I recently got into a bit of an argument with my friends about this, and some are angry at me for it so I’d like to know if I was in the right. I think that stealing something from a large chain supermarket, such as Tesco or Sainsbury’s isn’t immoral, since it does not affect any real person and taking a billionth of a corporation’s annual profit wouldn’t affect it in the slightest. My friend’s argued that stealing is immoral no matter what, some stating the law some just their own moral compass.
Edit: Thanks for the replies. I’ve come to the conclusion that one shouldn’t steal from big stores unless necessary, since it could reflect upon workers and the company wouldn’t forfeit any profit, resulting in higher prices. Also, I never took anything (I’m way too scared of getting caught), it was an argument about a mutual friend taking some sweets who I was defending.
25 comments
Are you literally about to die from hunger or just don’t fancy paying?
Yes it’s immoral you thief
Stop trying to justify your criminal behaviour
Theft is immoral so yes, you’re immoral.
I come from a long line of Cockney petty thieves and I’m not about to forsake family tradition just because some luvvy tells me, thank you VERY much
If it was just you and no one else then they wouldn’t notice. BUT it’s not just you is it so it does have a effect on prices for everyone else. Thank you.
I’d counter this by asking how much of their stock can be stolen before it becomes immoral, and why would you set the line where you set it?
If the line at which it becomes immoral is say, £1bn, do we then chastise everyone who stole from them? If after a recount, it’s actually £999m that was stolen, not £1bn, is it suddenly acceptable again?
Of course it’s immoral.
I know it’s only a drop in their ocean but if we all thought like you the prices would sky rocket for people who are buying food in the honest way
I think it depends what you’re stealing and your circumstances. If it’s the only way of feeding your kids then I don’t really see it as immoral as such. I mean, there has to be laws still, if you were caught it’s right that you’re punished. But you can have these contradictory situations where it is both morally ok to commit a crime and morally correct for the government to punish you for that crime.
If every person in the country stole one thing costing even ‘only’ £1, that’d be £70 million lost.
That’s £230 that could be given as a pay increase to every one of Tesco’s 300,000 employees, for example.
All you do is push up the prices for everyone else. Ultimately shrink is not just ‘absorbed’ by the retailers
Yes, think of the staff. What if their managers were being unreasonable and got somebody into trouble for not preventing something from being shoplifted? It seems unlikely, I know, but you never know whether or not the staff are dealing with a psychotic boss.
Depends what’s being stolen, I think there’s definitely cases where stealing can be perfectly moral.
Lots of the replies here are assuming that op is asking if a random person taking whatever they wanted moral?
No, I don’t think so. It’s just inadvisable. If you’re starving and don’t have the means I’d say it’s advisable and moral. They make billions in profit.
If 10% of the stock gets stolen on a regular basis, then that 10% will simply get added to the price of everything else as a way to pay for the losses. So we all end up paying the cost of the greedy few.
Yes, it’s immoral.
My husband used to work in retail as a manager in a popular Sports Shop. His base pay was pretty bad but he got pretty good bonuses (pvt, turnover etc). One of their bonuses was based on something to do with loss vs takings I think and if his shop lost too much stock either due to theft or damage he would lose that bonus. It worked out at about £500 every couple of months which was a lot of money for us. To lose it was tough.
My point is that you don’t know what effect the stealing is having on the staff. The overall company won’t bat much of an eyelid but the staff will suffer.
It’s the act of stealing that is immoral.
I don’t think it’s sound to gauge the morality of an act based on the victim. If you take this to its logical conclusion you end up in dark places.
If you stealing is moral then assume you’d be alright with everyone doing it all the time? Or is it just you?
You sound like an awful scrote. Same people that also justify stealing cars because they’re insured.
You’re part of a problem – stop stealing you horrible little chav.
Of course it’s immoral… it’s pretty black and white actually.
Don’t get me wrong. If Somebody was literally starving to death and all other honest avenues had been exhausted (food banks, asking people etc etc) then I’d rather someone steal from a massive supermarket than a small business. But that doesn’t make it any less immoral. It just means that the immortality is irrelevant to you. Because your survival is at stake. But the immorality still stands. It’s not the supermarkets fault people are in that position.
It will permanently fuck up the person who stole life.. ending in huge fines, prison and a criminal record.
I work for a large retailer (not supermarket large but probably a billion plus a year). We have targets on stock loss across the business for which we can earn an annual bonus for hitting. The single biggest reason stores miss their targets is due to theft. People shoplifting are indirectly taking money out of my pocket. Shoplifting is never a victimless crime despite what the police and the courts want you to believe.
it’s absolutely immoral. why does the size of wealth of the company matter? what would be the cut off for you in terms of the size of the company?
is killing someone immoral? I mean, there at 7 billion more people on the planet.
Yes. But so are a lot of things. Buying trainers made in a Chinese sweatshop is immoral but I don’t pass judgement on people who do.