老司机翻车记：芝加哥黑人车主是如何被罚单债务逼得破产的（2） [美国媒体]

译者按：
这是美国《大众利益》发布的长篇报道。文中描绘的贪婪的官员，狡诈的律师，无情的市政，麻木的人民，以及他们之间的互动可以作为了解美国下层社会的一个窗口。
文章的主体部分于11月8日发布于龙腾主站：
http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/26713.html
本篇是网友对该文章的评论。

Tex223845
Oddly enough some studies indicate that people who park in legal spaces, pay the meter, and stop at red lights receive far fewer tickets. Has this approach been tried?

真奇怪。一项研究表明，不违章停车，不闯红灯，停车缴费，红灯停车等行为可以有效避免交通罚单的产生。不知道（文中提到的这些车主）试过这种方法没有？

Ryan （回复Tex223845）
What a novel idea. Obey the law and don't get a fine.
Wonder why the author didn't bring up that option for these criminals instead of turning them into victims.

这真是个新颖的主意：只要你遵守法律就不会被罚款！
我就奇了怪了，为什么作者没有为这帮子罪犯提出这种解决办法，而是坚持把他们洗白成受害者呢？

Scenario （回复Ryan ）
And if people never, ever got sick they wouldn't need health care.
In the real world there are places that have no parking or parking that costs someone working at or near minimum wage 1/3 of their weekly pay. The problem is some people have no viable options. The only job the can get is in a place with no parking. Public transportation would add 5 to 6 hours to their commute. They could park a half a mile a way and walk but they are not allowed to leave their children at school early enough so they can have the time to walk.
I got a parking ticket in Indianapolis once. I parked next to a meter. Got out. Read everything on the meter. Put in my quarters. When I got back, I had a ticket. I didn't know that there was more writing on the back of the meter. The side where you have to be standing in a main street to be able to read it.

你们这等于是说如果人们永远不生病，他们就永远不需要医疗保健。
在现实世界里，有些地方没有停车位，或者停车费是某人每周工资的1/3。问题是有些人没有其他的选择。他们可以找到的唯一工作附近没有停车位。乘坐公共交通则会导致每天增加5到6个小时的通勤时间。他们可以把车停在半英里以外然后走路上班，但他们不能把他们的孩子过早放在学校（学校不会那么早开门），这样他们就没时间走路了。
我在印第安纳波利斯吃过一张罚单。我停在一只咪表旁边。下了车。阅读了咪表上写的所有内容。往咪表里塞硬币。当我回来时，我吃了一张罚单。我没注意到咪表背面还有其他说明。就是说，你必须站在车来车往的街上才能读到那一边的内容。

This sort of stuff happens all the time. You put in your quarters. Says you have 45 minutes. Set the timer on the phone to go off in 35 minutes. Get back to the meter 34 minutes after you left. Should have 11 minutes left. Look at the meter. Time expired.
It's probably not on purpose. But why should the city spend money to fix a problem that's making them money if they don't have to. If a meter doesn't work at all, fix it right away. If the meter has a timer that runs out too soon, put it on the bottom of the list.

这种事情总是在发生。你塞了硬币。（咪表）说你有45分钟（停车时间）。你在手机上机定了个35分钟的闹铃。离开后34分钟内回到咪表旁边。应该还剩11分钟。看看咪表。超时了。
这可能不是（市政）故意的。但是，为什么这个城市有积极性来花钱来解决一个‘如果不解决反而能赚钱’的问题呢？如果咪表坏了，他们肯定马上来修。如果咪表跑太快了，那就是修理优先级最低的了。

The camera fines are the worst. You stop at the light, wait 3 seconds and turn right. But the machine says that you only waited 2.9999999 seconds so here's a $200 fine.
I've had lots of situations where I had no idea what the speed limit was. I drove for 20 miles actively looking for a sign. If I was pulled over for driving too fast or even too slowly, it would have been my fault for not magically knowing the speed limit in that area.

