Question and poll:

[TrickyBob]

Oct 17, 2013 14:52:30 GMT -5 EmilieMadison said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:49:51 GMT -5 TrickyBob said:

No where did I say I am ok with what they did. I said I feel sad that people felt they had to steal food. GBCN has had discussions about how little people have to live off of in terms of food stamps and I was stating that it shows.

I agree that it's sad that some people, even on assistance, still have so little. But I dont think a lot of these people felt they HAD to steal food. I think many of them probably felt like they COULD. 

Which is why it is stealing and wrong.

I completely agree with you.

[smock]

Oct 17, 2013 14:51:50 GMT -5 HRH Queen Dick I, Orphan said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:41:56 GMT -5 pixelpassion said:

Was it wrong to take so much? Yes.

But in working with people receiving assistance and seeing the heightened state of anxiety over having enough food/finances that they live in day to day, I'm not bothered by it. Being in that position has the potential to propel you to do things you'd never think of, particularly in the midst of a govt. shutdown with programs like WIC in certain states not working.

I dont steal or try to get over on anyone. Period. Are you saying that I might lose my moral compass if faced with poverty?

[luckyval]

Oct 17, 2013 14:42:01 GMT -5 @heyitsme said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:33:25 GMT -5 BaliHai said:

This is where I am. I voted it's stealing, because from a very basic POV it is, but I just can't judge it.

If I leave my front door unlocked, should the people that come in and take my stuff not be responsible because I didn't lock my door?

They only took food out of my refrigerator and some aspirin from my medicine cabinet because they were super hungry, sick and needed it desperately. They can't pay me back because they can't afford it/have no money - and I did do the stupid thing and left my front door unlocked.

Is that ok?  Or is it only OK because they are stealing from Walmart and not you?

FWIW - I think Walmart is the devil and if it happened to anyone I'm happy it's Walmart.  However, it's just not right - regardless of the excuses of why they did it.

As others have stated, I don't see the Wal Mart spree or your hypothetical as an ethical black or white. There are varying degrees of immoral behavior and, yes, I will judge less harshly someone who came into my house, stole some food because they were going hungry than I would someone who came in and stole my tv because it's a kickass tv

[smock]

Oct 17, 2013 14:53:56 GMT -5 @tambcat said:

I don't think it's justifiable. I think it is understandable, and I think Walmart made a conscious decision to allow it to happen for reasons unknown to me. I waiver on whether the recipients should pay it back, morally speaking, but realistically I think putting the financial burden on Walmart is the best decision.

I'm 99.9% sure that the reason Walmart did nothing to stop it is because they expected to be reimbursed by the government. AKA Walmart was hoping to "scam the system." 

[wkatie]

Oct 17, 2013 14:53:56 GMT -5 @tambcat said:

I don't think it's justifiable. I think it is understandable, and I think Walmart made a conscious decision to allow it to happen for reasons unknown to me. I waiver on whether the recipients should pay it back, morally speaking, but realistically I think putting the financial burden on Walmart is the best decision.

I agree with this. The people that took advantage knew it was wrong, but did it anyway for reasons they had justified to themselves.

Not that it is particularly relevant, but how much are we talking here? It was down for a "few hours." 

I also think part of the decision to allow it could have been to use it as positive PR. I.e. "Walmart CARES! We weren't going to let some glitch keep our customers from getting what they need."

[smock]

Oct 17, 2013 15:00:11 GMT -5 HRH Queen Dick I, Orphan said:

smock Lol no idea who that is. He's dirty, is it someon from Les Miz?

He's a dirty bread thief who should PAY FOR HIS CRIMES!!!

[eddy]

Oct 17, 2013 14:59:52 GMT -5 smock said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:53:56 GMT -5 @tambcat said:

I don't think it's justifiable. I think it is understandable, and I think Walmart made a conscious decision to allow it to happen for reasons unknown to me. I waiver on whether the recipients should pay it back, morally speaking, but realistically I think putting the financial burden on Walmart is the best decision.

I'm 99.9% sure that the reason Walmart did nothing to stop it is because they expected to be reimbursed by the government. AKA Walmart was hoping to "scam the system." 

yup

[luckyval]

Oct 17, 2013 15:00:38 GMT -5 smock said:

Oct 17, 2013 15:00:11 GMT -5 HRH Queen Dick I, Orphan said:

smock Lol no idea who that is. He's dirty, is it someon from Les Miz?

