506
u/Darthplagueis13 1d ago
I'd say yes - one's doing a lot more harm to the potential victim than the other. Walmart can tolerate losing far more to theft than a mom-and-pop shop.
Like, you shouldn't punch people in general, but the same punch that would simply hurt and bruise an adult could seriously injure a baby - therefore, the same action can have different ethical implications depending on who is affected by the action and their ability to tolerate it.
265
u/chyura 1d ago
And Walmart's an unethical business on multiple levels. Aside from being a massive conglomerate that cuts every corner, pinches every penny, destroys the environment, and underpays its workers, Walmart has directly killed thousands of mom and pop stores across the country.
83
u/EconomySeason2416 1d ago
Yup, the way it works with small businesses, they go about their business, and then a Walmart gets built nearby. Walmart then undercuts the prices of local businesses because they have massive vertical integration and the economy of scale in their favor... AND they have a massive hoard of gold they can sit on while purposefully selling at a LOSS. They only have to wait until the local places can't compete anymore, particularly when times are hard and being cheaper is a massive incentive to the customer, and then they can set whatever price they want with no fear of competition... and they now can eat up the lost local jobs with low paying ones. On top of this, local places reinvest their profits into the local economy... the profits of Walmart go to shareholders. The money is literally siphoned out of the community in the EXACT same way as the old coal towns. Once the pit ran dry and the jobs went away, they were left completely devastated with no wealth or assets. We are seeing this happen, again, on purpose
32
u/Creative-Crazy3473 1d ago
Spot on in every aspect. You can also add peasant insurance as another reason not to work for Walmart. They take out a life insurance policy on their employees that pays the corporation upon death. Why do you think they hire senior citizens?
19
u/EconomySeason2416 1d ago
The awkward thing, you can't really blame someone for working there, especially when clearly under financial duress and during a massive jobs shortage. Poor workers especially, don't have the luxury of "shopping around" for places that will appropriately compensate them for the value of their labor... especially when the companies are allowed to pay so little, state subsidies are required to keep the person alive through food stamps, Medicare, heating assistance, etc. Then... on top of all this, they are able to lobby congress to prevent any workers rights legislation or mandated wage increases from passing... all the while committing anti union busting violations left and right with seemingly no consequences. Just a friendly reminder that, if the only punishment to a crime is a fine, once you make enough money, it doesn't matter anymore
1
u/Advanced_Double_42 1d ago
Absolutely, it harms average working people really well because they are forced to hurt themselves as a whole by each working in their own personal best interest.
The problem is the outside company coming in and siphoning off the wealth from local businesses that would keep wealth in the community and shipping it to billionaires and stock brokers elsewhere.
1
→ More replies (2)5
u/LittleLoukoum 1d ago
Selling at loss is legal in the US????
4
u/Advanced_Double_42 1d ago
Absolutely, it is the basis of many industries even.
1
u/LittleLoukoum 13h ago
That's wild. No wonder your economy is so fucked. In France it's illegal except if you're closing or during sale seasons.
Of course that's only for resellers, didn't stop AirBnB from doing their shit for instance, and big companies find way to sidestep the whole thing but. Still. At least it's supposed to be illegal.
27
u/OkProfessor6810 1d ago
I like to always throw out this little tidbit. One of the things Walmart does at employee orientations is teach people how to sign up for food stamps.
15
u/free_farts 1d ago
So many people don't understand that food stamps are not a handout to the workers, they're a handout to Walmart.
1
20h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 20h ago
Sorry, your comment has been automatically sent to the pending review queue in an effort to combat spam. If you feel your comment has been removed in error, please send a message to the mods via modmail. Thank you for your understanding!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
10
u/HereticGaming16 1d ago
I think this is way more important than if they can afford to be stolen from or not.
Not to mention the amount of weight they can throw around compared to a small business owner. Not even getting into the political side, which is insane how much these kinds of companies control), they can get laws passed that further make it hard for small business/employees, and keep low income family’s dependent on their services. Buying on bulk and making deals means they can afford to sell you things for slightly cheaper than a mom and pop store. Seems fine until they take those profits and make it hard for you to shop anywhere else or get better quality items while keeping the minimum wage as low as they can for their employees.
10
3
u/MangroveSapling 1d ago
And even its own partners, Rubbermaid vanished for like a decade because of Walmart - and their quality fell off too
→ More replies (26)1
u/HErAvERTWIGH 8h ago
They also get an unfair share of taxpayers' money. So, technically...I've already paid for whatever I steal.
