UKC

There seems to be a number of people who are determined that the Covid 19 precautions do not apply to them and I'm not just referring to the general public. Politicians(and their siblings) celebrities and political advisers are all guilty along with the conspiracy theorists and deniers.

I've come to the conclusion that for many of these people being clobbered by a fine is nothing more than a minor irritation; a bit like those who flout parking regulations in popular mountain areas. They seem to regard the payment of a Fixed Penalty Notice as part of the cost of their day out.

Maybe the answer is some sort of enforced isolation. That would have the advantage of keeping them out of the infection chain. I don't profess to know the answer to providing the "secure facilities" but I really can't see any other way of dealing with these people.

Whip them till they scream for mercy. In front of an audience (socially distanced of course).

I'm a big fan of fines which scale with income. I think universal credit is £5k/year or so, and I think the covid fine is £200.  We could use that as a base to scale things from. So, as an example, Dominic would get a £5600 fine. Might not learn his lesson immediately but I think he'd get there a damn sight quicker than otherwise.

I think people on higher incomes should pay an even higher proportion of their income when it comes to fines. If you fine someone on universal credit or minimum wage 5% of their income they would probably struggle to eat or get into debt that would spiral.  Fine someone on £200k 5% of their income they'll probably just buy a slightly less expensive second car or go on a slightly less extravagant holiday. 

That works so long as they're on PAYE. I imagine most people on a £200k package and above will have it arranged in so that actual earning are hard to ascertain.

There will be a lot of very wealthy people whose affairs are arranged in such a way that they don't have any visible income.

Scaling fines will hit low to middle wage earners the most, as you say high earners have things in place to hide the earnings,  very low earners and people who only have benefits coming in often get to pay in installments. I know people who pay £1 per fortnight from their benefits.

Mr and Mrs average who are living to or maybe slightly beyond their means will bear the brunt. 

Unless you do it like Switzerland: If your declaration of income looks implausible they take a look at your house, cars, and living standard (as documented by your credit card data) and are happy to hand out speeding fines of 5 million Euros...

CB

Force them into an isolation hotel for 2 weeks at their own expense. Make friends with a couple of mice

I think people from different backgrounds will have very different experiences leading to different views on the the laws.

For instance imagine someone working full time in some shitty, low paid job where they're interacting with many others, thus risking infection, and perhaps told to turn off their test and trace app too. Then at their time off they're told not see anyone and stay at home. There's a contradiction there. Don't worry about infection at work / don't do anything to risk infection in your free time.

I can understand why someone in that position might well be more tempted to bend the lockdown rules than someone who is perhaps not working at all.

You beat me to it, and you seem better informed than me. I had also heard this regarding  Swiss speeding fines too but didn't know how they checked (or, indeed, that they needed to)

It's tricky because it's all very fluid and new (well, the latest changes are new at any rate) and what some/many/most/??? people do for a law is determine their relations with it based on things like:

- If they feel it's fair

- If they can get behind the achievement the law is aiming for.

- If they think they are likely to get caught for flouting it.

- If they think the punishment is worth risking.

- If they feel the law is morally righteous.

- How they feel their peers are reacting to the law

- If they feel it is going to be effective at achieving its aim.

- What benefits they can get from flouting the law.

- many more things that don't come to mind just now.

So there are oh-so-many factors that contribute to how people relate to laws and with the covid rules changing on around a weekly basis, I don't think it is at all surprising that there are such huge distances between what some people think is acceptable and what other people think is acceptable. I think society needs time to adjust to a radical change and find a new equilibrium and I don't think we are there yet.

This is to say nothing of the general lassitude that scientists have always predicted would be a serious problem for a very restrictive set of rules as time went on.

Also, I have to say, I don't think the naming-and-shaming attitude in the media and in some local areas does anything to foster understanding or societal cohesion over the issue.

It is rumoured that people may soon be fined (taxed) for what has been happening and needs to be paid.  It's may be called a wealth tax, based on assets, not income.