He's a dirty bread thief who should PAY FOR HIS CRIMES!!!

Don't use pronouns - it's ever more to be 24601

[WOT?*]

Oct 17, 2013 14:51:50 GMT -5 HRH Queen Dick I, Orphan said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:41:56 GMT -5 pixelpassion said:

Was it wrong to take so much? Yes.

But in working with people receiving assistance and seeing the heightened state of anxiety over having enough food/finances that they live in day to day, I'm not bothered by it. Being in that position has the potential to propel you to do things you'd never think of, particularly in the midst of a govt. shutdown with programs like WIC in certain states not working.

I dont steal or try to get over on anyone. Period. Are you saying that I might lose my moral compass if faced with poverty?

I have the same moral compass.  I hate liars, cheaters and thieves.  Most people do.

I think a number of people here know a bit of the backstory about when XH was disabled.  We ended up living in a tent with three small children (the oldest going into kindergarten) and 7.5 months pregnant after having lost our base housing, our car, our subsequent apartment...  You can bet that after battling VA for two years, being denied Social Security because he "wasn't disabled enough" and being denied welfare for any number of reasons each time we tried (address, car wasn't titled properly, and more), I lied my ass off and told the welfare office that XH left me and the kids (not true) and were living in a tent because we were out of options (true).  I was on welfare in less than an hour.  It was only after he "came back" a week later that we started having a lot of problems with them but you can bet I did what I had to do, after two years of battling, to even get ON the system.  I have no idea how far I would have gone to feed my kids if I hadn't "lost" my moral compass at least enough to get us on the system. To feed my kids I would have lied, cheated and stole and done whatever else I had to do to see them fed.

[pixelpassion]

Oct 17, 2013 14:51:50 GMT -5 HRH Queen Dick I, Orphan said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:41:56 GMT -5 pixelpassion said:

Was it wrong to take so much? Yes.

But in working with people receiving assistance and seeing the heightened state of anxiety over having enough food/finances that they live in day to day, I'm not bothered by it. Being in that position has the potential to propel you to do things you'd never think of, particularly in the midst of a govt. shutdown with programs like WIC in certain states not working.

I dont steal or try to get over on anyone. Period. Are you saying that I might lose my moral compass if faced with poverty?

I cannot speak for any individual and I'm not as obtuse to suggest that because someone is living in poverty their integrity suddenly goes out the window.  But I can definitely understand why some people living in systematically maintained poverty would feel compelled to stockpile more food than is allotted by EBT.

I agree wholeheartedly with elle, that certain situations considered "theft" perpetrated by middle class people wouldn't be judged as harshly. Some of the same people I know IRL that are judging the ppl taking $700 of groceries are also the same people pirating terabytes of media with limewire and Torrent. I just find people stealing food in order survive more understandable and forgivable than someone stealing entire music libraries. 

[swimmette]

Oct 17, 2013 14:01:14 GMT -5 @tambcat said:

I agree with holding Walmart financially responsible. Someone has to pay, and the people receiving benefits probably can't.

So stealing is OK as long as you can't afford it?  I agree that Wal-Mart fucked up, but these people knowingly bought absurd amounts of food because of a system glitch.  I guarantee that if a CC had a glitch (and somehow the purchaser knew about it and took advantage) and didn't charge said purchaser on a store trip, the person would 100% have to pay it when the glitch is found.  Stealing is stealing, I don't care if you are rich or poor.

[BaliHai]

Oct 17, 2013 14:58:14 GMT -5 luckyval said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:42:01 GMT -5 @heyitsme said:

If I leave my front door unlocked, should the people that come in and take my stuff not be responsible because I didn't lock my door?

They only took food out of my refrigerator and some aspirin from my medicine cabinet because they were super hungry, sick and needed it desperately. They can't pay me back because they can't afford it/have no money - and I did do the stupid thing and left my front door unlocked.

Is that ok?  Or is it only OK because they are stealing from Walmart and not you?

FWIW - I think Walmart is the devil and if it happened to anyone I'm happy it's Walmart.  However, it's just not right - regardless of the excuses of why they did it.

