You never 'hurt' a corporation by stealing from them. They merely raise the prices for everyone else. It's factored into the 'cost of business', termed 'shrinkage' in retail. You are effectively stealing a penny from the pockets of every customer that walks into the store. This is why economics should be a mandatory subject.
There's no such as thing as stealing from a corporation, the concept of ownership requires a sentient entity who could claim ownership, corporations are not people, they are not sentient, and the goods said to be owned by a corporation are in reality owned by no one.
In a normal world this stuff would be free if you have worked, due to redistribution of goods... and the hunger would be stopped not only in africa and asia but in our countries too. Now you have to work, then everyone in the system steals from you. In a normal world people wouldn't work for money but for community they live in and then the products they produced would be redistributed between them... In the normal world we have to fight for... No masters, No gods, No borders, Social Revolution!
The stores owners are a "faceless, inhuman entity with no concern for [his] welfare", because they don't just voluntarily lavish him with free stuff that considerable resources went into producing. But he proudly advocates that one should "take what [one] needs without giving anything up". So for the "corporation", wanting even just reciprocity in the exchange of resources is abhorrent, but for him, taking whatever he wants from them through force and/or fraud... perfectly fine--virtuous, even.
The reversal of fundamental ethics in the video (fraud is virtuous, honest exchange is violence) is so patent, I really don't think it needs to be pointed out by anyone else.
So other people offering goods and services for voluntary trade, that they have worked to produce or procure, and wanting something in return for them, is "forcing you into an exchange" in a "relationship based on violence". And going into their place of business to defraud them about your intention to trade with them and then physically remove their property from them, rather than peacefully and honestly negotiating for the exchange of resources, is a virtuous act of liberation and empowerment.
love this video...sadly i got busted and had to take some anti shop lifting class. They said all the cliche things...how people lose their jobs, prices go up...blah blah blah. Wrong. People get fired for their own stupidity. Prices dont go up. You see a DVD thats being sold for 19.99. I bet you plenty have lifted it and u go back bout a month later itll be the same price.
Most companies are publicly subsidized yet they pay people shit and the ceo's pocket all the money. Take back what you have all ready paid for. I love this video but it's not shoplifting you have paid for it.
My lady is always pocketing things not nailed down, just for the devilment of it. Other week in London she pinched me a £1,279 cardigan I was unable to afford.
Here in Florida I defninitely feel that I can't exist in public unless I am buying or soon will buy something. I would love for a community like Palm Beach would make it actually illegal to not buy something within a certain period. I would then take that community law and ask for asylum from Bolivia, who hate the US. Getting asylum is fantastic, also getting the other county's passport is the key to being free in this world.
The family that owns walmart is one of the richest families in the world. They treat their employees like shit. Ppl use the excuse that stealing from them takes bonuses away from the workers. OK, then how many billions of dollars must the Waltons make before they pay their employees a living wage? 40 billion? 60 billion? 100 billion? It's never gonna happen. They're greedy assholes. Wake the fuck up
The big corporations have to exist for people to steal from them. Hence, shoplifters depend on the existence of the stores they steal from. Therefore shoplifting depends on the continuation of capitalism. Get rid of capitalism, and shoplifting becomes unnesessary and redundant. Shoplifting is just more mindless consumersim.
They sue their own. They are the real thieves. Good one those who looted walmart. Continue to do so for the poor employers who cat shafted by walmart.
The corporations win both ways but an individual can only win one way but if you are caught then the system wins and by a factor of 5 or more. So use your brain thank god the majority don't have brains including those in power.
This video is a bunch of bullshit made up to justify selfishness. Everyone in this world trades their labour for provisions. Stealing is simply mooching of society, because you wish to take without giving. "it is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything" That's a lie, its just selfishness. You can argue all you want that the big companies steal from us by overpricing. Then don't buy from them, go somewhere small. I shoplift aswell but i see it as it is. I'm selfish and lazy.
ha ha, I love the honesty, But... They dont overprice. They underprice, Thanks to the third world, and goverenment subsidies, they can sell food for below the cost of production. Great right, cheap food. Who cares? Well there are a lot of fall backs with this system, Namely the deprivation of three fourths of the Population, WORLD WIDE. I really dont want to take you to school on this subject. But i suggest that you use some of your free time, Mr Lazy, and do a little research.
You misinterpreted what i said. I'm aware of the worlds less fortunate. My family is from a third world country which we moved to to escape comminism, although i have been fortunate not to expiernce it first ahnd i know much more about poverty and unfair wages than most americans, i have walked amongst the 3/4 of the population you speak of, not just read about them. No big company "under prices" when you consider the wages they pay it's all overpriced (as you said).
I agree with the argument that big corporations in a sense "steal" from the buyers, by selling their products in high prices.
However I do not agree with the shoplifting attitude. Instead you need to neglect the big corporations and shop from the small local stores. That way you hurt the big corporations and you assist the small stores to survive.
And an extra thought is that you don't need to buy shitloads of things you literally have no use for. Buy what you need.
I was planning to jack these earphones in Staples which cost like $20 and i just wanna know that if i shoplift, would the doors activates its theft alarm if it detects it? Or should i remove the tag just in case? I'm pretty scared and it would be my first time shoplifting.. Please reply honestly.
@FliPf13 Take the tag off - always. The one thing to remember is to be calm - they steal from you every time you buy something, so steal right back - remain calm at all times and it will work. If the barcode is actually a part of the CD, either take the CD out (use creative thinking), put a big sticker over top, or find a way to wrap tinfoil on it - then put it in your purse or pocket. Trust me - it's headphones, you aren't doing anything wrong by saving your hard earned money
@Jac92z a better solution would be to cover a bag from the inside with tinfoil. It let's you shoplift more items and does not make you look suspicious.
