Thread by @NdgameSorceress, I'm floored. Wow great message, ppl who shoplift are evil. I know [...]

I& #39;m floored. Wow great message, ppl who shoplift are evil. I know you guys think you& #39;re the thin yellow line or whatever but seriously? This isn& #39;t just an indirect tweet, this is taking someone elses idea and EDITING it a bit so it promotes YOUR message, and not even tagging them https://twitter.com/ImaginativeArt/status/1248032529547849728">https://twitter.com/Imaginati...

https://twitter.com/ImaginativeArt/status/1248032529547849728

Like this???? Isn& #39;t nice??? In fact its very rude of you to do??? Coulda just qrt& #39;d the original artist and posed the argument that maybe shoplifting IS bad. And you could& #39;ve been nice about it.

There are only two arguments that are valid against shoplifting from big companies:

1. You shouldn& #39;t do it because you put yourself at legal risk.

2. It can potentially hurt the employees of the company you& #39;re stealing from.

And that& #39;s *potentially*, but even if it does, it& #39;s not going to be nearly as much as people make it out to be. Few will be hurt by this.

The damage is, quite honestly, minimal. But even disregarding that, it& #39;s not the fault of the shoplifter that companies CHOOSE to affect some employee& #39;s jobs based on shrink. Captialism itself is to blame. Not the person taking the items.

Capitalism is also to blame for the fact that some people have to shoplift to get things they want/need in the first place. It& #39;s about the line drawn between & #39;want& #39; and & #39;need& #39;. Art supplies aren& #39;t exactly the foundation of the hierarchy of needs, but they do -

- improve enjoyment of life. And in a society that functions well for all, these things would be easy to obtain. People would get paid a living wage, with money to spare. Billionaires wouldn& #39;t exist. Corporations wouldn& #39;t be evil. But we don& #39;t live in that world.

So, no, you might not NEED, from a purely survival standpoint, to steal art supplies. They are not truly essential to keep yourself alive. But what kind of life is that? Looking at things from that angle? There is a huge difference between & #39;do I need this to survive?& #39; and

& #39;do i need this to help myself live?& #39; All of us, not a single person excepted, deserve to not just survive, but to live and to actually enjoy living. And sometimes that means you need new things; luxuries, things that don& #39;t literally keep you alive, but that do keep you you going

And for a HUGE amount of people, you might have to money to survive - but very little to actually live on. People who aren& #39;t poor enough to be homeless, but who are poor enough to make ends meet with only a small amount left over, which they need to save up, ideally, exist.

What do you tell those people? & #39;Eh the system sucks, deal with it& #39;?

The author of the original be gay do crimes comic this one references, as far as I& #39;m aware, likely was not one of those people. But the concept her comic was about is not inherently a wrong one.

And that is what I wish more people thought about. In my opinion? Anyone thinking about shoplifting (ONLY from corporations, never a mom-n-pop small store(s)) should basically just ask themselves: can I get what I want without putting myself in financial trouble?

If so, just go ahead and buy it. Shoplifting is inherently dangerous to the shoplifter, because laws, and it isn& #39;t worth risking everything you& #39;ve built just because you really want some flannel. But more importantly: you can get the end result you want, without losing anything,

AND without potentially hurting an employee somewhere within the company.

If money is tight, though, then ask yourself the next question: how badly do you need this thing? If you can wait, wait. If you can save up some money, do that. If you can tolerate not having it, do that.

But if you meet all of the criteria for going ahead with it, then all you have to do is think about how you could (again, potentially) be helping hurt some employee& #39;s job somewhere. Is what you would gain by stealing this thing greater than what they would lose?

Knowing the policies of the company you& #39;re stealing from and how they might treat their loss prevention teams in response to more shrink is helpful.

It& #39;s all just risk management. And ultimately, yes, you are potentially putting someone else at risk. It& #39;s

to a degree that is likely very small, but yes, the Potential is there for it to be bigger.

The more people have more of what they want, of the things that make them happy, the world gets that much brighter. Especially if what they get is used to help them create things for other people that improve THEIR lives (i.e., the arts, getting your friends gifts, etc.)

So, really, assuming you do actually NEED what you& #39;re stealing, either for survival or for living well, then all in all its likely a good thing, one that impacts other people negatively (the LP employees) little.

BUT

At the end of the day, if you can avoid shoplifting (avoid in the parameters I mentioned up above, ie living/surviving both being important) but you do it anyway, then I do not believe that& #39;s moral. Shoplifting addiction is a real thing, and lifting things you don& #39;t need

, especially when they don& #39;t end up going to someone else who can make use of them, is pretty much just straight up not good.

And you can always argue that shoplifting is always inherently bad for your own self, which I would agree with on a level.

If you shoplift when you don& #39;t need to, it& #39;s no longer a calculated risk, or making life better, or whatever, you pretty much are just putting employees at unnecessary risk (unnecessary being the key word there). So don& #39;t do that.

Honestly, nobody is ever going to read this thread, and I& #39;ve been rambling for no reason because I didn& #39;t like the way the OP basically copied the other person& #39;s work and didn& #39;t even try to actually Talk to her.

Latest Threads Unrolled: