Topic: What to do about people who believe that stealing is ok - page 4. (Read 1117 times)

Money is potentialy infinite. Resources are not infinite. There is no way to just print more resources no matter how much money you hand out. Education is not a right. No one has aright to the time and resources of another required for education. That is called theft and or slavery. Additionally not every poor person is poor because a rich person made them poor. That is insane Marxist victim-hood rhetoric.

Money doesn't grow on trees.  You don't need trees or growth to create money.  Money grows on computer screens out of key strokes.  The central bank literally creates money out of nothing.  Money isn't finite because its not a tangible resource.  Its an arbitrary thing we've created to get people to do stuff.  Just like points in a game, or merit on a messageboard, a money system can be tweaked or reassigned like an airdrop or fork to meet current needs.  Just like laws do not always correspond to what is right or wrong, money does not always correspond to what has value.  

Your willingness to take a skilled person's capital in return for allowing them education (which should be a right the brightest of the bright in the first place) is more evidence that you subscribe to stealing and that capital gravitates to those who have the most capital and skills together.   Skills without capital are even more useless than capital without skills.  How much skill does it really take to bet on a person with a perfect SAT score?

All of the research shows that poor kids are at an extreme disadvantage; even in the US.  
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5460626/
By the age of 4, poor kids already have decreased executive functioning ability.  This means they are not as able to get the same out of an equal education going forward even if they weren't already going to receive an inferior education.  This is permanent damage and we can point out clear mechanisms linking back to family income.  

I know exactly how fortunate most kids in the USA are.  That is the crux of the issue.  Being born in the US is not a skill.  Being born in any rich nation is not a skill but at the same time is usually an automatic ticket to limitless opportunity.  This excess of opportunity exists largely because it was stolen from the global south.  Living in a country that had its schools bombed and future damaged so that we could buy more stuff we don't need has only fed this perspective.

There is no doubt that the US is the best country to be rich in.  No argument there.  In no other country is it so legal for the rich to systematically steal from the rest of the world.  All we had to do was simply be born and our ticket to an easy life was already punched.  A lot of us had it so good that we could party and play for most of our lives, make terrible, irresponsible mistakes, squander more money than most people will ever see, and STILL come out in the top 1 percent without ever having to sweat.  

All of this on the backs of the global poor.

Wow! Space is big!?! I never knew that...thanks for the insight (is it big enough to dispose of nuclear waste after we have used the nuclear energy to power cities for decades?).



Great for NASA. We also got Tang out of it. Now it's time for the big boys to actually do something with it.

I believe completely in incrementalism so I, of course, understand that we are not building space colonies tomorrow. I do believe we will be building ocean colonies tomorrow (starting next week actually). From ocean colonies we can build a launch loop to start sending infrastructure into space. From there we can start colonizing our solar system. From there we can build technology to move further and further. When we go further and further we will be able to send humans all over the galaxy where there are also resources like there are on Earth. We may run into the problem of not having enough humans to live both on Earth and those that want to be transported to other worlds but hopefully the population grows at a faster rate.

Human ingenuity and progress in that whole thing depends wholly on the government getting out of our way. My dealings with the Thai government demonstrate this very thing. They tried to interfere with that roadmap to space colonization before it could even have more than one house floating in the water. Not through NASA nor any public resources. Just private individuals trying to bring progress to the world.

But do not worry. Where one government failed, others see opportunity and have expressed the desire to stay out of the way as they see the benefits of being the world's space port.

But back to the OP. You are certainly one of those that we need to protect ourselves from. I am ok with your ideology existing as long as I can protect myself and my belongings from people like you. For every thief coming in the night to steal our belongings we can use technology to stop them. For every Navy that comes to take away our property, there are technological advances that can be developed to thwart them. It will just be a technological race and the "public" will be funding your side of the battle until they grow weary of working most of their lives just to fund theft.