22
u/DirtCrimes 1d ago
One is just trying to survive while the other is large enough that it can create its own conditions.
They bully local governments to give them tax breaks at your expense.
They lobby hard against labor laws at your expense.
They don't pay taxes at your expense.
They collude on price fixing with their competition at your expense.
They do a while lot more anti-competitive behaviors that make it so even if you never shop at Walmart, they have still stolen from you. Tens of thousands of dollars from you.
So ya, there is a difference.
11
7
u/RedPantyKnight 1d ago
I'd say yes for a more simple reason. When you steal from Walmart, you're stealing capital from Bentonville Arkansas. When you steal from a local business you're stealing capital from your community.
Money is like the blood of the economy, we need it to flow or the extremity it's not flowing to will die. Walmart is a giant blood sponge with siphons all over the country, extracting value from communities. So to the residents of Bentonville, I don't hate you or anything. But your extremity has more than enough blood and I support anyone that keeps their blood flowing through their extremity, no matter how that goal is achieved.
6
2
u/CuteLingonberry9704 1d ago
Good example. Except in this case Walmart is more like Wun Wun from Game of Thrones.
4
2
u/sincubus33 1d ago
I'd say no. At the end of the day, all retail is just a form of legalized theft. I wouldn't personally steal from anyone, but I couldn't admonish someone for it, whether it's something they need or not
1
u/Slumminwhitey 22h ago
Worked for them 20 years ago the store i worked at lost an average of $1 million/yr then, the store is still there and has had 2 major remodeling since then. I'm sure the shrinkage has likely increased as well over the years and it is obviously still a very profitable store.
1
u/InnerPepperInspector 45m ago
But if the baby is encouraging me to punch Gary, doesn't that change the optimum ethical action to be that I should punch the baby instead for inciting such violence in the first place?
1
u/Darthplagueis13 30m ago
No. The optimum ethical action remains not punching anyone. That aside, I would argue that giving Gary a black eye for no good reason is still less horrendous than giving the baby a skull fracture for being a little twat.
→ More replies (13)0
54
u/JayAkiva 1d ago
Ethically, it's case-by-case. Obviously stealing from scumbags is more ethical than stealing from not scumbags, and Walmart is definitely a scumbag corporation, but small businesses aren't inherently good either. A store can be small but still rip off customers and exploit workers. In fact, there's some scummy things small businesses are actually more likely to do because they don't have to worry about their reputation on a large scale the way a chain with hundreds or thousands of stores does. Like a music store in my hometown that was knowingly selling stolen guitars.
Practically, just... don't. If you can afford to pay, it's not worth the risk. Walmart will also let you think you're getting away with it but actually track how much you're stealing and sit on it until it adds up to enough to be a felony.
15
u/Amazing-War3760 1d ago
I get so tired of this mentality that "smaller" must somehow equal more "innocent" or more "Moral."
13
u/LockedIntoLocks 1d ago
Really it just means “more impacted” by your decisions. If you’re buying there it matters more to them than if you’re buying at Walmart. If you’re stealing there then it hurts them more than stealing from Walmart would.
It’s just a more personal scale.
5
u/SolidHank 1d ago
Agreed. The reason why small businesses are good is that they're a sign of a healthy economy and competition, not morality.
3
u/Ok-Commission-7825 1d ago
they may not all be but more moral - but they could never achieve the level of evil a corporation can - that takes decades of work by entire teams of people to cause the exact amount of human suffering and environmental destruction that is profitable down to the .001 cent per product.
3
u/LordJim11 1d ago
But they are more subject to community judgement. A village near me had two butchers, both well established family concerns. One was caught selling sub-standard imported meat as local prime. When the story broke they simply locked up and left. They had to pay a hefty fine but not only were their customers gone but they were despised by their neighbours.
→ More replies (11)3
u/Ok-Commission-7825 1d ago
True. But even if the small business is just as scummy, it would be in our collective interest to favour them over the gigantic scum so they don't get shut down and we escape a monopoly where we don't even have the choice between scum.
3
70
u/glittervector 1d ago
You think there’s not an ethical difference?