As others have stated, I don't see the Wal Mart spree or your hypothetical as an ethical black or white. There are varying degrees of immoral behavior and, yes, I will judge less harshly someone who came into my house, stole some food because they were going hungry than I would someone who came in and stole my tv because it's a kickass tv

Once again, agreed.

[swimmette]

Oct 17, 2013 15:10:13 GMT -5 @scottydeux said:

Oct 17, 2013 15:08:01 GMT -5 swimmette said:

So stealing is OK as long as you can't afford it?  I agree that Wal-Mart fucked up, but these people knowingly bought absurd amounts of food because of a system glitch.  I guarantee that if a CC had a glitch (and somehow the purchaser knew about it and took advantage) and didn't charge said purchaser on a store trip, the person would 100% have to pay it when the glitch is found.  Stealing is stealing, I don't care if you are rich or poor.

Obviously, no.  But, where's the money going to come from.  These people have little/nothing.

And where is the lesson that knowingly taking something that is not yours is punishable?  Look, the issue is not that people have it hard.  Sure they do.  BUT, I am not allowed to go in and just take $700 worth of groceries, I would go to jail.  Not punishing thieves demonstrates that it is ok to take what is not yours.  Plain and simple.

[pixelpassion]

Oct 17, 2013 15:08:01 GMT -5 swimmette said:

Oct 17, 2013 14:01:14 GMT -5 @tambcat said:

I agree with holding Walmart financially responsible. Someone has to pay, and the people receiving benefits probably can't.

So stealing is OK as long as you can't afford it?  I agree that Wal-Mart fucked up, but these people knowingly bought absurd amounts of food because of a system glitch.  I guarantee that if a CC had a glitch (and somehow the purchaser knew about it and took advantage) and didn't charge said purchaser on a store trip, the person would 100% have to pay it when the glitch is found.  Stealing is stealing, I don't care if you are rich or poor.

Walmart knew about the glitch and did not try to stop customers checking out with this amount of groceries (perhaps they were assuming the govt would repay the amount as another poster had speculated). 

I feel like this is borderline negligence on walmart's part since they were aware of the problem and waited to correct it. Also, I guarantee that the people receiving benefits will not have the money to pay wal-mart back. 

[pixelpassion]

Oct 17, 2013 15:15:19 GMT -5 swimmette said:

Oct 17, 2013 15:10:13 GMT -5 @scottydeux said:

Obviously, no.  But, where's the money going to come from.  These people have little/nothing.

And where is the lesson that knowingly taking something that is not yours is punishable?  Look, the issue is not that people have it hard.  Sure they do.  BUT, I am not allowed to go in and just take $700 worth of groceries, I would go to jail.  Not punishing thieves demonstrates that it is ok to take what is not yours.  Plain and simple.

I would not suggest that a person taking advantage of a one-time glitch is branded a thief. 

[pedanticwench]

Oct 17, 2013 14:39:43 GMT -5 EmilieMadison said:

It's just grossing me out, that so many people are justifying this.
Say you've fallen on REALLY hard times and to help you out, your richie rich friend hires you to clean their house for $100 and says that they will leave the money in a drawer for you when you're finished. When you're done, you go to the drawer and see about $5K in cash. YOU CANT TAKE MORE THAN $100 JUST BECAUSE YOU NEED IT, IT'S SITTING THERE, AND YOUR FRIEND HAS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE BANK. How hard is this to grasp?

If someone is desperate enough, I think they'll do just about anything, regardless of what they've been taught about right and wrong.

[emptygee]

Oct 17, 2013 14:32:36 GMT -5 TrickyBob said:

Walmart fucked up and should eat their cost. The shoppers stole.

But how sad that people stocked up like this on food. They didn't steal big ticket items. It sort of breaks my heart that the large, overall, picture shows that families cannot live off of such a small amount of money.

Um, yeah, they didn't steal big ticket items because they would have been arrested. The whole checkout system wasn't down, just the EBT limit machine or whatever. They couldn't steal anything BUT food. And just because someone decides to steal food doesn't mean they HAVE to.

[Deleted]

It's stealing.  It's not justified.

But Wal-Mart is paying for it, right?  Wal-Mart can certainly afford it.  I don't feel bad for Wal-Mart.