I don't think you understand how big the universe is and how far we are from being able to access and live off of resources beyond earth.  The universe is not "full" because that fails to imply the vast amounts of empty space between matter.  Empty space that we cannot develop the technology to fully overcome because it is outside the boundaries of the laws of physics.  You don't seem to appreciate the difference between space travel and space colonization.   Its like being able to swim in the ocean for a few minutes vs being able to travel across the ocean.  It would take tens of thousands of years just to reach the nearest star if we left today. Even as a meteorologist and space enthusiast, I'm more interested in what we will do on Earth in the near term.  You can't simply respond to immediate problems with "well who cares because in hundreds of thousands of years we will probably solve this problem".  Its really just a fancy way of ignoring problems.

Also, you have it completely backwards.  Human ingenuity and progress like space travel was only tapped into by the Soviet union and NASA which required national pooling of public resources.  Private firms today are still piggy backing off of technology that first was developed by these governments in the 50s.

We aren't talking about the wisdom of breaking the law.  We are talking about if the law determines what is ethical or unethical and the wisdom of the law being the entirety of your moral compass.  You seem to think it is ok to do anything that the law permits you to do.  I find that problematic because there is an overlap between theft and legality.  You yourself has said that government-forced redistribution is theft so surely you can comprehend this notion.

No on has ever asked for equality of outcome so why would you make such a statement if you are not attempting a strawman?

First of all, these countries represent a very small percentage of the most privileged people on Earth so the notion that the richest people have equality of outcome amongst themselves, even if true, would be evidence of a global failure.  There should not be a border around opportunity.

Also, your statement may be generally true in these countries, but poor children in the west still do not have the same opportunity to score well on the SAT.  Children who are not properly nourished, deal with childhood trauma, and do not get proper sleep in early years of cognitive development do not develop the same abilities as those who have grown up with basic needs met.  This is not equality of opportunity.  SAT scores can be strongly predicted by things like zip code and parent education.  These are things no one has the opportunity to choose.  

You are talking about some of the most privileged people in the world.  Most people do not even have the opportunity to go to college and waste time or rack up 200k in debt. These are people who had maximum opportunity, did not make the most of it, and will still come out with a better life than 85% of the world despite making all of the wrong choices.  You are making my point.

Also, every economic system is forced capital redistribution and they all have consequences.  Choose a system is just a matter of choosing which consequences you prefer.  
Knowing how the capitalist system works and agreeing with it on an ethical basis are two different things.  You seem to have conflated the two.  I know exactly how the capitalist system works and think it is completely unethical but still participate in it because it is the reality of the world I live in.  I teach my children ethics and economics and let them decide if they want to abandon ethics for economics , abandon economics for ethics, or want to push for a world that abandons capitalism for ethical economics.  Most of the young generation prefer the latter and are ready to fight for it.  

You cannot continue to push the false dichotomy of capitalism or "communist" systems of the past.  There are countless other ways a society can function if you open your mind, think outside of the box and use some imagination or creativity.


Do you see the double standard in your post?  Why can't we treat the poor like the lazy child of .a billionaire and give them money.  That way, everyone will have the same opportunity to "return" the capital or put it into good use.  According to your same logic, the people with the most skills would end up with the capital anyway.  

And that is why you adhere to a flawed system. You have no confidence in human ingenuity and progress.

Stop worrying about doling out a Model T to every citizen and start allowing progress to happen unequally.

The universe is full of resources, space travel is imminent. All the sooner if people like you get out of the way.

But such technological advances cannot happen without greed, and allowing people to keep the fruits of their labor and shoot for a better life than everyone else. That is the breeding ground for progress and will take us beyond the stars.

"In a universe full of planets and energy"

What are you on about?  We live on Earth and can't survive 1 second without it's resources.  The rest of the universe is completely irrelevant.
I'm not asking you what the law is or how it works.  No one asked about gun laws or self defense laws.  I think everyone here knows those things and its a distraction from the topic at hand.  I'm asking you to be an ethical thinker, not a lawyer. If there is no situation in which you would ever disagree with the law, then just say that.  

Conveniently, you chose to talk about the one piece of property police keep record of, but what about everything else?  What if you can't provide proof that it is your property to the police but you know that it is your property?  Do you still consider this stealing?  

