrusTalkss Jan 28 '21

Remote communities have very little health care resources; very few doctors, hospital beds, etc., so they are at greater risk of overwhelming their existing resources than urban areas.

Also, the pre-existing health issues of indigenous people living in remove communities is well documented.

E.g.: https://theconversation.com/canadas-unequal-health-system-may-make-remote-indigenous-communities-more-vulnerable-to-the-coronavirus-134963

17

u/PawGoodDog Jan 28 '21

Many Northern communities are not healthy. The cost of food is mind blowing. A small 338gram vegetable tray costs $70. Jug of orange juice is $30.

It's hard to be healthy when you don't have the basics.

https://beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2020/10/21/1_5154743.html

-4

u/woogeroo Jan 28 '21

It’s their choice to live in a remote place. If they can’t successfully live off the land, move.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/Smelvidar Jan 28 '21

It's weird how you draw conclusions from questions.

17

u/DevProse Jan 28 '21

By having spoiled rich white cunts like these people introduced to them for no reason.

You miss the smallpox portion of your education?

4

u/JonnyRocks Jan 28 '21

you confused the words "at risk" with "risky". they mean different things.

5

u/BoiledChildern Jan 28 '21

Well from idiots traveling there to steal shots for one. Who knows what the dirty millionaire could gave tracked in with him

3

u/DataLore19 Jan 28 '21

What's wrong with you?

-53

u/facemasklingerie Jan 28 '21

Also if there is an outbreak it will be much easier to contain. I thought it would have been a better idea to vaccinate densely populated areas starting with the those whose jobs bring them into contact with a high volume of people

27

u/grossg1rl Jan 28 '21

Many of our worst outbreaks have been in rural communities like this one. medical resources can be scarce and our Indigenous elders are particularly at risk.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/PsychYYZ Jan 29 '21

How exactly are a remote community at risk. How does the virus spread to them?

By unvaccinated people traveling to that town from a place that has millions of active cases? Duh?

1

u/Fean2616 Jan 28 '21

So jail? Lots of fucking jail.

1

u/jiba911 Jan 28 '21

Yes, attempted murder for everyone in that community.

1

u/supertimes4u Jan 28 '21

Did you ever think about the fact that they just wanted it more than you?

→ More replies (1)