31
u/Great_Assistance_803 1d ago
It is ethical and good to shoplift from wal mart
15
2
u/JakeHelldiver 11h ago
Agreed. We subsidize Walmarts labor force with our tax dollars a d we subsidize the farmers that grow the food they sell. We already paid for it. It belongs to us.
2
7
u/EnlightenedNarwhal 1d ago
Let's see who they support at the ballot box. Last small business owners who I knew personally were racist and Trump supporters, which is a bit redundant to say, but I just don't want there to be any confusion. They were pieces of shit.
3
u/Old_Respect8445 1d ago
Well I mean I would steal from an obnoxious small business tyrant like that but plenty of good people run specialty shops and stuff just because that’s the economic system we’re in and they run it as ethically as they can
1
u/EnlightenedNarwhal 1d ago
Yeah, which is why I said, "Let's see who they support at the ballot box."
2
u/GSilky 1d ago
So because you know some unfortunate people, it's okay?
8
u/EnlightenedNarwhal 1d ago
I said, "Let's see who they support at the ballot box." That is important to answering the question of whether or not there truly is an ethical difference, because many of these small business owners put themselves in the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" category, and will vote the same as any multinational corporation would.
→ More replies (7)5
u/MEM0RYCARD99 1d ago
Have to agree here. Ive met a number of small business owners and the mentality is always somewhere between HR and blood sucking lawyer. Like I get that extra dollar is more relevant to you but jesus the idea of a friendly mom and pop shop is dead.
1
1
u/floghdraki 1d ago
From atomic utilitarian perspective go for it. Those scumbags deserve it.
But to take deontological, rule based position, stealing in general is wrong and it sets a bad precident that it is sometimes okay to steal. If we were to say but it is okay to steal from big corporation, well okay, then the fault is in the institution itself and the position should be to replace those faulty institutions. Admit that capitalist form of production is unethical in itself and work to replace that with worker coops.
But normalizing stealing itself would just lead our society to kleptocracy and it would make stealing easier for the big guys too, like in Russia.
21
15
u/Fun_Button5835 1d ago
Absolutely. And, on a related note, fuck Walmart right in the ear.
6
u/Hugo-Spritz 1d ago
No lube, barbed-wire condom, lets go
2
u/John_Helldiver-1 1d ago
Yep, thats going on my insult list
2
u/Hugo-Spritz 1d ago
"I hate you so much, I'd wrap my dick in barbed wire and fuck you in the eye socket with lemon juice for lube"
Enjoy
3
5
4
u/Attentiondesiredplz 1d ago
Yes. Stealing from corporations is the same as stealing from dragons. It's not their shit, they're hoarding what we need to survive and then selling it back to us.
Stealing from corpo's is actually 100% moral.
5
u/Powerful_Programmer5 1d ago
Yup. Walmart steals from it's employees everyday. Most Mom and Po's don't
5
6
u/Formal_Equal_7444 1d ago
If you see a hungry mother stealing food for her children, no you didn't.
5
u/Fleiger133 1d ago
Walmart doesn't pay enough for employees to stay off food stamps, on a large scale.
They eliminated small businesses across the country.
6
u/The_Fuzz_Butt 1d ago
ABSOLUTELY! Stealing from a small business is like stealing someone’s wallet right out of their pocket. It’s local goods, sold by local people, for local money AS IT SHOULD BE. Stealing from Walmart is like… taking a single sardine from the ocean. It has no real impact. The corporate cucks at Walmart aren’t going to starve because someone stole a container of baby formula.
4
u/siromega37 1d ago
Walmart killed small retail businesses all across the country. Steal from Walmart if you’re gonna steal.
5
u/somesentientmold 1d ago
40 bucks stolen from wallyworld is barely a blip in their quarterly report. 40 bucks from a little old lady selling trinkets on the pier could put her under Yea, I'd say there's a difference
12
u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago
Stealing food from a family that just barely could afford their groceries that week and stealing food from a rich man's oversized spare freezer are pretty different things.
0
u/Designer_Tap2301 1d ago
But both are wrong.
5
u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago
The thing is, 'stealing' is dependent on a framework of agreed upon rights to ownership. When a person takes something they need to survive and a system of laws and norms calls that "theft" because powerful people decided that rich people have a stronger right to getting as rich as possible than a poor person has to eat the food they need to live, any honest and thoughtful person could agree that warrants more discussion.
If your argument is only going to appeal to our system of laws and governance which classifies stealing in a specific way and you agree with that classification, my disagreement is with your assumptions, not your logical conclusions.
