I’m all for pegging fines to income to reduce the likelyhood that fines cause serious harm to violators, beyond the desired effect. But at some point it may not be possible to do anything but take a license.
Fixed that for you.
Compare to: "OSHA shouldn't be fining MegaCo for lacking metal safety-railings around the ManMangler 4000 unit, because if it was reeeealy about safety they'd shut down the entire factory until it was safe. Fines prove they aren't serious about safety and have some other dubious motive."
Fines are a totally valid way to change behavior and deter the unsafe behavior from happening again in the future. They are both adjustable and reversible, unlike imprisonment or eye-for-an-eye. While I would love to see fines scaled by wealth to avoid disproportionately severe (or ineffective) effects, that's not the same as rejecting fines entirely.
If OSHA was serious about safety, they would shut the offending machine down until remedied.
If there's enough problems in a facility, then they shut the whole place down.
But therein lies the problem - then the employees don't get paid. The "fine" should go to the employees for endangerment and payment of lack of work.
But no, fines.
I think the one that "took a comment to an absurd point" is the one about driving being a human right.