Caught my staff stealing again.

Of cause theft is wrong. Theft is at the expense of someone else otherwise it wouldn't be called theft(thats the definition after all)
What i'm saying is some people will steal merely because they can(no morals). Others will only steal if they have no other choice. So if you add all that up that means everyone will steal if its possible to steal. If its impossible to steal even if you're desperate, problem solved.

Some systems make it impossible to steal some companies have no stock losses(attributable to theft) because of this not because humans have "morals"
 
Last edited:
Vegeta said:
Of cause theft is wrong. Theft is at the expense of someone else otherwise it wouldn't be called theft(thats the definition after all)
What i'm saying is some people will steal merely because they can(no morals). Others will only steal if they have no other choice. So if you add all that up that means everyone will steal if its possible to steal. If its impossible to steal even if you're desperate, problem solved.
Click to expand...
Ok I see what you're trying to say... and yes, if you can prevent theft great but you're not actually solving the problem for anyone but yourself - at least, the infected mind is certainly not cured. Still, I don't believe that EVERYONE will steal if there's a 'potential for theft', something which you're stating as fact. Indeed, someone who sticks absolutely to their morals would rather die than steal, but this is an extreme that is probably never actually reached in the real world anyway so I don't see the point in turning this into a debate. The bottom line is that nobody should WANT to steal, yet there are some who do, or they justify it. It may be possible, but in ALL cases, doing it is wrong, because you're forcing harm on someone else which is exactly how you should NOT act.
 
What a friend of mine did few years back. He caught a staff member stealing and wanted to fire her but the law at that time was 3 strikes before you can fire.
He started to treat her and show her that she was not wanted by giving her difficult things to do. He made her sweep and mop and clean up most of the time. He made it so bad that she left on her own without having to pay her a cent.
 
HideInLight said:
If I haven't earned it, then I simply don't want it.
Click to expand...
I want a billion rand... I haven't earned it, but I want it. That doesn't mean I'm going to do something unethical to actually obtain it, but there's nothing wrong with wanting it and using that want to motivate me to get it, right? ;) Every realised dream/accomplishment started with a desire/goal/want after all
 
Vegeta said:
I don't believe you. If you where in his shoes you'd steal. I dont steal either because i'm just like you, comfy. But if i was hungry...
Click to expand...

I still don't agree. He has a job so he shouldn't be hungry. If he's hungry it's because he's an idiot that never used condoms so has kids to feed. Stealing will kill his chances of getting a better job and improving his life in the long term.
 
Maddmatt said:
I still don't agree. He has a job so he shouldn't be hungry. If he's hungry it's because he's an idiot that never used condoms so has kids to feed. Stealing will kill his chances of getting a better job and improving his life in the long term.
Click to expand...
Or he's hungry because his taking care of his old mother & father who can no longer work and have no retirement because they worked for minimal wage on a farm. He takes care of his younger sister who needs money for studies(so she can hopefully make some money one day) he helps his sick aunt whos husband the bread winner died and she has no one else. He works for minimal wage he's desperate. Us comfy people can judge and talk out of our a$$ all we like, life is hard for most.
 
It's an emotional problem as well as a philosophical one. Emotionally, some acts of theft may seem justifiable (at least to those who commit the act); but the fact of the matter is that in all cases, theft remains theft and is therefore wrong.
You might say "he stole because was earning minimum wage and couldn't make ends meet", but that doesn't cancel out the fact that theft was committed. The same way you could say that, I can also say: To me, it's morally detestable from an emotional standpoint how some people can have such extreme wealth and rather than distribute it to those who need it, instead choose to live extremely lavish extravagant lives with expensive parties, private yachts, planes and motorcars, and million dollar holiday homes all over the place... but the truth is that in a Capitalist system, wealth comes to those who earn it, so it's nobody's right to tell anybody else what they ought to do with their wealth. It doesn't matter how I feel emotionally, he has the money and I don't, and I'm wrong to steal it. Robin Hood may have been a hero to those he gave, but at the end of the day what he gave was not his own, but stolen from others, and an objective judge would rule him guilty of theft regardless of what his intentions may have been, right?
 
I say law is law but not all law is right. And i dont condone stealing but i'm just saying like in your Robin Hood example law just isn't always right
 
Last edited:
Vegeta said:
I say law is law but not all law is right
Click to expand...
What do you mean? Sounds like you're indirectly saying that there are times when it's OK to steal? Alright then, steal from who? If you're condoning theft, then please give me your physical address, I'll happily to come "steal" from you, because since our views of theft seem to differ, it would turn out that I'd have implicitly received your permission to steal purely based on your own world-view, so that me taking from you would not be considered theft by my world-view. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here: Can you be more specific -- which particular law are you referring to here when you say that not all law is right? What should that law be, if it's not right? Surely you believe that laws SHOULD be absolute/right and for the benefit of all? So then surely condemning theft is for the benefit of all, at least assuming that all are provided for by some means?
 
Stealing a total of only 1 million from the top 50 wealthiest companies in the world to save the lives(medication/food whatever) of 1 million dieing people... Thats wrong according to the law. Faktup law me thinks!
 