And I love Robin Hood, if that makes any sense.

I don't see who is harmed here...except for Wal-Mart.

And I don't care about Wal-Mart.

[pantsparty]

It's wrong. This is not an exact parallel, but last month I caught an error in my commission check that would have meant an extra $400 for me. I let my boss know to make the adjustment. I've never been on any type of aid, but it doesn't excuse a person from moral behavior, IMO.

[vamoose]

Walmart has gotten some great publicity out of this mess, so I will go ahead and consider the overspent EBT cards money well spent for Walmart.

I don't like that people stole and are getting off without consequences, but I have no better alternative. I think benefits are calculated to be pretty much the minimum needed to feed the people receiving the benefits, so taking money out of that is no good. They could intercept any tax refund, but I'm guessing most of these people wouldn't be getting a tax refund anyway.

[Deleted]

Oct 17, 2013 16:10:39 GMT -5 Lucy Honeychurch said:

What I don't understand is stealing egregiously, gleefully and defiantly.  But then maybe I should, considering how many people seem to think this kind of thing is justifiable/awesome.

I don't think it's "justifiable" or "awesome."

I simply don't see what harm has been done here when Wal-Mart is picking up the tab.

Really, what is the harm?

[emptygee]

Oct 17, 2013 16:16:20 GMT -5 @misoangry said:

Oct 17, 2013 16:10:39 GMT -5 Lucy Honeychurch said:

What I don't understand is stealing egregiously, gleefully and defiantly.  But then maybe I should, considering how many people seem to think this kind of thing is justifiable/awesome.

I don't think it's "justifiable" or "awesome."

I simply don't see what harm has been done here when Wal-Mart is picking up the tab.

Really, what is the harm?

Since Wal-Mart is going to end up paying, I don't think there is a harm. However, I think the original debate was whether or not it was stealing. Some people apparently think it isn't. Which is ridiculous, by the way.

[sonrisa]

What I want to know is how many of the buyers were off work Walmart employees who noticed the glitch (or heard about it) from work.

[Jermys]

I'm having a hard time with this. Like a PP said, it's your personal integrity, and I do believe that my integrity is important and not worth selling. Then on the other hand, my personal integrity would go straight in the shitter if I was already nervous about the shutdown affecting my EBT benefits/WIC benefits, and the possibility of my kids going hungry. If I could stockpile some hamburger and chicken nuggets to get them through lean times, I'm betting I'd stick two fingers up to the government AND Wal*Mart.

I would rob Mother Theresa if it was between her and my kids. So there's that.

[Deleted]

Oct 17, 2013 16:21:50 GMT -5 Lucy Honeychurch said:

Oct 17, 2013 16:16:20 GMT -5 @misoangry said:

I don't think it's "justifiable" or "awesome."

I simply don't see what harm has been done here when Wal-Mart is picking up the tab.

Really, what is the harm?

Well, where's the harm in GoDawgs stealing ketchup? lol. Really, no harm; I was just curious how many people thought it was stealing versus how many people thought it was justified.

There is absolutely harm.

The harm is that the rightful owner of the ketchup no longer has that ketchup.

And that rightful owner is not a mega-corporation with billions of dollars.

That rightful owner is somebody like me who is pissed she no longer has ketchup that she needs for her own lunch because GoDawgs stole it.

[Deleted]

Oh it's definitely stealing, and not really justifiable either in the most basic sense.

However, my moral compass is...slightly impaired, to put it delicately.

My mom says that it points straight to hell. I'm pretty certain that I either did, or should have served some time in a previous life.

[Deleted]

Windfalls for the poor don't really upset me, especially when no other people are harmed by those windfalls.

[Deleted]

And also? The identity of the thief. That's relevant.

[Deleted]

If I were in that situation, the only thing that would have kept me from taking part is the fear of prosecution and possible jail time.

I'd let someone else put their ass on the line and hit them up for some of their pilfered goods after the fact. Deeply discounted, of course.

[Deleted]

Stealing from a rich friend and stealing from Wal-Mart when there is a glitch simply isn't a comparable analogy.

If I find $100 on the floor of my workplace, what do I do? I probably take it to reception and try to see if anybody has lost it.

If I find $100 on the street outside, what do I do? I probably put it in my pocket.

These are different situations.