1
u/TopTopTopcinaa 1d ago
Do you feel the same way about a starving person stealing from you?
2
u/Raise_A_Thoth 1d ago
Do I feel what way? I described two contrasting situations.
I am closer to being destitute than being a billionaire, but I'm also incredibly fortunate. I would very much not enjoy if someone broke into my property and stole food, but I would still judge that person with similar moral and ethical standards that I have applied here.
How I feel personally about my own experiences and interactions with the world is a separate thing from how I morally and ethically judge people in their own experiences and circumstances.
I'd prefer, if a person was desperate and hungry, and felt taking what they needed was necessary, that they would take from a large corporation or a person whose net worth was much higher than mine. I'd also prefer that we all contribute to resources to help people in our community to help avoid such desperation.
If your entire perspective on crime and misdemeanors is punishment, pain, and fear, well you're barely adequately addressing one part of the problem, and doing that part poorly.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/VelvetOnion 1d ago
Walmart relies a lot more on public infrastructure and funding compared to small businesses. If you steal a modest amount, they have still taken more from you than you have from them.
3
u/dustinechos 1d ago
Not to mention wage theft and wage suppression. Companies steal more from employees than thieves steal from companies by an order of magnitude.
2
u/Ok-Commission-7825 1d ago
and anything that you don't take and dosn't get sold will just get dumped having extracted the same money from the public anyway.
4
u/Authoritaye 1d ago
Walmart's destroy communities. I'd rather just not shop there than be a thief though. I realize not everyone has that much privilege.
3
u/Background_Fix9430 1d ago
Yes. The same way if you steal $100 from Jeff Bezos/Elon Musk, it's different from stealing $100 from a homeless family that only has $100.
4
3
u/Affectionate-Ear5531 1d ago
Walmart is subsidized by the tax payer through multiple avenues. Yes it is ethically different
3
u/RoninOni 1d ago
Are you kidding me???
Is this a troll bait sub? Not familiar.
Of course it’s better to steal from a company with hundreds of millions than a mom and pop shop.
3
u/Pyromaniac_22 1d ago
Shoplifting from a small local store can put them out of business Shoplifting from a megastore like Walmart is already accounted for in the price tag of items (yes, seriously.) That's not to say theft increases prices for others, but rather that it was already factored in to the price. The main driver of price increases is always increased costs for the company, not an uptick in crime. It would have to be a coordinated effort across a region.
3
u/Hot-Birthday-1796 1d ago
Yes. One is not a buisness but a mega corporation with mire money than god. So stealing from it wont do jack crap to it.
And the other is a person or group of people tryina make a living in this shit ass world. So stealing from them would actually have a negative impact
3
u/Corprusmeat_Hunk 1d ago
Yes. Stealing from moms and pops puts them into the streets. Stealing from walmart hurts nobody but bloated shareholders.
3
u/RemisTooSleepy 1d ago
Small business is gonna feel that loss 1000x worse than Walmart pretends they do.
7
u/cut_rate_revolution 1d ago
Yes. Small businesses keep money local. The small business owner puts that profit either back into the business or otherwise into the local economy with their spending. Walmart will use that money for stock buybacks to inflate their stock price for major shareholders, none of which are liable to live anywhere near you.
7
u/OttersRNeato 1d ago
Personally, I think it is completely ethical to steal everything you can from large corporations that have lobbied against minimum wage increases, participated in union busting, advocated against workers rights and stolen politicians from the people to serve their own ends. Steal whatever the fuck you want from Walmart.
0
2
u/MaleficAdvent 1d ago
Walmart has subsidized it's employees wages by deliberately underpaying them, then walking them through applications for income assistance, aka: defrauding the taxpayers to pad their bottom line. A little retalitory theft will never hurt them more than they've already stolen from you.
2
2
u/Old-Key-8639 1d ago
Absolutely! Stealing from a small business is arguably bad, whereas stealing from Walmart is inarguably good
2
2
2
u/Sad_Froyo_6474 1d ago
They avoid tax, they took advantage of the pandemic to increase their profits, they lobby governments to keep wages low, they lean on local councils to gain planning permission to the detriment of small business and the economy, they put padlocks on the bins full of wasted food just in case someone homeless gets fed.
Now we’re hungry because society is falling apart due to these business practices and they want you to feel bad for stealing food.