Vegeta said:
Stealing a total of only 1 million from the top 50 wealthiest companies in the world to save the lives(medication/food whatever) of 1 million dieing people... Thats wrong according to the law. Faktup law me thinks!
Click to expand...
Stealing is wrong according to the law. But you think the law is wrong? So if someone lies within the top 50 wealthiest people in the world, then the law should state that it's OK to steal from them? That's RIDICULOUS dude... seriously... where do you draw the line?

I think a law such as "Do not steal" is perfectly fine. The problem is that humans have a problem of greed, which leads them to exploit the system and work around the laws. There should not be an extremely wealthy portion of society, the same way there should not be an extremely poor portion of society. There should be a distribution of wealth which is handled in such a way as to keep the system self-sustaining and productive, and so that every person not only has equal rights, but also equal potential to realize their goals -- every person must then conform to the law without exception, so that those who fail to do so can be justly fined in order to teach them the correct way so that the system can maintain its integrity. As close to ideal laws as possible, with as close to zero corruption as possible. But people are too content with thinking these days that corruption is just another way of life - most people only care about themselves and their own lives to bother about the lives of our children. Most people don't think twice before dropping their plastic packets/bottles on the floor, or beer bottles in the streets... people just don't seem to care. Why? Because they don't know any better. That's why theft is so common - it comes down to the fact that these people really just don't care about anyone else but themselves, because if they did, they'd at least have enough respect to bring up the matter seriously with their bosses.
Well, change starts with you. Every one of us needs to make the change... and a part of that change is to reject compromise. Theft is wrong, always, end of story. Let's help the poor, and encourage the lazy/unproductive to work - there's just no other way I can think of. Anyone care to contribute a better solution? You're not doing it for me, you're doing it for everyone including yourself... and that's key.
 
Last edited:
Heres another faktup law the right to own certain things like for example Animals. You OWN a living breathing animal thats part of the ecosystem and can do with it what you please. How faktup is that sheat! Loads of faktup laws excist me thinks

A hungry worker at a bread factory steals a slightly damaged loaf of bread because he's starving. (a loaf that was not good enough to sell for food but good enough to sell as byproduct)
Its still a crime lock him up u say?
 
Last edited:
Vegeta said:
A hungry worker at a bread factory steals a slightly damaged loaf of bread because he's starving. (a loaf that was not good enough to sell for food but good enough to sell as byproduct)
Its still a crime lock him up u say?
Click to expand...
Yep! If he really needs and wants the bread he should ask his boss for it. If his boss says no, he should go find another job really... because no boss deserves success (success brought upon by workers such as this guy) if he's not even willing to give a desperate worker a reject loaf once-off, in my opinion.
Ultimately, his boss sets the rules for that factory, and I doubt any factory owner would tolerate theft. Most importantly, the worker has no right to take that bread regardless of how hungry he is: it was never his bread to begin with... everyone else out there is working hard for money to pay for their bread, why should this guy get his for free just because he happens to be working in a bread factory?
 
fragtion said:
Yep! If he really needs and wants the bread he should ask his boss for it. If his boss says no, he should go find another job really... because no boss deserves success (success brought upon by workers such as this guy) if he's not even willing to give a desperate worker a reject loaf once-off, in my opinion.
Ultimately, his boss sets the rules for that factory, and I doubt any factory owner would tolerate theft. Most importantly, the worker has no right to take that bread regardless of how hungry he is: it was never his bread to begin with... everyone else out there is working hard for money to pay for their bread, why should this guy get his for free just because he happens to be working in a bread factory?
Click to expand...
Wow okay to me the workers who make the bread to make this company, its owners and shareholders rich beyond comprehension should never even need bread. He is the maker of the product and should never have to "need" it. But thats not reality in reality even though his hands bring riches he himself will never be rich and he might even be hungry for bread. If that doesn't show you that there's something wrong with the world and its laws nothing will.
 
Vegeta said:
Wow okay to me the workers who make the bread to make this company, its owners and shareholders rich beyond comprehension should never even need bread. He is the maker of the product and should never have to "need" it. But thats not reality in reality even though his hands bring riches he himself will never be rich and he might even be hungry for bread. If that doesn't show you that there's something wrong with the world and its laws nothing will.
Click to expand...
You've just touched on a completely different ethical problem. I agree with you 100%. Every person should get equal remuneration for their contribution in work terms, and this is often not the case - the parent company raking in the profits whilst the workers who make everything get peanuts. Yes this is a serious problem, but it does not count as justification for these workers to then STEAL from the company in return. Two wrongs do not make a right, another solution must be found which does no harm.
 
People will always take the high moral ground when they are comfortable and don't have to struggle to get what they want to survive but once they end up in the dumbs everything goes as survival is more important than any morals as morals won't get you food, shelter or security. ;)

What happened to the OP was wrong and I hope he solve his little problem however he deem right.

Now to all the morally high people before you attack first check if you are strapped in as your safety cord might break and you end up landing on your arse with you head stuck in it.
 
fragtion said:
You've just touched on a completely different ethical problem. I agree with you 100%. Every person should get equal remuneration for their contribution in work terms, and this is often not the case - the parent company raking in the profits whilst the workers who make everything get peanuts. Yes this is a serious problem, but it does not count as justification for these workers to then STEAL from the company in return. Two wrongs do not make a right, another solution must be found which does no harm.
Click to expand...
Are they stealing though? You're saying the company steals from them first by exploiting their desperate need for money with a minimal wage? Who is the thief here? The one the law says in small claims court?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X