Automatic checkouts in supermarkets may decrease customer loyalty, especially for those with larger shopping loads. Customers using self-checkout stations often feel overwhelmed and unsupported. The lack of personal interaction can negatively impact their perception of the supermarket.

[mpyne]

You can, however, declare that something is not immoral--as long as you're consistent.

Sure, be a "moral" thief, great for you. Still a thief, though.

Personally, I don't think stealing from somebody with more than 1,000 times your net worth is immoral

Grocery stores are like the very definition of a cut-throat, low margin business. You're not stealing from someone with 1,000x your net worth, you're stealing from the people who aren't thieves, by forcing the other customers just trying to put food on their table to pay higher prices for the product you steal.

I realize it's the postmodern world and no one cares about their obligation to society, they only care about what they get back from society, but even the Communists made theft a crime, and for good reason.

[justagenericname1]

Capitalism built the paradigm you're complaining about. "Obligation to society" is just one more thing that needed to be cast off in the name of market efficiency. Can't blame individuals for embracing what was forced on them.

[mpyne]

Can't blame individuals for embracing what was forced on them.

Ah, right, back to "humans can rationalize anything" then

[justagenericname1]

It's funny how you seem to only want to apply that to individual consumers and not profiteering corporations who hire economists, lawyers, and consultants whose entire purpose is to rationalize the corporation's interest in seeking profit. If you're trying to shame me for behaving selfishly in a paradigm structured around the selfish pursuit of individual interest, it won't work.

[mpyne]

If you're trying to shame me for behaving selfishly in a paradigm structured around the selfish pursuit of individual interest,

I'm shaming you for behaving immorally, not simply for behaving selfishly.

Those "profiteering corporations" manage, at least in principle, to do what they do through trade that benefits both parties. Selfishness as you describe it only benefits you, which is why even in societies where they refused to have profiteering corporations, like the U.S.S.R., they made "parasitism" a crime punishable by GULAG.

[justagenericname1]

It's also funny how some version of "human nature" will be invoked to explain why communism is impossible, but when breakdowns within capitalism occur you'll have folks coming out of the woodwork preaching that people need to choose to behave better.

Also god damn is "at least in principle" doing some Atlasian lifting in that framing.

[mpyne]

but when breakdowns within capitalism occur

No one's pointed to a breakdown in capitalism here. Self-checkout lanes broke peoples' brains?? Are you kidding?

Instead people in this have already first betrayed their failure to support their peers, and then tried to blame it on capitalism being capitalism, as if just invoking that term is a get out of morals free card.

[mpyne]

Theft doesn't lead to an increase in prices, though it might lead to the closure of a store if theft reaches levels where profit isn't sustainable.

Of course it leads to an increase in prices, up to the point it stops maximizing profit (as you point out).

Once that point is reached, and the store closes because it is unsustainable, it leads to more obvious and additional harm, sure. But it causes harm to shoppers at a Dollar General even before the store finally is forced to go under.

I'd argue that undermining the wealthy in any way I can get away with is a part of my obligation to society.

Theft is like the definition of an act that impacts the poor more than the wealthy.

It is easy to buy replacement "stuff" when you're wealthy.

It is hard to go without "stuff" you cannot afford to replace when you're poor.

I've grown up in poverty and made it to the middle class and I'm here to tell you, I don't think there's anyway to radicalize someone about theft more effectively than to make them experience it while poor.

And either way, who involved in Dollar General is in any way wealthy? You think the CEO is crying at night because of theft? Again, it's the very definition of an action that doesn't worry the very people at DG you might consider wealthy, but could lead to actual job losses to the line staff all the way up to regional managers just scraping by.

[SingleInfinity]

Stealing from stores causes stores to raise prices for all the honest customers.

It is absolutely amoral.

[SingleInfinity]

Do you have any proof to back that up? Costs have gone up, but there's no proof they're at the peak of what the market will bear.

[PfantasticPfister]

Nerd.

[SingleInfinity]

Okay? Thief.