4 ms·
> To help them we need to be less tolerant of such petty crime ??? Petty crime by any reasonable definition is an inferior good, above a (not actually all that
by Spivak 3y ago
> To help them we need to be less tolerant of such petty crime
??? Petty crime by any reasonable definition is an inferior good, above a (not actually all that large) income people stop doing it. It's not entirely clear how punishing it harder is actually going to help until you actually help the truly desperate. Now, once you do and the only people left shoplifting have no claim to any kind of "well I had to because I couldn't afford <necessity>" then you can bring the wrath of god down on it.
- stewx 3y agoNo one has to steal, and it's insulting to honorable low-income people to claim otherwise.
- feintruled 3y agoYou sure the social safety net is that good?
- throwawa14223 3y agoNo safety net is require to say stealing is immoral.
- feintruled 3y agoI didn't mention the morality of it. The statement was 'no one HAS to steal' so I was taking it as a statement that no-one will starve without stealing which must surely be a comment on the social safety net. My three assumptions here are that some people are starving, stealing to eat is the canonical excusable crime, and that 'just get a job' is not a solution. If you disagree with any of those, then that's your opinion but we have nothing further to discuss as we start from a different premise.
- throwawa14223 3y ago>stealing to eat is the canonical excusable crime You're absolutely correct, we disagree on premises about the world. Have a wonderful day, I'm sorry for what amounts to a nonsensical response on my part.
- WXLCKNO 3y ago> No one has to steal Did a double take on this one. There are plenty of scenarios where stealing is honorable.
- WalterBright 3y agoBeing a thief isn't honorable.
- WXLCKNO 3y agoIt's not black or white. Stealing food from Walmart so your kids have the extra they need to grow is very honorable in my mind. It may feel shameful but it's honorable to me.
- BitwiseFool 3y ago>"It's not entirely clear how punishing it harder" It seems like nowadays 'punishing at all' is a serious issue. If the police say they won't show up for theft under a certain dollar amount they've basically made it legal to steal up to that amount. >"until you actually help the truly desperate" Food banks and welfare programs exist. I feel like sympathetic people are ignoring the fact that some people realize they can do illegal things because it gives them an advantage, not solely because there is no other option.
- Spivak 3y agoFood banks and welfare programs don't cover the things that are actually unaffordable. We have food banks and SNAP because food is cheap and abundant. And guess what, poor people can afford things that are cheap and abundant. We can talk about honor and the nobility of suffering or whatever your catholic school taught you but the reality is that humans need a certain level of comfort before they stop doing things that are considered desperate acts to get there. You steal the stuff you can't afford that gives you comfort and puts you ahead enough that you still have money to make rent. Things like laptops, phones, tvs, video games have a high comfort/risk ratio and significantly raise your tolerance to the shittiness of the rest of your life.
- BitwiseFool 3y agoDon't assume my stance comes from a Catholic upbringing, or from any religion at all. There's no need to frame this in terms of "honor and the nobility of suffering". I'm not saying people should suffer, I'm saying people shouldn't steal, particularly when alternatives exist. If the question is "when is theft permissible" most people aren't going to agree that stealing "laptops, phones, tvs, video games" is okay because it will make the thief feel better about how shitty their life is.
- Spivak 3y agoI'm not arguing it's permissible, I'm saying you're gonna get nowhere trying to fight the river of rational actors who are following the natural optimization problem of value/risk. People who are desperate are going to steal and they're going to steal certain classes of goods. You either deal with this or will forever be demonizing the very people you want to help because they're not behaving in the way you've decided they should to be worthy of sympathy.
- ulizzle 3y agoThe Aladdin fallacy. Everyone who steals is driven to it by desperate circumstances. But if you read the article, dire straits means the liquor aisle or the electronics section.
- kennywinker 3y agoDesperate circumstances are exactly what drives people to steal from the liquor aisle. And idk about you, but I can’t think of a better way to shoplift overdue rent than stealing from the electronics section.
- ulizzle 3y agoIt’s alcohol withdrawal, which is a desperate circumstance, but it didn’t arise out of nowhere. And overdue rent is what happens when you make bad decisions like spending your money on drugs and alcohol Have any of you ever even been in dire straits? Because those of us who have are not as tolerant and that’s not meaningless
- Spivak 3y agoPeople who are desperate steal things that are expensive and provide them some reprieve from their situation. You don't see too many heroine users among the upper crust. It's wild how people who people who've never experienced being poor don't get economics of it. You don't steal food, that's stupid because the risk/reward is terrible, when your phone breaks you steal the iPhone because that takes $1000 off your budget. I tried to bake that idea into the phrasing but it clearly didn't land.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoWhy can't those HN users also view iPhones thieves as less honourable/worthy, less deserving of sympathy, etc...?
- sixothree 3y agoDid the article not mention things like laundry detergent as well?