I hope you also realize that redistribution of wealth is also often done through legal means.  By your logic, this is not stealing because if the government taxes me, I cannot call the government and tell them that the tax money belongs to me and have them return it.  If a government were to raise taxes to 100% or legalize slavery, it doesn't seem to me like you would consider it theft because it would be legal.  

I haven't said anything about the system you lived under.  I think everyone agrees that a system that does as you have described is an awful system.  

I've never read or met anyone who thinks all humans are the same, like ants, or should all have the same outcome from their lives.  Its a tired, lazy strawman. The kind I would expect from tecshare.  If being illiterate was someone's choice then fine, but have you ever stopped to wonder if a huge majority of the illiterate people have not simply chosen to be illiterate because they are lazy?  Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe (just maybe) many of these people are illiterate because they did not have proper access to education?  Most rich people were born rich and most poor people were born poor.  That has very little to do with the fact that people are different, have different potentials, and can be lazy.  

The lazy child of a billionaire is much more likely to succeed than a child born to poverty in a war-torn area during a famine.  Your life is set on a certain track before the age of 5.

a. is irrelevant. Nothing in this whole universe can be equal to another thing nor should it be desirable.
b. public property should not exist. You would think that with the tragedy of the commons playing itself out over and over and over people would realize that shared resources are just about the worst way to deal with resources.

The brainwashing by the public schools can likely be held accountable for the continuance of such a failed system. But of course, you can't blame them for trying to perpetuate their own inadequacy.

In a universe full of planets and energy, I think you are wasting time believing that someone can "take everything".

For anybody who thinks stealing is okay...

We need to make a strict law that if anyone steals something and gets away with it, that if he trades it for something else... MANDATORY EXECUTION.

This means that if a person embezzels some money, he can't use it to pay for something that he wants to buy. He can't use it to pay his servants if he is rich. He has to keep it. Mandatory execution if he is caught transferring it to someone else in any way.

You brought up laws and legal definitions of crime which is why I brought up slavery.  I'm talking about stealing while you are talking about laws and crime.  Slavery was a form of legal theft and slaves were private property within the law.  I used that to point out your appeal to authority fallacy which assumes all theft is illegal and anything legal cannot be theft.   It seems like you are saying slavery is not theft as long as it is legal.

We agree that retrieving stolen property from a thief is fine but what if the thief had already sold your property and you're taking it back from someone who purchased it? This is a realistic scenario because thieves usually look to move stolen goods as quickly as possible.  Is that stealing?

As for the bold part, I have made clear that taking stolen items is not necessarily stealing but can be.  We are in agreement that taking your car back from someone who stole it is not stealing but what if it was illegal? What if they had it registered in their name already?  You are confusing yourself by letting the law be your moral compass and not separating the law from what you actually believe stealing is.  

Laws vary over time and place but your own morals should not.

You have several options

a.  Push for a society where everyone has equal opportunity to obtain private property
b. Push for an adequate amount of public property that serves as an alternative to private property and can still meet the needs of those who do not believe in private property
c. Brainwash the masses into thinking you have a or b.

but there is no scenario where you can just take everything, leave the masses with nothing, and not expect them to come for your head.

Corruption exists in every form of government regardless of economic system.  We agree that power leads to more corruption and that all forms of totalitarian governments generate theft which is bad so there is no debate on this here.  

If you want to debate about the various ways communism could be implemented, make another topic and I'd be glad to discuss it with you but this is not the place for that and I won't let you drag me off-topic.

Well, you (communists/people who do not respect private property/etc.) fall into the reason for the original question. What do we (as individuals) do about preventing those who do not believe in private property taking our property.

I respect that communists think differently and I do not believe that any social structure can exist by requiring everyone to adhere to a specific ideology. Thus the reason why someone who respects private property must be personally responsible for protecting those rights.

This, I believe, may come down to upgrading our ways of protecting property via technology (autonomous drones, blockchain reputation system, tracking devices, etc.).

