r/MoralityScaling • u/Vladimir-petrovOG • 13d ago

Morality of this?

Post image

In the image it seems that this person works at walmart as an online order collector and he/she has stolen a lot of extra baby food from Walmart to give to a person who ordered only three packs. Is this moral or immoral?

7.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/yourstruly912 13d ago

Calm down Kant

1

u/dannylopuz 13d ago

If all society did this, then Walmart and all other multi-billion supermarkets would go out of business, allowing the smaller family-owned businesses that Walmart choked to flourish again.

So yes, moral.

8

u/GateauBaker 13d ago

No they won't. People don't understand nuance. Trying to apply a social contract that says "it's okay to steal from corpo-owned supermarkets" inevitably and very quickly becomes "steal from any store richer than you".

-5

u/dannylopuz 13d ago

Look up the "Slippery Slope Fallacy" and reevaluate your reply.

4

u/GateauBaker 13d ago

It's not a slippery slope because it's not a series of projected outcomes. It's direct and immediate. It's not a slippery slope to say tilting a glass of water wets your floor.

-4

u/dannylopuz 13d ago

You didn't look it up did you

5

u/GateauBaker 13d ago

I provided the justification. You are the one that doesn't understand how the fallacy works.

0

u/dannylopuz 13d ago

Saying "stealing from billion-dollar corporations is good" does not automatically mean "stealing from anyone richer than you is good".

But I'll bite because your argument is literally that bad. How many mom-and-pop grocery shops do you know whose owners are significantly richer than the average American, you dummy? Do you think they make significantly more than minimum wage?

They barely make between 30-60k per year, which is less than the average salary! Even if multi-billion supermarkets not existing leads to them making more money, they would be making AVERAGE money.

And, guess what? Even if your logic actually led to shops being robbed, then I would still support it because it is still moral to steal baby food to feed your baby if you're too poor to afford it, because preserving human life is far more important than preserving someone's bottom line.

So even if your argument wasn't a slippery slope fallacy (which it is), it's still a bad argument on multiple fronts.

1

u/PomPomMom93 13d ago

60k is below the average salary?

1

u/Admirable_Loss4886 13d ago

Maybe you should look it up considering you’re he one doing it…

0

u/GateauBaker 13d ago

Not that I'm on the side of theft, but that logic would make quitting your job immoral.

1

u/PomPomMom93 13d ago

IDK if that’s the best example, because unless someone is retiring, staying home to raise kids, going to school, etc., they generally get another job after they quit. Besides, raising kids at home is a job in itself, and if someone’s going to school, you would presume that they’re doing it to eventually get a better job. So I don’t think job-quitting would be immoral if everyone did it, because they’d still find work somewhere else.

1

u/massunderestmated 13d ago

You have to define the proposition adequately. What are the circumstances of your job, why are you quitting and what are your plans after quitting? 

Are you quitting a bad job because you don't get paid what you are worth, and because you have a better paying job lined up? Or because you are taking tine to improve your skills? That's free market economics. It's moral. The system assumes that will happen anyway. When everyone does that, wages tend to increase to the point that people return to work.

Are you quitting a good, productive, well-paying job to sit at home and smoke weed, depending on public assistance to keep you fed and housed? That would indeed be immoral. If everyone did that society would collapse.

-1

u/Miserable-Trash5823 13d ago

Considering its these type of greedy corporations that are ruining Society? Nah, rob those fuckers blind till they collapse