Quote:
Originally Posted by unsunghero
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Well for one shoplifting tends to happen more in poorer communities. So it affects poor people the most. It’s poor people who work in those stores, and btw a small family owned business is a much better shoplifting target from a practicality standpoint because they won’t be able to afford nearly the theft prevention measures of a big chain
And maybe every once in a while a shoplifter kills one or someone innocent gets really hurt intervening
So it hurts poor people sometimes physically drastically, causes them to lose their jobs, their ability to buy stuff locally, and probably negatively impacts their general feeling of security in life
But it hurts the evil cartoon villain CEO by making him have to take a disappointed glance at his new stock value then go back to getting blown on his yacht. Gotcha
|
It's more like a 99.9% versus .1% of the problem issue. I used to run a small business. I got mad when this dude fucked up the decals on my car for no good reason. But I never bothered to report it to the pigs.
I also used to work in shitty hotels. Shitty hotels are often the last step some folks have until they're full-on homeless. Guess what my job role was as the AGM at the time? Throwing them out when they can't make their payments.
I quit on the spot before I actually had to do that. Yes, those people probably still got thrown out but I couldn't afford to pay their tab myself, since even as an AGM I was getting poverty wages.
What you're doing here, possibly inadvertently, is letting CEOs off the hook while pitting one poor person against another. That serves only the goals of the owner class. The fact that you've adopted this mentality means the owner class has accomplished their mission - your opinions of the poor are condescending and you feel more solidarity with management than you do the fellow poor.
If you are going to talk about the causes of crime, you have to be comprehensive.