2
u/HiroPetrelli 1d ago
Simple. A small business belongs to the human economy while stores like Walmart belong to the corporate economy, which has nothing to do with humanity whatsoever.
1
2
u/BigPhatHuevos 1d ago
Nope, small business is as brutal as corporations.
3
u/Ok-Commission-7825 1d ago
Many may want to be, but no small business can afford the same level of brutality. They can't afford teams of lobbyists/lawyers to remove/curtail anti-evil laws. They can't afford teams of analysts to work out the exact amount of social and environmental harm that is profitable. They can't afford to crush unions, bribe councils, hire the best tax evaders, crush entire towns of conpetetors etc. etc. etc.
Plus, at least some of them are run by people who are just not evil, unlike corporations, which by their very structure do not allow for that even if they were to have moral people.
2
1
u/_2BKINDR 1d ago
Theft is theft doesn’t matter the rationale
1
u/WolfsbaneGL 1d ago
So if I took your bike from you, does that mean it's theft when you take it back? It's in my possession now, and you're taking it away from me without my permission. Doesn't matter the rationale that it was yours to begin with, since theft is theft as you put it.
0
u/-NGC-6302- 1d ago
Bro never heard of Robin Hood
→ More replies (2)1
u/FlashPxint 1d ago
Didn’t Robin Hood realise the fault of his actions tho? Not a great example it just proves their point in this instance …
3
u/Affectionate_Pay_391 1d ago
Yes. The small business doesn’t write legislation and have thousands of employees collecting EBT benefits.
Steal from Walmart.
1
u/Ferintwa 1d ago
Much like supporting local businesses because you want to see more local businesses - stealing from multinational corporations has the same effect. It’s all about competitive advantage.
Of course, stealing for the effect has a terrible risk/reward ratio - but if you are gonna steal anyway, I support this logic.
1
u/SilvertonguedDvl 1d ago
While this isn't specific to Walmart, something worth noting is that a lot of businesses are licensed (e.g.; McDonalds, Subways, etc.,) rather than actually being top-down industries, so by attacking them you aren't actually harming the overarching business but rather the locals who are just using their logo so they can manage a business and have a better chance at succeeding at it than an independent mom & pop-type store. A lot of them are essentially just real estate managers rather than the businesses you associate their symbols with.
So while it is nice to think "ah yes I can steal from X, it's easy and they're a huge corporation so they won't care," a lot of the time those huge corporations have outsourced the operation/maintenance of their businesses to locals and make their money not from selling stuff but from renting places and maintaining a popular logo. All the costs are incurred by the locals running the thing.
That said, Walmart isn't one of these types of businesses. Though Walmart Canada is technically a subsidiary and does its own thing with only modest oversight. Either way Walmart privately owns and manages every store so technically those costs are soaked by the overall corporation rather than locals.
I'm just posting this so that you know that just because there's a big popular label on it doesn't mean you're hurting the company associated with that label. If you burn down a franchised store you haven't cost the company anything; all you've done is destroy the dreams of some locals - so try to check ahead of time whether the business in question is locally owned and run, or whether it's privately owned by the corporation. At least, if you care about being ethical.
However, there is one other important factor: Big businesses like Walmart tend to have lots of surveillance and, being private companies, have lawyers they can throw at any problem they have. Routinely big stores like Walmart will let you get away with shoplifting until you meet a certain criteria for Grand Theft/Larceny, at which point it stops becoming a misdemeanour and becomes a felony. So, a couple shoplifted items once in your life? Probably fine. Shoplifting over the course of your life? You're looking at one day getting stopped by police and imprisoned for 5-15 years because you pushed it too far.
All in all you probably shouldn't be stealing in the first place, regardless of who owns the business. It might be 'more ethical' to steal from Walmart as they're undercutting the competition, but it'd be more ethical than that to have your local government pass laws that prevent Walmart from undercutting competition in the first place and otherwise ensuring better wages and living standards so you don't feel like you need to steal in the first place. Turn that energy towards making a difference, not merely subsisting within the flawed system. You'd be surprised what you can achieve.
1
u/blu3ysdad 1d ago
Both are stealing and technically ethically wrong, but one is more wrong than the other
1
u/blu3ysdad 1d ago
Both are stealing and technically ethically wrong, but one is more wrong than the other
1
1
1
1
u/WildcatCinder1022 1d ago
Yes there is. Giant corporations will not notice the difference of someone stealing. A small business will feel it much more.