No, I do not believe every person should be a bread maker but if you have the unlimited power of a Dyson Sphere you should not be worrying about 10 people remaining and only 10 loaves of bread. Through technology all of the needs (and wants) of individuals can be obtained in this vast universe if only those who value equality over progress would get out of our way and let humanity move forward (each according to his own desires).

Once we can individually protect our own private property through more advanced technology (such as being able to hold your private Bitcoin keys in your head), then the state will no longer be able to steal as easily as it currently does.

That's an incredibly complex subject for a "civilized westerner" like me. You're describing something I can barely imagine xD

But I'd like to add that it's not just for theft.
In fact you can easily see that our low crime rate isn't thanks to the police, it's thanks to the fact that nearly everyone respects the law by default.

I'm not sure I'm being clear, but I already got the feeling that in other cultures, if you have a problem in front of you you deal with it and end of the story. Someone is bothering you in the street? You kick the shit out of him. Someone disturbs you because he's talking loud, you intimidate him and maybe kick him few times.

Most nations have a very... Primitive and savage culture.
This can be seen easily in immigrant population in Western countries. I've been attacked a few times in my life and that always has been by black/arab foreigners.
And the worse is that they didn't seem crazy or anything. It was normal for them to escalate to the physical conflict quickly. While we are used to respect each others so much than them.

Anyone saying it's easy to live with other cultures has never tried it...
So yeah I agree with you Elwar, either you enforce your laws quite strongly, maybe giving to your population the means to do it, either you separate cultures.

What you mean is that corruption in government results into people stealing each other because government is showing the bad example?
Do you have any fact on this or is it just your impression?
Which would be fine btw, just interested if you have figures on this

Yes, yes, real Communism hasn't been tried before, some how you are going to take people's property by force to redistribute without the state, and all the horrible things that result anytime any one tries to implement Communism isn't a result of Communist ideology. This is very much on topic. As I said in my first reply to the OP, government corruption is one of the primary drivers behind creating a low trust society where people  justify stealing as a result of the government never being held responsible under the law.

Communism creates more government corruption arguably than any other form of government, even open dictatorships, because it occupies the ideology of revolution and fighting for the people while actually being a totalitarian dictatorship. At least with open dictators everyone knows what they are getting.

My position has been misrepresented.
Do you think bank robbers should be able to keep the money if they are caught?

By my logic, stealing slaves from slave owners and setting them free (return to their rightful owner) is not a crime.   Harrriet Tubman did not steal slaves but I'm sure the slave owners felt that way. 

I'm fine with euthanasia in cases where people are suffering, have to be actively kept alive, and consent to being left to die (unplugged).
You are off-topic.  This isn't about what you think communism means or if it was responsible for those deaths.  Its about stealing and we can agree that all those totalitarian states stole from the people because by my logic, they kept more than their fair share. 

Cool story bro. Unfortunately an oppressive centralized totalitarian state is required to roll out Communism. There is no way around it, otherwise it would just be called charity. This is where you try to tell me Communism has never existed, and I tell you how it just so happens to kill millions every time it is tried.

Nice strawman.  As a communist, i don't believe in having a state at all. 

As long as the fruits of peoples labor is taken by the state for "redistribution" though, that is not slavery right? After all the only way to create the Communist utopia of equality is to make everyone equally enslaved and impoverished. You aren't one to talk about a broken moral compass Captain Postmodern.

Interesting opinion.  To me it sounds a lot like you are describing the US government.
By your logic, having slaves was not stealing as long as you bought the slaves and slavery was not yet outlawed.  Your moral compass is broken. 

You are a Communist. Communism inherently supports government sponsored theft. They not only steal your property, but your mind, your spirit, and your pride. I don't really care what twisted Postmodernist relativist logic you use to justify it, Communism is theft.

Stealing, in general is bad. Especially if it is done in a way that hurts another person. I don't participate in any scams and I value my integrity but I also don't judge anyone that has found a way to pilfer some money from large corporations or banks. I wish I had the balls to and skill to grab a few million from Chase banks or the like but I would never be able to do it. I'm too paranoid.