交通摄像罚款是最恶劣的。你红灯停车了，等了3秒然后向右转。但机器说你只等了2.9999999秒，所以请接好这张200美元的罚单。
很多时候我不知道当地限速是多少。那种情况下我会开20英里每小时去找限速标志。哪怕我因为开得太快甚至太慢而被警察拦下来，那也是我的问题，因为我不能神奇地预知那地方的限速。

link487（回复Scenario ）
Good points.

说得好。

Leon Bayer （回复Scenario ）
Good point, but there is a huge difference between you who tried to comply, and the subjects in this study who did not make that effort.

说得好。但是像你这样的尝试遵守交通规则的人和文章中写的那种根本就没有想要遵守交通规则的人明显不一样。



There is a scientific experiment where they put a dog in a cage with a short wall in the middle that the dog can easily jump over. The ring a buzzer and a few seconds later place a painful electric shock on the floor. But there are two versions. The first version, they only shock the side of the cage the dog is standing on. In the second version, they shock both sides. Dogs in the first version hear the buzzer and jump over the wall avoiding the shock. Dogs in the second version have no way to escape. The dogs in the first version are just normal dogs. The dogs in the second version just cower and whine and give up whenever they hear a buzzer because they've learned that no matter how hard they try, their going to get shocked.

有一个科学实验，他们把一只狗放在笼子里，中间有一堵狗很容易就能跳过去的短墙。他们响一声蜂鸣器，几秒钟后往笼子的地板上释放一阵让狗感到疼痛的电流。但是这试验有两个版本。第一个版本，笼子里只有狗一开始站着的那侧地板上会过电流。第二个版本，短墙两边的地板上都过电流。第一个版本的狗听到蜂鸣器就可以跳过短墙，避免被电击。第二个版本的狗则无法避免电击。第一版中的狗表现的很正常。第二个版本中的狗只会畏缩和哀嚎，听到蜂鸣器就只会放弃，因为他们已经知道无论他们怎么努力，他们都会被电到。

People who've gone to court and try to pay the bill learn that it is futile to even try to pay the charge. The fee is always going to go up faster than you can pay it. At this point, there is really no reason not to park illegally. What difference does it make if they take your licence away for a $100 bill you can't pay or a $1000 bill you can't pay or a $10,000 bill you can't pay.
The government could solve this problem if they allowed payment plans for lower amounts. As it is now, the people have to accumulate $1000 in debt before they can get into a payment plan. But the payments are usually greater than their disposable income. They end up having to choose whether they want to not buy food or not pay the electric bill or not pay for the traffic fine. If they had a system where they could start making payments at $10 instead of $1000, they would avoid this problem.

那些上法庭并试图支付罚款账单的人会发现，即使他们试图支付罚款也是徒劳的。罚款总是比你存钱的速度增长得更快。这样一来，他们没有理由不非法停车。如果他们因为你无法支付100美元的账单，或1000美元的账单，或10000美元的账单而吊销你的驾照，对你来说又有什么区别呢？
如果政府允许收入较低的人分期付款，就可以解决这个问题。现在，只有欠了1000美元以上的罚单债务，你才有资格分期付款。但是，一次分期付款需要交的钱通常比这些人所有可用资金还要多。他们最终不得不在不买食物，或不支付电费，或不支付交通罚款之间选择。如果有一个欠10美元以上就可以分期付款的系统，这些人就可以避免这个问题。

Scenario （回复Leon Bayer ）
I just thought of a middle class example. First, Republicans succeed in getting rid of those silly regulations that are just hurting business.

我刚才又想到了一个中产阶级的例子。首先，共和党人成功地取消了那些“只会伤害商业的愚蠢规定”。



Ryan MacIntosh （回复Scenario）
In abouy eight hours you can walk a marathon. 26.2 miles. you telling me public transportation is slower than 3 miles an hour? Slower than walking. But you will take your car pay for gas and not pay your tickets.
No, you want to be a victim. The establishment isn't against you, you are against the establishment.

