Is it wrong to steal food to feed your starving family?

Is it wrong to steal food to feed your starving family?


  • Total voters
    50

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
So you should have no problem with illegal immigrants trying to feed their families by coming here and working?
Sock puppetry is not cool polockow
I can understand why your so upset with illegals there taking away your Jobs right ?? i mean its not there Fault that the employer knows there better off with them then some sorry lazy lard ass that only complains ,, get used to it :)
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
I can understand why your so upset with illegals there taking away your Jobs right ?? i mean its not there Fault that the employer knows there better off with them then some sorry lazy lard ass that only complains ,, get used to it :)
Upset?
I'm for amnesty and immigration reform. Have been for years.
 

Cpappa27

Well-Known Member
Interesting, you're willing to kick millions of people off assistance based on an ignorant assumption

Are you aware corporate welfare amounts to almost double the amount of welfare our government provides to citizens in the form of assistance? Are you aware real wages have decreased since 1968? Are you aware that 93% of all economic gains since 2010 have gone to the top 1% of earners? Are you aware that half of all Americans make less than $30K per year? Or that 420 people now own more wealth than all other Americans combined?

Do you think poor people caused this and made it this way, or do you think it's more likely that those with the wealth devised a system that perpetuates it and spends enormous amounts on media and influence to get dumbasses like you to blame down instead of up? You are getting raped by your handlers and they're telling you that pain in your ass is some poor person stealing your wallet.
Its a dog eat dog world so get over it. In the end its still a battle of survival and evolution and only the strong will survive, and most will be left behind.
 

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
Way i see it is no country should have borders , We shouls should be allowed to go where ever ,
With stealing for food is just wrong,
A person has to do what a person has to do to survive be it move to a place where there may be work,, instead of staying where there at .
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Every animal in the world keeps traveling till they find food, some hundreds of miles, or die trying. When you gotta feed your kids and family you do whatever it takes to get food and stealing is the laziest of all and should be considered only after all other methods have been exhausted. Stealing of course would be the first one to come to mind for some because the other ways are TOO FUCKING HARD. Laziness is what is bringing this country to its death, but dont worry its not their faults right the government conditioned them that way with welfare checks, food stamps, etc. Dont get me wrong I know there are people who really need it like maybe 25 percent of them, but I also strongly believe the other 75 percent are so accustomed to the ,wipe my ass and feed me, lifestyle why would they want to get off it. Whether Im white or christian is irrelevant, and that was based on basic principles of parenting, and that stealing in this country has become a fuckin pandemic, and all those animals you mentioned above are edible when your hungry. Being unprepared is preparing yourself for failure and yuppy merica is in for some rude awakenings in the not too distant future which will separate the men from the boys.
Its a dog eat dog world so get over it.
Maybe you should take your own advice then:o
 

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
Its a dog eat dog world so get over it. In the end its still a battle of survival and evolution and only the strong will survive, and most will be left behind.
thats the thing people have become to reliant on gov programs,, for one if i have mandatory drug inspections for work , so should anyone that is getting Gov assistance .
But the truth is laziness, people do not want to work women get knocked up have tons of kids Guess what they live comfortably,,
i was not put on this Earth to support fucking dead beats ,, i mean seriously of course i agree there there for emergencies .
But like every god dam thing humans will exploit , i would bet 40 percent or even higher on social assistance should not be there how in the fuck does this loop hole exist
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
thats the thing people have become to reliant on gov programs,, for one if i have mandatory drug inspections for work , so should anyone that is getting Gov assistance .
But the truth is laziness, people do not want to work women get knocked up have tons of kids Guess what they live comfortably,,
i was not put on this Earth to support fucking dead beats ,, i mean seriously of course i agree there there for emergencies .
But like every god dam thing humans will exploit , i would bet 40 percent or even higher on social assistance should not be there how in the fuck does this loop hole exist
Instead of reciting your opinion, why don't you post the evidence of your claims? Let's examine them

-People have become too reliant on gov. programs [because they're lazy]
-People do not want to work
-Women have kids to increase their welfare benefits
-At least 40% of welfare is fraud

Let's start with those four claims. What evidence do you have that supports them?
 

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
The greater part of human history has gone something like this: see animal, chase animal, kill animal, skin animal, cook animal, eat animal. But all that chasing and killing and cooking means a lot of brutish work, and somewhere along the way we fell in love with the dream of the effort-free existence. Now iRobots vacuum our carpets and wash the kitchen floor; battery-operated, self-heating jackets from North Face and Maplin keep us warm; and our cars park themselves, if we're fortunate enough to own a Lexus LS 460.