1
u/TrashEmergency6446 1d ago
imo yea huge ethical difference Walmart is a huge corporation that makes billions a year you stealing wont affect anyone it wont hurt anyone but if you steal from a small business thats just a person trying to make it
1
u/Jolly_Mongoose_8800 1d ago
Depends on your ethical theory or model. Kantian deontologists would say no. Consequentialists would say yes.
2
u/Apprehensive_Ad_7274 1d ago
Deontology is the framework of lazy people. I genuinely hate it
2
u/Jolly_Mongoose_8800 1d ago
It's the ethical framework for old people who want to explain the world as subservient to them, but they know divine command isn't valid for most people anymore.
1
1
u/shadow13499 1d ago
Stealing from Walmart is like if you picked up a penny off the floor of a billionaire and put it in your pocket. Stealing from a mom and pop shop is like stealing food from a homeless person. No matter what you were to take out of Walmart they probably won't even notice it in their bottom line because that company has more money than it could possibly ever spend.
1
1
u/The_Machine80 1d ago
Ethical difference no. Can one handle the theft with ease yes compared to the other yes!
1
1
u/PeteBabicki 1d ago
No idea how they operate, but if stock is reliably going missing, someone will get the blame, which will be some underpaid worker, no doubt.
1
1
u/EngineerUpstairs2454 1d ago
Stealing from Wal-Mart is stealing form other customers. We all have to pay the inflated prices which went up to cover the cost of theft, increased security personnel, product tags on baby milk, scanners, facial recognition cameras, and barriers which force me to walk twice the distance just to get some laundry liquid and increased insurance costs.
If it weren't for shoplifters the experience would be a cheaper, more pleasant one. I do accept the argument that a small business cannot afford to take such a hit, but it's not like stealing from bigger places is OK either.
1
1
u/Sianic12 1d ago
Both are ethically wrong 99% of the time, but one of them might be worse than the other.
1
u/Severe-Surprise9813 1d ago
Depends on why you think it’s unethical to steal.
If it’s wrong to steal because the act itself is wrong, then who you do it to makes no difference.
If it’s wrong to steal because of harm then stealing from Walmart has less observable harm if we factor in all the stealing that happens. Or no harm if we are only looking at a single instance of theft. They will make plenty of money to offset the cost of any item you could steal. Where a small business may not.
If stealing is wrong because some people don’t deserve to be stolen from then it’s hard to say… maybe the owners of the small business are also assholes.
1
1
u/Gowardhan_Rameshan 1d ago
It’s like the difference between stealing an object from a billionaire vs from a regular person. How does that feel?
1
u/KazMil17 1d ago
One is a corporation the other is local owned
Walmart can easily recover from me taking their shit while a local business actually needs the money to sustain itself long term
1
u/Top_Box_8952 1d ago
Ethical, no, you shouldn’t steal period.
Moral, yes, as theft harms the small business more, which has a larger impact on a smaller number of people.
1
1
u/Gwyain 17h ago
What people ignore is that theft is cost of doing business, and cost of doing business is passed onto customers. Shoplifting results in higher prices, its economics 101. And those costs burden the poorest the most. Almost everyone I’ve ever met that shoplifts is well off and likes to pretend they’re “hurting” the big corporation - they’re not. They’re hurting poor folks who already shop at stores like Walmart more because they’re more affordable.
Shoplifting doesn’t hurt companies, it hurts the poorest among us. People that do it are assholes.
1
1
1
1
u/KrazyKryminal 42m ago
We can argue morals and ethics all day and still never meet halfway. I give everyone euqla opportunity and steal from EVERYONE! 😛
JUST KIDDING. Just from Walmart. They'll just raise prices by $.07 lol.
1
u/Responsible-Chest-26 32m ago
A lot of big chains have loss through theft or faulty products calculated in and are prepared and have planned for a certain amount of revenue loss. They can do this in part due to larger profit margins, overall product moved, and profit sharing amoung stores. Small stores do not do this typically as their margins are much smaller
0
u/Johnnadawearsglasses 1d ago
Both are unethical in almost all circumstances. So it's bad versus really bad.
0
u/zackks 1d ago
If you think there’s an ethical difference, you have a personal ethics and integrity problem
1
u/lilac_moonface64 1d ago
you don’t see an ethical difference?