八小时的时间足够你走一个马拉松的长度了，26.2英里。你告诉我公交车比每小时三英里还慢？比走着还慢？可是你有给你的车加汽油的钱，就没钱交罚款？
不可能，你自己想当受害者。建制派没有反对你，是你反对他们。

译注：
建制派指在某一国家或机构内，支配权力的群体或精英。

======二======



Lopinot （回复Katie Gains ）
Bingo!

完全正确！

======三======

Jpeake
Dumb question, but why not just park legally?
Disclosure - only read about a third of article. Maybe this is discussed and I missed it.

我有个傻问题，为什么他们不干脆不违章停车呢？
我只看了文章的前三分之一，可能文章后面介绍了具体情况但是我没有看到。

Chris Wheat （回复Jpeake）
Tickets for red-light camera violations — issued when drivers turn illegally or run through a red light — make up the greatest number of all citations. But compliance tickets for lacking a city sticker or having expired plates are disproportionately involved in bankruptcy cases. Indeed, sticker violations were the largest source of ticket debt in Chicago.
-FTA

红灯摄像头违章– 当司机在红灯的时候违章转向，或干脆闯红灯的时候产生- 是所有罚单中数量最大的一种。但是，没有更新年检贴纸或者牌照过期涉及到的破产案不成比例地高。确实，年检贴纸违章是芝加哥罚款债务的最大来源。
-文章里的原话

Gerald Abrahamson （回复Jpeake ）
Based on your comment, you have never lived in a real city. There is very little, or virtually no, available parking unless you pay a very large parking fee. If you can afford the large parking fee, then the minor cost of tickets would be chump change in comparison.

从你的评论看，你从来没有在城里住过。城里很多地方基本找不到，或干脆没有停车位，除非你想要支付一大笔停车费。如果你真能交得起停车费，停车罚单那点钱根本不算什么。



Jpeake （回复Scenario ）
I just don’t feel like this is the govt’s issue to solve. I say that as a Democrat who voted for Obama twice. You aren’t entitled to own a car. Or to park in the most expensive city in the Midwest.

我实在不觉得这是政府应该解决的问题。我是作为一个两次投票给奥巴马的民主党人说的这话。你不是天生就有可以开车的特权，或者天生就有每天都能把车停在中西部消费最高的城市的市中心的特权。

译注：
从普通美国人的角度来看，民主党的纲领偏向“民主/左”，即倾向于将好处分给大家。共和党的纲领偏向“自由/右”，即通过自由竞争促进经济发展，把蛋糕做大。这位这里认为解决所有人上下班难的问题过于“社会主义”了，即是民主党也不及这样做。

If a $200 traffic or parking ticket is enough to destroy you financially, you’d think people would be dang sure to not put themselves in position to get one. No matter how ridiculous the city enforcement is. You know the rules of the game up front.

如果200美元的交通违章罚单足以在经济上摧毁你，那么你在这些地方开车/停车的时候自己就要非常小心谨慎。无论市政执法多么荒谬，你在事先也是了解这里的游戏规则的。



译注：
美国的交通违章罚款是在城市法庭交的。一般来说原告是警察，被告是违章车主。如果被告对罚款金额无异议可以直接去法庭一个窗口交罚款，如果有异议则可以选择上庭与警察对质，由法官判断罚款/罚款数额是否合适。



美国交通法庭示例

======四======

Puck Swami
I have no sympathy for these people. None. Zero.
First, If you can't afford all the costs of car ownership -- don't be a car owner. It's that simple. Take transit.
Secondly, if you can afford to be a car owner, drive it safely and legally and you won't get red light ticket or moving violations.