While traditionally given to hard work, Americans have also, somewhat paradoxically, kept a close watch for any innovation that might take some of the drudgery out of everyday life. This contradiction in our national character was present in the DNA of two of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. As part-time inventors, both men made mighty contributions to humankind: Jefferson radically improved the plow when he created what is known as "the moldboard plow of least resistance," which dug into the soil with less effort; and Franklin was a bona fide scientific pioneer who proved, by capturing lightning in a bottle, that lightning and static electricity were indeed one and the same substance—a discovery that made him internationally famous. But both men also had a talent for dabbling in the kind of thing that might put a dopey smile on the face of the fat and sedentary American of 2007. In 1804, Jefferson invented the automatic double doors: open one and, voilà, both doors swing open at the same time thanks to the workings of a mechanism concealed beneath the floorboards. In another, perhaps more intense burst of inspiration, he added a leg rest to the already extant "revolving Windsor chair," thereby coming up with the prototypical La-Z-Boy (a piece of American ingenuity perfected, in 1928, by La-Z-Boy's two founders, Michigan cousins Edward Knabusch and Edwin Shoemaker). The "air bath," Ben Franklin's main innovation along these lines, sounds like something that could be offered at a Sedona spa in our time. It involved "lying uncovered and naked on a bed for an hour, a practice he claimed was good for one's health," writes cultural historian Tom Lutz in Doing Nothing: A History of Loafers, Loungers, Slackers, and Bums in America. The air bath didn't catch on, but you have to give Franklin points for investing so much thought and effort into something that required so little of each.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
I don't know what it's called other than compassionate I guess. We have the technology and the sophistication today that living a life shouldn't be a constant struggle against the looming specter of unemployment, bankruptcy, starvation, whatever.
We should be working to build a society in which people choose to work, in which drudgery doesn't exist, and in which work is not necessary in order for society to function. Maybe we don't have the technology yet, but there's nothing to say we won't. Eventually, it's going to be cheaper to automate a huge number of jobs that it is to pay humans, and when that happens, it will be literally impossible to employ the vast majority of people. That doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Imagine a world in which robots and AIs perform the majority of tasks (the AIs don't have to be human intelligent or self aware, just smart enough to solve a narrow set of problems they might encounter when working on a farm or in a factory or whatever), and humans are left free to pursue whatever they wish. Education becomes something you do for you, not something you do so you can get a certain job to survive in society. Work becomes something you do because you're passionate about it, and the job you do isn't drudgery, it's creative, like being the architect that tells the AIs what to build, or the farmer who comes up with a better crop rotation cycle to keep the soil fertile. In a society where the most emphasized thing is not to 'get ahead' or to avoid 'losing', and instead is to help others and be compassionate towards people regardless of who they are or what they do or where they live or what their interests are.

Again, this is what we should work towards. It's not going to happen overnight, and it won't be easy, and it's going to have flaws, but it's a real goal and a real way to improve the world. This is not just making the world a nanny so that people can be lazy while others work hard every day and support the lazy people. This is fundamentally changing the way people think about the world and changing people's attitudes towards things like profit, work, success, failure, and so on. Personally, I think that you've failed at life if you have a big house and three cars and a big Tv and lots of money if you have no real friends or experiences or hobbies or strong family bonds or intellectual interests. Having a 9-5 job you hate and spending every weekend turning your brain off only to do it all again the next week is a waste of a life.

Recently I met a guy while doing emergency fire response training at work, he was our instructor. His day job is tree management, he enjoys going to work every day, and he makes enough money that he can take every third year or so off and go travel in different countries for months at a time, going kayaking and hiking and meeting people and so forth. He lives an amazing life, really great guy, and it's basically because of the attitude he has towards what success is and what's important. I want to live in a world that encourages and supports that lifestyle, of being able to do things without fear of failing, and I understand that the only way to make that a possibility for the vast majority of people is to live in a society that recognizes that people should be able to live their live to the fullest they can, and never be stuck in a corner because of financial reasons. This has never been done before because it couldn't be done before, and it probably can't even happen right now, but we're approaching a time and a level of technological advancement in which people no longer will be required as a labor force, and we can actually make this society a reality. It wouldn't be a utopia by any means, but it would be a far cry better than any current society in terms of happiness, fulfillment, mental health, stability, and general societal identity.

I believe that people deserve a stable and happy life and the ability to do what they want to do, and i don't base that on history or society as it exists now. I base it on the simple fact that people are the product of their environment, and if we want the best possible people, we need the best possible environment. I know this probably seems all pie in the sky but I'm sure that if you tried explaining democracy or social benefits to a person living in 1500's Europe under whatever kingdom existed at the time they'd say it was a pie in the sky as well. Feudalism is not the best society. Communism is not the best society. Capitalism is not the best society. The best society is one that we design to be self correcting, self supporting, self envigorating. It is not an easy task, it will require huge amounts of consideration and engineering to make a society that reinforces itself by supporting its people without making its people become entitled. I believe that it is possible, and that it's worth the effort.
https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/45l03x/artificial_intelligence_could_leave_half_the/czyxwcp?context=3
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Instead of reciting your opinion, why don't you post the evidence of your claims? Let's examine them

-People have become too reliant on gov. programs [because they're lazy]
-People do not want to work
-Women have kids to increase their welfare benefits
-At least 40% of welfare is fraud

Let's start with those four claims. What evidence do you have that supports them?

The figure for welfare fraud is too low, since all redistribution that arises from force is fraudulent if it is renamed charity.

Any kind of thing that says it is charitable cannot begin with some people directing others resources thru forcible confiscation. It is impossible.

When people do that with another persons labor = slavery

When people do that with other peoples property = theft

Charity can only arise from a voluntary basis or it isn't charity.

I could rebut a few other things you mentioned, but since you won't be able to rebut what I've already said, I'll go roll one up now.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
I want to know if its wrong to shoot someone for stealing my food?

That's a good question. You certainly have a right to protect your property from thieves.

For me the concept that comes to mind is proportionality of response. If somebody were stealing my food my response could be based on the circumstances.

If they broke into my house in the dead of night, I'd be more likely to use deadly force than if somebody were grabbing some blueberries from my field or taking an apple from a tree etc.


It's funny though that people have been conditioned to think that it's not theft if the people doing the taking have anointed themselves "leaders" .
 
Top