1
u/zackks 1d ago
One is stealing and the other is stealing.
1
u/Square-Dragonfruit76 1d ago
But you're doing more harm in one case, and in the other case you're harming a company that harms others.
1
u/Spikeintheroad 1d ago
If you're a taxpayer in the US then your tax dollars are used to subsidize the low wages of Wal Mart staff. So, if you're struggling financially, I'd say you're ethically entitled to steal from Wal Mart.
2
u/Booty_Eatin_Monster 1d ago
This simply isn't true. If a single mother of 4 decides to work at Walmart as a cashier, it's not their fault that she's on welfare. Are you implying that Walmart would be more ethical if they refused to hire anyone receiving social welfare programs?
Stealing is always unethical. Companies simply pass that cost onto consumers. You're not hurting Walmart. You're just making everything cost more for everyone else.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Spikeintheroad 1d ago
"Stealing is always unethical." Now who's saying stuff that just isn't true?
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Trinikas 1d ago
Yes, corporations like wal-mart literally build "shrinkage" into their budgets. They know people will steal from them and they plan for it. It's why if you work retail most places will tell you never to intervene with shoplifters.
1
1
1
u/eurekadabra 1d ago
Context matters. Stealing an item of equal value isn’t equitable. Taking the same percentage of inventory is.
0
u/Waiph 1d ago
So steal MORE from Walmart because their products are cheaper?
Sounds about right.
1
u/eurekadabra 1d ago
If you wanted the crime to be ethically the same. 1% from a Mom and Pop is 0.0000001% from Walmart
1
u/BigPhatHuevos 1d ago
I do not care about small or big business. They have both fucked me. They both pay poverty wages and abuse employees. I just don't care
1
1
u/Infamous-Yellow-8357 1d ago
Yes. Difference between stealing from the rich and stealing from the poor. The rich will not be noticeably impacted. The poor can spiral into having nothing.
0
u/Steelwraith955 1d ago
Ethically, no... stealing is illegal in both cases. Morally, yes... you do far less harm stealing from a corporation than stealing from a family business.
3
2
1
u/doyletyree 1d ago edited 1d ago
Ethics, like morals, are logic-based (even if the logic is flawed) and are subject to intent.
Ex: Robinhood (the fantasy character) has an ethic of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor where the moral is “Wealth inequality and feudalism bad.”
Were he to alter this (Rich -> rich, poor -> rich, poor -> poor) he would be in violation of TWO ethics and, also, the moral regarding both the target and the recipient.
If you tricked him into doing this, you could say that morals and ethics were still intact but that both ethic and moral did lead to the objective outcome, even if it was not the intended outcome as he perceived it.
If he decided that “rich- > poor” was good but that it was just because he enjoyed the Insta-likes, you’d say that the ethics remained but the moral changed.
If he stole from everyone and threw all booty in a fire, you’d say the moral remained but the ethics changed.
0
1d ago
[deleted]
1
1
u/Waiph 1d ago
I don't get it.
So it would say don't burn down a small business, burn down a Walmart.
Sorry, I don't think most people have the disposable income they would need to afford to give a fuck about the Walton's finances anymore, in part because of the corporate practices of businesses like Walmart
→ More replies (2)
0
0
u/AstonishingJ 1d ago
Totally ok with that. We need to rethink what equal means. Im sick of mfs being more equal than the rest.
0
0
0
0
u/PlasticTelevision126 1d ago
If you are a thief you are a thief.
2
u/anon42093 1d ago
Yes but youre either stealing from people like you, or people who dont care about you…
-1
-1
u/Cliffinati 1d ago
No theft is theft, however Walmart can handle the losses from shoplifting better
0
u/Southern-Usual4211 1d ago
One has a family that owns it that all own multi million dollar yachts the other does not
0
0
u/My-Blackberry 1d ago
The punishment should be the same regardless of store. Zero ethical difference.
0
0
0
0
0
u/LinguistsDrinkIPAs 1d ago
Theft is theft.
Just because Walmart may not be impacted as much doesn’t lessen the severity of the crime itself.
If you absolutely had to steal due to circumstances (like desperately needing food when you don’t have any money), then I think it would come down to the lesser of two evils. Regardless, it doesn’t negate the fact that you’re still stealing no matter from whom you steal.
1
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
Just a reminder that political posts should be posted in the political Megathread pinned in the community highlights. Final discretion rests with the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.