我一点也不同情这帮人。没有同情心。零同情心。
首先，如果你养不起车---那就不要买车。就是这么简单。请坐公交。
其次，如果你买了车，也养得起车，开车小心，遵守交规，确保你不会因为违章吃罚单。



Try to fight the City in Court? You WILL lose and it will cost you even more than just paying up when the violations bureau puts a gun to your head. They ain't stupid and you are not the first person trying to fight a bogus parking or traffic ticket! If the City of Chicago made it easy or even possible to always obey the "law" the City would lose gazillions in operating revenue. That is a fact and the city politicians know it.

想试试上法庭告芝加哥市？你官司肯定会输，而且违章相关部门会强逼你吐出比直接交罚款更多的钱。他们可不是傻子，你也不是第一个试着与他们的诈骗罚款单作斗争的人！如果芝加哥市让依“法”行车就能很容易地避免被罚款，甚至来说有可能避免被罚款，那芝加哥市就等于损失了一大堆收入。这是事实，而且芝加哥高官很清楚这个问题。

From the perspective of living in a small town or farm, like you seemingly do, you could never understand what living and driving in the city is all about. But, please get off your overly simplistic high-horse and learn that it is often and at times, nearly impossible, to play by the rules when the game is rigged. Yeah...it is all about money. Extracting as much as they can in every way they can think of.

如果你来自一个小镇或农村，我觉得你很可能就是（来自小镇或农村），你永远无法理解在这个城市生活和开车意味着什么。但是，请不要端着你那过于简化的高高在上的态度，并请明白当游戏规则被操纵的时候，你几乎不可能遵守规则。没错......他们（芝加哥市）这么做都是为了钱。用他们能想到的所有方式，尽可能多地搜刮。



译注：
芝加哥市长拉姆·伊曼纽尔是民主党人（也是决定芝加哥开始靠罚款贴补市财政那位老哥），2011年起任芝加哥市长，连任至今。



译注：
棒球梗。

Of course, all of this will be changing with advent of the AV (autonomous vehicle or self-driving car). But who can afford the cost of an AV? Not the average American, which means the poor will NOT own one either. The solution is simple: Mass public transit using a fleet of AVs. Instead of running on fixed routes, they operate like a public taxi fleet--door to door service. Which means you do NOT spend $35k-$50k buying a new car, paying thousands per year insuring it, paying additional thousands per year keeping it in an expensive garage, storing it at work, etc. You do NOT buy it--you rent it for each trip every day. So you only pay (say) 10% of the cost of ownership per year and get to reclaim your garage and make it into a livable space. Meantime, all those parking garages get torn down and office/residential towers can be built on the land (much more effective use of high-value land, right?). Imagine what happens to all the HUGE empty parking lots around the malls....

当然，随着AV（自动汽车或自动驾驶汽车）的出现，所有这些都将随之改变。但谁能买得起一辆自动驾驶汽车？肯定不是普通美国人，这就意味着美国穷人肯定也不会有自动驾驶汽车。解决方案很简单：用自动驾驶汽车队来开展大规模公共交通。它们不用在固定路线上运行，可以像公共出租车车队一样运作– 提供门到门服务。这意味着你不需要花费3.5万到5万美元买新车，还要每年支付数千美元的保险费，然后每年再额外支付数千美元把你的新车存在工作单位的车库等等。你不用*买*它- 你每天为你的每次旅行*租*它。因此，你每年只需支付（比方说）10％的成本，然后可以把家里的车库改成居住空间。与此同时，所有停车场都可以被拆掉建办公楼/住宅楼（这是对这些珍贵地块的更有效的利用，对吗？）。想象一下，把购物中心商场附近那巨大的空置停车场改成有用的建筑该有多么美好......

======五======

Larry Vigil
Don't park where you shouldn't and pay the ticket rather than ignore them. You can ask for payments but don't ignore them. It's called obeying the law and if you don't obey the law you have to pay the consequences, you are not a victim in this, you are part of the problem.

那就不要把车停在禁止停车区呗，然后把你的罚单交了，别故意忽视它们。这就叫做遵守法律。如果你不遵守法律，就得付出代价，（这种情况下）你不是这个问题的受害者，你就是问题本身的一部分。



译注：
自由市场的倡导者基本都是共和党以及纯粹市场经济的支持者。他们一般希望政府做“小政府”，尽量不要进行宏观调控，依靠自由竞争让市场进行自我调节。他们认为通过竞争变得有钱的人会花钱，然后这些钱就会流入社会上其他人的手中，最终大家都会变得富裕，即“涓滴效应“。这些人一般反对政府进行宏观调控，认为这种行为是“社会主义的大政府”行为。自然，这样的人是有钱人/资本家的几率比较大。

link487 （回复judiwillard）
To me, the Democrats that run Chicago are not progressive. They are neo-liberal. They believe everything has a price, but nothing has any value, especially working class humans and their concerns. That has been true in corrupt "political machine" Chicago for over a century. There are few, if any viable alternatives to voting for the well oiled political machine that is the Democratic party in Chicago.

对我来说，掌管芝加哥的民主党人可不是进步派。他们是新自由主义者。他们相信一切都有价格，但任何东西都没有价值，尤其是工薪阶层的人和他们的喜怒哀乐（更没有价值）。在腐败的“政治机器”芝加哥，一个多世纪以来都是如此。然而，很少（很多时候根本就没有）能有比民主党这台失灵的政治机器更好的选项。

That being said, the Republican track record in Kansas or Wisconsin is just as bad as the Democratic track record in Chicago when it comes to cronyism, corruption and austerity. They also interpret "smaller govenment" as closing public schools, reducing funding for state healthcare programs and letting roads and bridges crumble into dust. Seems like both parties operate from the same playbook.

话虽这么说，堪萨斯州或威斯康星州的共和党人在任人唯亲，腐败和独裁方面的记录和（芝加哥的）民主党一样糟糕。他们还把“小政府”解读为关闭公立学校，减少对州医疗保健计划的资助，以及（不去修缮公路系统，）让道路和桥梁慢慢烂掉。看起来两党手里的是同一个剧本啊。

======单个评论======

Bill_G
This whole thing amounts to usury. The courts should start assigning community service to these people who can't pay and dismissing these fines and impound fees. That would provide plenty of deterrence for repeat offenders while keeping people out of financial distress. Of course that would also end this little racket Chicago has set up so I wouldn't bet on it happening anytime soon.

这种做法整个等于高利贷。法院应该开始判这些无法支付这些罚款和拖车费的人用社区服务（抵消罚款）。这样做应该可以对屡犯交规者造成足够的威慑力，同时不会让人们陷入财务危机。当然，这样做也会让芝加哥市政府丧失这次合法敲诈勒索的机会，所以我不认为这很快就能实现。



译注：
在美国，买车之后会得到一张临时牌照。但是这张临时牌照一般只能用几个月的时间。车主需要在这段期间向当地车管所申请正式牌照。



临时牌照示例



DJ Shack • 8 months ago
So, how is this a black thing? As far as I know, vehicle stickers fees, license plate fees, red light camera fines and parking ticket fines are not raced based. I'm confused as to why the authors of this article think that everyone but black people should pay what they owe. It's amazing that so many of the subjects of this article feel entitled to drive a car without paying for plates or stickers and thinking they can park in no parking zones and drive thru red lights with impunity. Maybe that's the "black thing".

那么，这位啥是与黑人有关的问题？据我了解，谁都要交年检费，牌照费，闯红灯罚款和违章停车罚款，罚款不论黑白。我现在感到很困惑，因为作者的意思好像是说大家都应该还债，但是黑人不用。这文章里能找出这么多认为自己的车不用年检不用上牌照，在禁停区可以随便停车，闯红灯还不受罚的人。可能这些人的存在才是“与黑人有关的问题”