@FliPf13 Try to find a big store that sells clothes as well and have a changing room, take a nail clipper with you or a sharp object to remove the tag,choose small items that can be easily hidden in your clothes,take these items to an area where there are no cameras,hide them in your clothes, then move to the clothes section,take some t-shirts, pants 2 of each ...etc go to the changing room, remove the tag, with the sharp object, wear the clothes underneath your clothes,walk away.
@FliPf13 For the earphones, check a place where there is no cameras , remove it from it's package, put it in your pocket or hook it to your music player. hide the empty package somewhere.
Those that think this is imoral or wrong of evil does not understand everything in this country has already been paid for. Corporation steals from us everyday. There are some corporation that steal your social security number and signature and trade then on the open market and you are none the wiser.
I don't see this as justifying stealing by "It hurts the companies and helps the little man". It's more like "This is how I survive. You work behind a register to get your paycheck, to buy what you need. I take what I need."
How good or bad it is is subjective. Good and bad are subjective. It's only bad if YOU think it is. If you don't care if someone gets hurt (we're set to die the moment we're born, so why not??), then it's not bad, etc.
Man, I want to go steal something so bad right now. >_>
I'm totally down for freeganism but my concern with shoplifting is whether or not it still has the same effects as buying the item. If big corps are willing to take shortcuts in the first place (non fair trade, underpaying employees, destroying precious resources, etc), wouldn't they be more than willing to make even more shortcuts to compensate for lost profit?
I've gotta say, I'm just not down with that. The means of production ought to be owned by those working them, but the products themselves are not free for all to take. It is always exploitation to take that which you have not labored to create without the uncoerced consent of the one who ha labored for it (or who has gained it legitimately and without coercion or exploitation).
shoplifting only makes a difference on the shoplifter who is not giving up anything in exchange for goodies (life, money, time) yet for the corporation it is just the same as if you bought the items and feed the machine, cos they count on you and the items are already sold for them when they reach the shelves. Thrilling, I give you that, but just temporary and fruitless.
My view is that you are simply justifying being one of life's takers (just your accusation against the corporations), or alternatively you have confidence issues in not feeling empowered or liberated enough to deal with the world normally.
You should read the book they show in the vid: Days of War, Nights of Love. I was against anarchy, but that was before I knew what it truly was. You're only assuming you are forming your own opinion when you say that we are not empowered enough to deal with the world normally, but that idea has been forced on you and you have submitted to it because resisting is too difficult for you. You show up day in and day out to your job and live by rules that are not your own, yet you think you are free?
Don't try to justify it, you're a selfish greedy thief who costs all of us honest shoppers more money! I am concerned by shoplifters' needs and welfare, they need free board and lodging somewhere, and I hope as many as possible get some prison years to think their lives through.
the only problem i have with shoplifting is that it may affect workers' wages. Also, lazy people who have no work ethic don't deserve to shop lift. They're plain thieves.
As i myself, someone who hasnt ever done this before personally would recommend... Anarchy. especially in times of recession. your rich and fat president obama.. i get a peace prize for being a black guy sitting on the most important throne in america hasnt fixed things, they have left you without a choice.
I think if you want to shoplift from major corporations, then shoplift. They are the greedy theivivng capatilists profiting form world hunger. Id rather burn a wal-mart to the ground with all the meaningles material stuff thats isnt really woth antything along with it. ANd too comtinue on in that fashion...WHOS WITH ME!!!!
You just want stuff without paying for it. Stop making yourself out to be an insightful, 'fight the war, fuck the norm!' individual. You can help society by leaving Wal Mart off your shopping list and going to a mom & pop's shop.
But M&P's shops cost more than Wal-Mart. And you don't wanna pay those prices, even if they're fair. So instead of giving your hard earned money to those who deserve it, you justify your stealing with an 'I'm so anarchy, and that's cool!' Indy-flick. Eyeroll.
@HoneyNVinegar You dont think that Wal-Mart Steals? They steal buisness from honest people just so Sam Waltons idiot grand children and the richest 2%, can wipe there surgicly modified asses with 500 dollar bills. Meanwhile 75% of the world (workers/slaves)Live below the poverty line, in slums without running water or food. There is a direct corraltion between excessive wealth and extreme poverty. Do you think that the Wal-Mart would pay there employees anymore money if nobody Stole?
As a fellow shoplifter, I consider there to be a difference between big corporations and family-run corporations; I would not shoplift from small family-run businesses. And I wouldn't consider what I do to be "stealing". I call stealing one person taking from another person, but one person taking from a corporation is very different. Corporations (or better yet, private economic tyrannies) exist to profit. Good or bad, their motivation is money, and therefore hold no responsibility
or capability for remorse or humanity. That these institutions exist in the first place is stealing in my opinion. Its like the guy in the video said, "It is a way to carve out a little piece of the world for myself to act back upon a world that acts so much upon me."
Just be honest- you're too lazy to work and stealing gives you a massive rush. I accept that because its honest. Don't dress it up like you are smashing the system by stealing off big companies because it won't make any difference to anyone other than the people who have to pay inflated retail prices to cover the loss made by people stealing.
As someone who would like to see the system crumble, I feel conflicted by this idea. While nothing would bring me more joy and satisfaction than taking from the rich and providing for the poor, it is not the rich who suffer from these deliberate acts of self gratification. Instead it is the every day Joe who is hurt by shoplifting, it's the old lady who greets at the door because she can't make it on social security alone.
Its the poor family who gets their everyday staple items at WalMart because they can't afford the inflated prices of the grocery stores. When companies profit loss, prices go up and jobs are cut, but the rich fat cats still remain rich and fat. The current economy displays a perfect example of this. While the Waltons', Gates', and Johnsons' still sleep easy and comfortably, the average individual is the one who can't make their mortgage payment, nor provide for their family.
That's the way I felt too, because unfortunately I worked for these assholes too. I think though, it's those same exact peoples' fault that they live the way they do. They choose to go and work at a place like that; they feel like capitalism is the ONLY way of life, so the press on. Fact is, the way we have been living is very, very recent, and definitely NOT the only way to live life. I think that the best way to think about this is to help people realize that there are better ways to live.
This video reeks anarchy which makes no sense at all. Why needs laws? If stealing is from someone else is moral, then so should assualt, rape and murder.
By their logic, it would be okay for someone to shoot that baby right in the head. I hope it happens.
stealing from your neighbor is not the same thing as stealing from say a wal mart, for reasons which are outlined in part n this video...you may also want to go research the concepts "property is theft" and "surplus value of labor"
the reason why stealing from a wal mart isnt so bad: if you would have millions of dollars would you care if they stole you 200$ dollars? its as if they stole you 10 cents or something like that
Do you really think the credit crunch is not a contrived event? Someone has a printing press for money. DUH! Why does the government borrow money at interest from the central banks, when it has the right to print its own for nothing????
I do not think the 'credit crunch' is a contrived event, no. That being said, I think it is absolutely being used to institute conditions to forcibly extract wealth from low and middle income people to the politically connected elite. Western civilizations are really heading on a fast road to fascism, and it's very frightening.
You dont think that the credit crunch was predictable? There are financial advisors and institutions like the Federal Reserve. One of their major roles (along with wallstreet etc) is to look at not only anomalies in trade and the economy, but to be sure it is self sustaining and will not have these "crunches". Independent economists and professionals have warned of the problem for years, this was completely avoidable and predicted. It was allowed to happen, our "confidence" in the$ was attacked
I absolutely think the 'credit crunch' was predictable. In fact, I was very attuned to the predictions before it even happened, but 'predictable' does not equate to 'intentional.' Did perhaps certain people recognize the situation and ignore it, or just try to make as much money as they could while they could? Sure. I agree with you that certain people probably saw this coming and 'allowed' it to happen, but I do not think it was 'contrived' or 'planned.'
I also want to bring up again the fact that, this economic issue has actually been in progress for a long time, it basically already happened.. the dollar already was worth less, but the people didnt believe it, they were convinced otherwise. They of course were pushing off the inevitable, but the only thing keeping the dollar afloat as of recent years is the "illusion" that it is strong... once the "illusion" is attacked or "confidence" is lost, the collapse begins. Our own admin, attacked US
Well... yes partly it was an "illusion," I suppose, but it had a lot to do with the willingness of foreign lenders to continue to 'feed' the dollar. Of course, you could argue that those lenders were under the "illusion" that the dollar would continue to be strong in the long run and the U.S. would continue to be the world's superpower. But, certainly, our current economic woes are the result of years and years of bad policy (with dozens of administrations indirectly responsible).
Well here is the question... if you believe they "allowed" it to happen, how is that different from contriving it? I mean technically its different, but the guilt is the same... If I were to mention I was going to kill someone, go with you to the store to buy the gun. You had FULL knowledge and "allowed" it to happen, you can be charged as an accessory to the same crime and share the sentence.
Allowing something to happen when you have the power to prevent it, is the same as doing it yourself
I somewhat agree, with slight variation. If a disinterested/uninvolved party/person is in a position to stop harm to others (being astutely aware of the threat) WITHOUT posing potential costs and consequences upon himself/herself, that party/person (given sufficient evidence) ought to be held responsible as an accomplice to the harm committed.
Now, I actually don't think that applies to this discussion. I actually think it's worse than that. I'd suggest that certain individuals were very much interested/involved and perhaps were even blinded by the short-term benefits they received from the practices that caused/catalyzed/worsened/constructed the "crash." Of course I think those that were fully aware of the consequences of their actions should be held responsible. They won't be, but that's a totally different thing.
Ok cool. I just think theres a point when they should stop. Tesco for example, has a shop in every square mile of Britain.... but they want more. All the large corporations pass on minimum savings to the consumer, making the offers look amazing so we cant tell. Its just greed. When will they stop ruining small family businesses etc?
What is greed? Isn't it just as greedy for you to suggest that you should be able to obtain their goods and services more cheaply? What's wrong with Tesco having a lot of shops? If people like a business's products, what is wrong with that business expanding and serving more people? Small family businesses disappear because people choose to purchase goods and services from their competitors and not them.
The men at the top of the corporations don't care about the consumer. They will do anything to increase profit margins. For instance, Coca Cola builds factories in poor countries, to use the cheap labour, and then chucks its disgusting toxic waste straight into the local rivers! They use aspartame as a sweetener. (Really bad for you). The problem is that a corporation is treated in court as a person, when it displays none of the aspects of a human. Its not treated like a company/business.
I think Coca Cola contracts out to factories in other countries more often than it actually builds its own, but anyway... I actually do not drink Coke products for the very reason that the company has some practices that I disagree with. Yes, corporations have developed legal privileges that they should not have, however I do not think that legally identifying a corporation as a "person" is one of them.
In effect, a corporation being designated as a legal "person" only serves to identify the condition in which debts are contracted in the corporation's name and not the names of the shareholders. When Google tags "Inc." onto the end of its name, it is communicating to potential creditors that the shareholders do not accept 'unlimited personal liability' (in other words, a creditor must look only to a corporation's assets to fulfill their claims).
But this does not allow for some kind of waving of personal responsibility or immunity to suit. If one of the Google Street View cars runs over someone, the victim can sue the driver. If the driver is found guilty, then the employer/corporation is also held responsible. Corporations do not and cannot shield employees from personal liability.
If a person or collection of people feel that their health has suffered as a direct result of Coca Cola's use of aspartame, they may pursue claims against the company. The same goes for Coca Cola's pollution of rivers. If the pollution is causing damage to people or property, then Coca Cola can be taken to court. The reason, I would argue, that Coke perhaps continues these practices is because the courts or the government are essentially allowing them to externalize the costs...
For instance, in the case of polluting rivers, my assumption would be that the rivers are state owned and thus suffer a kind of 'tragedy of the commons.' Once Coca Cola suffers the cost of polluting the rivers, it will likely stop. The examples you offered are consequences of states neglecting the enforcement of private property rights, and NOT the legal terminology of referring to a corporation as a "person."
That is one of the biggest problems of the world today. Individual rights being taken away. Also, people care FAR too much about money, and far too little about other people. The corporations are one of the biggest factors, not only corporations like coca cola, but also the establishments that you wouldn't know were corporations unless you were told. e.g. London, Bank of England, the Fed....
I really don't think that people in general care far too much about money and far too little about people. I do not see that in my day-to-day existence. I'm sorry if that's what you see. I constantly see people looking out for one another and being kind (and I live in New York City). I think it is fully right to take up issue with the actions of individuals that make up certain corporations, but I honestly think that hostility toward the 'corporation' as an organizational entity is misplaced.
the problem with the corporation is that they are not held accountable. They just switch heads.. .For example, if you murder someone, you go to jail. Now a coporation can quite literally murder hundreds (search "bayer aids" for example) and they only have to admit a failure, pay a fine, do something political etc. Then they are back to business as usual, and can even continue killing (cigarettes, pharmaceuticals, toxic chemicals etc). The corporation can be a murderer and pay to stay afloat
I agree that a big problem with the corporation is that they are not properly held accountable, but that is not an inherent problem with corporations; rather, it is a problem of the justice system. It is a myth that there is a legal pardon for personal accountability within a corporate structure. A corporation is subject to BOTH personal and financial consequences in law.
No thats just it! the "corporation" does not EVER get subjected to "personal" consequences, only the employees of said company do.. employees come and go.. The "personality" or "practices" can continue as long as any individual in charge decides to allow the "business model" to continue. The more money they make, the easier to justify. Even stockholders and politics can further the agenda. Companies can continue to break laws and pay fines. Worst case scenario, they fire or scapegoat someone.
A "corporation" IS people. How would you suggest holding a corporation responsible for a certain action if not to hold the individuals who committed/ordered the action personally responsible? What incentive is there for anyone to continue certain "practices" that will destroy their legal record or land them in jail? What incentive is there for shareholders to put up with "practices" that lose them money?
Now, of course, the REASON that we see certain corporate practices being maintained is because certain corporations are not subjected to the costs or legal ramifications of their actions. This is largely due to either (a) jargoned, loopholed, and unnecessarily complex law (along with unconstitutional judicial measures) that favors those who can hire the 'best' (and most expensive) lawyers, and (b) a corporate-state alliance that fixes legislation to externalize corporate costs in many ways...
...That is why I say that it is a problem of the legal system and government, and not the corporate entity in and of itself. Other non-corporate enterprises are able to manipulate and externalize their costs in the same way.
AS IF THE PEOPE WHO WILL NEED TO CLAIM AR GONNA BE ABLE TO AFFORD A LAWYER AS GOOD AS COCA COLAS. What planet are you living on? They will always win. Why? Because they are LOADED, with all the other profit they have made, by causing human suffering to keep their profits high. As I said, they are treated in court as an individual human, when in fact, it acts nothing like a human. Its not fair and its not right
I agree. The legal infrastructure is compiled with obscure loopholes and an unnecessary complexity that leans in favor of those who are able to hire the most expensive lawyers. However, we should note that juries are capable of turning this condition. Also, a side note, corporations do NOT always win. Hardly. If they did, they wouldn't make so many decisions that attempt to avoid suit in the first place.
I am not trying to defend the policies and influence of certain corporations. My point is... The organizational structure that is defined as a 'corporation' is not the problem. There are plenty of non-corporate entities that are just as big and powerful and corrupt as some corporations. The PROBLEM is the mechanism by which corporations are able to externalize their costs and distort the market in their favor, and that mechanism is government.
Yeah, but that mechanism is purposely written into the way that the corporation is made. It was designed that way. Thats the problem, there are people out there who will make things that way.
A corporation, as in a 'limited liability' organization, is perfectly capable of existing through contractual obligation and does not necessitate the coercive arm of the state to exist.
I agree with "SpreadingAwareness" on a moral level it feels wrong what the big corps are doing but what are we supposed to do? The option is to either not shop at the big corps and try to keep the Mom&Pops alive or use government force to remove the big corps....good luck with that and that is immoral in my opinion.
Steal shit you need to survive like food and clothing. Not iPods or stupid consumerist shit.... you do that, you're a lifestylist and are no more a leech on labor than the capitalist.
Only today I stole some food from a large corporation. I do it all the time. Best thing in the world to do man! I just ate my dinner which I cooked from stealing from Wal Mart. It always tastes extra nice knowing it was free.
Labour shouldn't be given a monetary value. Those who lose money from shoplifters ARE NOT those who do the bulk of the work, those at the bottom of the economic food chain. Those that lose money are primarily the management. I have NEVER heard of pay cuts to employees due to rampant shoplifting. The only ones that lose money are the ones that leech off of other's labour to begin with, and force humanity to pay to live.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Classic: a person ignorant of economics and generally the way civilization operates rants about the 'evils' and 'unfairness' of capitalism while simultaneously benefiting from it like a parasite.
Thanks for the comment. I just noticed my comment rating and couldn't help but laugh. It's so interesting that people will give me an anonymous thumbs down, but then refrain from responding or telling me what they disagreed with or disliked about my comment.
Economics 101: When supply is reduced relative to demand, prices increase. This is an important market function, because it helps to conserve resources. Remember the oil crises of 1979? Restrictions on the price of gasoline led to severe shortages and prevented many from finding gas at all. Price ceilings almost always lead to shortages. "Those who do not remember history are damned to repeat it." Indeed. The U.S. has some of the cheapest oil prices in the world.
Sadly, the net result would be the big faceless corporate beast 'downsizing' it's staff (the poor little bastards at the bottom of the ladder)to cover the 'terrible losses' of shrinkage. despite getting over 120 times back over the 'festive season' sales.
Still like the whole ballsy notion of it thought...
You never 'hurt' a corporation by stealing from them. They merely raise the prices for everyone else. It's factored into the 'cost of business', termed 'shrinkage' in retail. You are effectively stealing a penny from the pockets of every customer that walks into the store. This is why economics should be a mandatory subject.
starrychloe 1 month ago
I cant tell if Im in that part in youtube again...
XmanVon 1 month ago
There's no such as thing as stealing from a corporation, the concept of ownership requires a sentient entity who could claim ownership, corporations are not people, they are not sentient, and the goods said to be owned by a corporation are in reality owned by no one.
DeterminedGoat 3 months ago
In a normal world this stuff would be free if you have worked, due to redistribution of goods... and the hunger would be stopped not only in africa and asia but in our countries too. Now you have to work, then everyone in the system steals from you. In a normal world people wouldn't work for money but for community they live in and then the products they produced would be redistributed between them... In the normal world we have to fight for... No masters, No gods, No borders, Social Revolution!
RedBlackStar1936 3 months ago
Flagged this video for promoting criminal activity.
HURR DURR I'M FIGHTIN' DA POWAH HURRRRRRR
Fuck all of you who support this bullshit.
MegaKingAsshole 4 months ago 7
"WHOO YEARH DOWN WITH THE CORPORATIONS MAN!!! *downs bottle of buckfast*
*someone steals your television*
WAHHHH SAVE ME POLICE
DoctorCapitalist 4 months ago 6
Of course the transgender is using a Mac.
Dermit15 4 months ago
@Dermit15 you're a faggot.
KiloSierraAlpha 4 months ago
@KiloSierraAlpha Yup.
Dermit15 4 months ago
The stores owners are a "faceless, inhuman entity with no concern for [his] welfare", because they don't just voluntarily lavish him with free stuff that considerable resources went into producing. But he proudly advocates that one should "take what [one] needs without giving anything up". So for the "corporation", wanting even just reciprocity in the exchange of resources is abhorrent, but for him, taking whatever he wants from them through force and/or fraud... perfectly fine--virtuous, even.
baggytheo 4 months ago 9
The reversal of fundamental ethics in the video (fraud is virtuous, honest exchange is violence) is so patent, I really don't think it needs to be pointed out by anyone else.
RuddODragonFear 4 months ago 12
So other people offering goods and services for voluntary trade, that they have worked to produce or procure, and wanting something in return for them, is "forcing you into an exchange" in a "relationship based on violence". And going into their place of business to defraud them about your intention to trade with them and then physically remove their property from them, rather than peacefully and honestly negotiating for the exchange of resources, is a virtuous act of liberation and empowerment.
baggytheo 4 months ago 13
Comment removed
baggytheo 4 months ago
great story n all, but still fucking illegal, try it and see what happens.
zxbryc 5 months ago
That is a smart ass way to shoplift.
ApplyPieable 6 months ago
love this video...sadly i got busted and had to take some anti shop lifting class. They said all the cliche things...how people lose their jobs, prices go up...blah blah blah. Wrong. People get fired for their own stupidity. Prices dont go up. You see a DVD thats being sold for 19.99. I bet you plenty have lifted it and u go back bout a month later itll be the same price.
y2joct7 6 months ago
Most companies are publicly subsidized yet they pay people shit and the ceo's pocket all the money. Take back what you have all ready paid for. I love this video but it's not shoplifting you have paid for it.
Blackandred24 7 months ago
I could not be more in alignment with your way of expressing yourself. Uncommonly appreciated and received.
ValeoMethod 7 months ago
I like the idea behind this but I think the execution is poor.
Not shoplifting itself, just this video.
jackyjackson 7 months ago
My lady is always pocketing things not nailed down, just for the devilment of it. Other week in London she pinched me a £1,279 cardigan I was unable to afford.
neilangus1able 9 months ago
Here in Florida I defninitely feel that I can't exist in public unless I am buying or soon will buy something. I would love for a community like Palm Beach would make it actually illegal to not buy something within a certain period. I would then take that community law and ask for asylum from Bolivia, who hate the US. Getting asylum is fantastic, also getting the other county's passport is the key to being free in this world.
powergirl901 9 months ago
dayum she is HOT! :D
sadly I wasnt that lucky when I went shoplifting today -.-
41stgaming 10 months ago
Comment removed
jaynetasticfosho 10 months ago
The family that owns walmart is one of the richest families in the world. They treat their employees like shit. Ppl use the excuse that stealing from them takes bonuses away from the workers. OK, then how many billions of dollars must the Waltons make before they pay their employees a living wage? 40 billion? 60 billion? 100 billion? It's never gonna happen. They're greedy assholes. Wake the fuck up
shaunmason220 10 months ago
Read the book Days of War, Nights of Love. Questions will be answered.
slowlyawakening 10 months ago
The big corporations have to exist for people to steal from them. Hence, shoplifters depend on the existence of the stores they steal from. Therefore shoplifting depends on the continuation of capitalism. Get rid of capitalism, and shoplifting becomes unnesessary and redundant. Shoplifting is just more mindless consumersim.
sarcee1960 10 months ago
I enjoyed this. very nice
Trav88674 1 year ago
Walmart steals
Google "Debbie Shank walmart"
They sue their own. They are the real thieves. Good one those who looted walmart. Continue to do so for the poor employers who cat shafted by walmart.
newbievamp2005 1 year ago
The corporations win both ways but an individual can only win one way but if you are caught then the system wins and by a factor of 5 or more. So use your brain thank god the majority don't have brains including those in power.
WAX1138 1 year ago
This video is a bunch of bullshit made up to justify selfishness. Everyone in this world trades their labour for provisions. Stealing is simply mooching of society, because you wish to take without giving. "it is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything" That's a lie, its just selfishness. You can argue all you want that the big companies steal from us by overpricing. Then don't buy from them, go somewhere small. I shoplift aswell but i see it as it is. I'm selfish and lazy.
IXAMXNOTXDEAD 1 year ago
ha ha, I love the honesty, But... They dont overprice. They underprice, Thanks to the third world, and goverenment subsidies, they can sell food for below the cost of production. Great right, cheap food. Who cares? Well there are a lot of fall backs with this system, Namely the deprivation of three fourths of the Population, WORLD WIDE. I really dont want to take you to school on this subject. But i suggest that you use some of your free time, Mr Lazy, and do a little research.
The6stringsamauri 11 months ago
@The6stringsamauri
You misinterpreted what i said. I'm aware of the worlds less fortunate. My family is from a third world country which we moved to to escape comminism, although i have been fortunate not to expiernce it first ahnd i know much more about poverty and unfair wages than most americans, i have walked amongst the 3/4 of the population you speak of, not just read about them. No big company "under prices" when you consider the wages they pay it's all overpriced (as you said).
IXAMXNOTXDEAD 10 months ago
Id feel bad stealing individual people, but not stealing from big corporations
BSagitarius 1 year ago 3
Cool vid, but are u serious
bananasofcourse 1 year ago
they will simply raise prices for paying custees. but he,y such is the road to liberation.
skyjuiceification 1 year ago
@skyjuiceification great now the small businesses can compete now
UmNothankyou 1 year ago
they will simply raise prices for paying custees.
skyjuiceification 1 year ago
Anessa ramsey is HOT.
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
This video is made of pure awesomeness and win.
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
I agree with the argument that big corporations in a sense "steal" from the buyers, by selling their products in high prices.
However I do not agree with the shoplifting attitude. Instead you need to neglect the big corporations and shop from the small local stores. That way you hurt the big corporations and you assist the small stores to survive.
And an extra thought is that you don't need to buy shitloads of things you literally have no use for. Buy what you need.
jimkits 1 year ago
the items were not in bags
flappy188 1 year ago
FFFFFFFFFFFFFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE???
audioduo 1 year ago
I have a question to those true shoplifters.
I was planning to jack these earphones in Staples which cost like $20 and i just wanna know that if i shoplift, would the doors activates its theft alarm if it detects it? Or should i remove the tag just in case? I'm pretty scared and it would be my first time shoplifting.. Please reply honestly.
FliPf13 1 year ago
@FliPf13 Take the tag off - always. The one thing to remember is to be calm - they steal from you every time you buy something, so steal right back - remain calm at all times and it will work. If the barcode is actually a part of the CD, either take the CD out (use creative thinking), put a big sticker over top, or find a way to wrap tinfoil on it - then put it in your purse or pocket. Trust me - it's headphones, you aren't doing anything wrong by saving your hard earned money
Jac92z 1 year ago
@Jac92z a better solution would be to cover a bag from the inside with tinfoil. It let's you shoplift more items and does not make you look suspicious.
blackZ34all 1 year ago
@blackZ34all ,Trollololololololo
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
@FliPf13 Flip, i've stole many times from stores. it's not the tag [thing that gets scanned] that makes the alarm goes off.
it's the white/black things that are fat stickers that make things go off.
it's usually in cd's, games, and expensive things.
yayagabbi 1 year ago
@FliPf13 Try to find a big store that sells clothes as well and have a changing room, take a nail clipper with you or a sharp object to remove the tag,choose small items that can be easily hidden in your clothes,take these items to an area where there are no cameras,hide them in your clothes, then move to the clothes section,take some t-shirts, pants 2 of each ...etc go to the changing room, remove the tag, with the sharp object, wear the clothes underneath your clothes,walk away.
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
@FliPf13 always act naturally and calmly or they will notice you.
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
@FliPf13 For the earphones, check a place where there is no cameras , remove it from it's package, put it in your pocket or hook it to your music player. hide the empty package somewhere.
walk away.
????????
PROFIT
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
@FliPf13
remove everything, and if the alarm goes off run until you really have to
TheArjan1982 1 year ago
Those that think this is imoral or wrong of evil does not understand everything in this country has already been paid for. Corporation steals from us everyday. There are some corporation that steal your social security number and signature and trade then on the open market and you are none the wiser.
16sag7 1 year ago
This video is fucking awesome.
KillingOptions 1 year ago 3
I don't see this as justifying stealing by "It hurts the companies and helps the little man". It's more like "This is how I survive. You work behind a register to get your paycheck, to buy what you need. I take what I need."
How good or bad it is is subjective. Good and bad are subjective. It's only bad if YOU think it is. If you don't care if someone gets hurt (we're set to die the moment we're born, so why not??), then it's not bad, etc.
Man, I want to go steal something so bad right now. >_>
LovetteCher 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
BurlBrule 1 year ago 2
this vid is crud but id still tap that byach
mastainventa 1 year ago
When you steal from Walmart, you're also making the price of products increase, and guess where most poor workers shop?
cogar48 1 year ago
@cogar48 maybe they should steal their stuff than too
adiosucks123 1 year ago
Yeah, but jail food sucks
videoapparatus 1 year ago
As a shoplifter i must say this video provides true justification and moral sense to what i do. Thank you
1031toby 1 year ago
I'm totally down for freeganism but my concern with shoplifting is whether or not it still has the same effects as buying the item. If big corps are willing to take shortcuts in the first place (non fair trade, underpaying employees, destroying precious resources, etc), wouldn't they be more than willing to make even more shortcuts to compensate for lost profit?
KnittyGrittyNatch 1 year ago 5
I've gotta say, I'm just not down with that. The means of production ought to be owned by those working them, but the products themselves are not free for all to take. It is always exploitation to take that which you have not labored to create without the uncoerced consent of the one who ha labored for it (or who has gained it legitimately and without coercion or exploitation).
CrawdaddyJoe 1 year ago
Advocating crime = very uncool. Grow up.
hastyberford 1 year ago
haha ok mom
M4napalm 1 year ago
shoplifting only makes a difference on the shoplifter who is not giving up anything in exchange for goodies (life, money, time) yet for the corporation it is just the same as if you bought the items and feed the machine, cos they count on you and the items are already sold for them when they reach the shelves. Thrilling, I give you that, but just temporary and fruitless.
robertojerez 2 years ago
No demise for me fella! A life of freedom and fresh air when I want!
I'm no punk looking for a daddie, and back door parole ain't no way to end your days!
tomdkg 2 years ago
My view is that you are simply justifying being one of life's takers (just your accusation against the corporations), or alternatively you have confidence issues in not feeling empowered or liberated enough to deal with the world normally.
tomdkg 2 years ago
You should read the book they show in the vid: Days of War, Nights of Love. I was against anarchy, but that was before I knew what it truly was. You're only assuming you are forming your own opinion when you say that we are not empowered enough to deal with the world normally, but that idea has been forced on you and you have submitted to it because resisting is too difficult for you. You show up day in and day out to your job and live by rules that are not your own, yet you think you are free?
bronmon1 2 years ago
I'M WITH YOU
halliemoyer 2 years ago
Don't try to justify it, you're a selfish greedy thief who costs all of us honest shoppers more money! I am concerned by shoplifters' needs and welfare, they need free board and lodging somewhere, and I hope as many as possible get some prison years to think their lives through.
tomdkg 2 years ago
yeah, because that is what prisons are for, right??
Right?!?!
welcometoskyvalley 2 years ago
HONEST SHOPPER tomdkg?!?! good job on successfully bending over for big corporation you fool!!
ditchoven 2 years ago
the only problem i have with shoplifting is that it may affect workers' wages. Also, lazy people who have no work ethic don't deserve to shop lift. They're plain thieves.
seigneurvoland666 2 years ago 3
on a trip to orlando florida i stole over $500 worth of toys, pins, stickers, etc from Disney, Universal Studios, and seaworld
russianpimp26 2 years ago
As i myself, someone who hasnt ever done this before personally would recommend... Anarchy. especially in times of recession. your rich and fat president obama.. i get a peace prize for being a black guy sitting on the most important throne in america hasnt fixed things, they have left you without a choice.
13377r3331f 2 years ago
I think if you want to shoplift from major corporations, then shoplift. They are the greedy theivivng capatilists profiting form world hunger. Id rather burn a wal-mart to the ground with all the meaningles material stuff thats isnt really woth antything along with it. ANd too comtinue on in that fashion...WHOS WITH ME!!!!
The6stringsamauri 2 years ago 30
Hell the fuck yeah. ; D @The6stringsamauri
JillianaCornejo 1 year ago
@The6stringsamauri Im with ya hell yeah Molotov anyone!
AnarchoSyndicalistt 1 year ago
@The6stringsamauri how do they profit from world hunger
anonymousQ45 8 months ago
@The6stringsamauri You would burn a walmart down, but would not lift a finger to stop the government bombing over 100,000 civilians in iraq? WTF
ahtremblay 4 months ago
You just want stuff without paying for it. Stop making yourself out to be an insightful, 'fight the war, fuck the norm!' individual. You can help society by leaving Wal Mart off your shopping list and going to a mom & pop's shop.
But M&P's shops cost more than Wal-Mart. And you don't wanna pay those prices, even if they're fair. So instead of giving your hard earned money to those who deserve it, you justify your stealing with an 'I'm so anarchy, and that's cool!' Indy-flick. Eyeroll.
HoneyNVinegar 2 years ago 5
@HoneyNVinegar You dont think that Wal-Mart Steals? They steal buisness from honest people just so Sam Waltons idiot grand children and the richest 2%, can wipe there surgicly modified asses with 500 dollar bills. Meanwhile 75% of the world (workers/slaves)Live below the poverty line, in slums without running water or food. There is a direct corraltion between excessive wealth and extreme poverty. Do you think that the Wal-Mart would pay there employees anymore money if nobody Stole?
The6stringsamauri 11 months ago 4
you can say all this stuff, but your older sister and/or parents will never agree with you regardless of how old you are!
xxxKINGFROGxxx 2 years ago
You would be eating pavement at my store. Have a nice day:)
rubikrawler 2 years ago
some people seem to forget about legends like Robin Hood......
rhhhimapirate 2 years ago 4
As a fellow shoplifter, I consider there to be a difference between big corporations and family-run corporations; I would not shoplift from small family-run businesses. And I wouldn't consider what I do to be "stealing". I call stealing one person taking from another person, but one person taking from a corporation is very different. Corporations (or better yet, private economic tyrannies) exist to profit. Good or bad, their motivation is money, and therefore hold no responsibility
ImCramped999 2 years ago 2
or capability for remorse or humanity. That these institutions exist in the first place is stealing in my opinion. Its like the guy in the video said, "It is a way to carve out a little piece of the world for myself to act back upon a world that acts so much upon me."
ImCramped999 2 years ago
Just be honest- you're too lazy to work and stealing gives you a massive rush. I accept that because its honest. Don't dress it up like you are smashing the system by stealing off big companies because it won't make any difference to anyone other than the people who have to pay inflated retail prices to cover the loss made by people stealing.
mpat1980 2 years ago
thanx for making this video.
SuperGhost64 2 years ago
Annesa: I love you. Contact me. Let's run away from it all and live wild and free together.
luv2bud 2 years ago
As someone who would like to see the system crumble, I feel conflicted by this idea. While nothing would bring me more joy and satisfaction than taking from the rich and providing for the poor, it is not the rich who suffer from these deliberate acts of self gratification. Instead it is the every day Joe who is hurt by shoplifting, it's the old lady who greets at the door because she can't make it on social security alone.
doggbiscuit 2 years ago
Its the poor family who gets their everyday staple items at WalMart because they can't afford the inflated prices of the grocery stores. When companies profit loss, prices go up and jobs are cut, but the rich fat cats still remain rich and fat. The current economy displays a perfect example of this. While the Waltons', Gates', and Johnsons' still sleep easy and comfortably, the average individual is the one who can't make their mortgage payment, nor provide for their family.
doggbiscuit 2 years ago
That's the way I felt too, because unfortunately I worked for these assholes too. I think though, it's those same exact peoples' fault that they live the way they do. They choose to go and work at a place like that; they feel like capitalism is the ONLY way of life, so the press on. Fact is, the way we have been living is very, very recent, and definitely NOT the only way to live life. I think that the best way to think about this is to help people realize that there are better ways to live.
Rudimentarypenis 2 years ago
Very much agreed, despite your username. haha.
murderbydeath222 2 years ago
you go girl
birdofpara 2 years ago 2
This video reeks anarchy which makes no sense at all. Why needs laws? If stealing is from someone else is moral, then so should assualt, rape and murder.
By their logic, it would be okay for someone to shoot that baby right in the head. I hope it happens.
scholzpdx 2 years ago
if you hope a baby gets shot then you deserve to burn
computerz101 2 years ago
stealing from your neighbor is not the same thing as stealing from say a wal mart, for reasons which are outlined in part n this video...you may also want to go research the concepts "property is theft" and "surplus value of labor"
Sammaelhain 2 years ago
the reason why stealing from a wal mart isnt so bad: if you would have millions of dollars would you care if they stole you 200$ dollars? its as if they stole you 10 cents or something like that
so feel free to steal! : )
TheGooberment 2 years ago
> By their logic
Don't assume logic that you can not understand, little man.
aphexmandelbrot 2 years ago
i thought that was a real mustash at first haha nice
Big corperations Are evil
GenieTechs 2 years ago
"To steal from a brother or sister is evil. To not steal from the institutions that are the pillars of the Pig Empire is equally immoral."
-Abbie Hoffman
JerseyLov 2 years ago 33
Comment removed
Fubex3 2 years ago
And a jew.
MetroDNews 2 years ago
Love how we can't see the original comment, only the response; "And a Jew".
How hilariously ambiguous.
BAGADOOBLE 2 years ago 3
@JerseyLov Amen to that
anonymousassasin1 1 year ago
I should be able to have whatever I want and not have to work for it. Just take from others because they have it and I don't. Ridiculous.
mindmesh 2 years ago
ye boi i be like hitt'n up and she like "no no i lus dat groz" ima hella no! rite? i did yee for like de grow trof's!
Hole gena boi!
YEE HAW!
rootbeer1000 2 years ago
they are hoarding it all
killumianti99 2 years ago
1:00 I have the exact same coffee mug. :)
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Check out MONSANTO CORPORATION on youtube
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
Do you really think the credit crunch is not a contrived event? Someone has a printing press for money. DUH! Why does the government borrow money at interest from the central banks, when it has the right to print its own for nothing????
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I do not think the 'credit crunch' is a contrived event, no. That being said, I think it is absolutely being used to institute conditions to forcibly extract wealth from low and middle income people to the politically connected elite. Western civilizations are really heading on a fast road to fascism, and it's very frightening.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
You dont think that the credit crunch was predictable? There are financial advisors and institutions like the Federal Reserve. One of their major roles (along with wallstreet etc) is to look at not only anomalies in trade and the economy, but to be sure it is self sustaining and will not have these "crunches". Independent economists and professionals have warned of the problem for years, this was completely avoidable and predicted. It was allowed to happen, our "confidence" in the$ was attacked
brainphreak 3 years ago
I absolutely think the 'credit crunch' was predictable. In fact, I was very attuned to the predictions before it even happened, but 'predictable' does not equate to 'intentional.' Did perhaps certain people recognize the situation and ignore it, or just try to make as much money as they could while they could? Sure. I agree with you that certain people probably saw this coming and 'allowed' it to happen, but I do not think it was 'contrived' or 'planned.'
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Others, I think, were simply incompetent and didn't understand the consequences and simply didn't believe the 'predictors.'
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
I also want to bring up again the fact that, this economic issue has actually been in progress for a long time, it basically already happened.. the dollar already was worth less, but the people didnt believe it, they were convinced otherwise. They of course were pushing off the inevitable, but the only thing keeping the dollar afloat as of recent years is the "illusion" that it is strong... once the "illusion" is attacked or "confidence" is lost, the collapse begins. Our own admin, attacked US
brainphreak 3 years ago
Well... yes partly it was an "illusion," I suppose, but it had a lot to do with the willingness of foreign lenders to continue to 'feed' the dollar. Of course, you could argue that those lenders were under the "illusion" that the dollar would continue to be strong in the long run and the U.S. would continue to be the world's superpower. But, certainly, our current economic woes are the result of years and years of bad policy (with dozens of administrations indirectly responsible).
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Well here is the question... if you believe they "allowed" it to happen, how is that different from contriving it? I mean technically its different, but the guilt is the same... If I were to mention I was going to kill someone, go with you to the store to buy the gun. You had FULL knowledge and "allowed" it to happen, you can be charged as an accessory to the same crime and share the sentence.
Allowing something to happen when you have the power to prevent it, is the same as doing it yourself
brainphreak 3 years ago
I somewhat agree, with slight variation. If a disinterested/uninvolved party/person is in a position to stop harm to others (being astutely aware of the threat) WITHOUT posing potential costs and consequences upon himself/herself, that party/person (given sufficient evidence) ought to be held responsible as an accomplice to the harm committed.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Now, I actually don't think that applies to this discussion. I actually think it's worse than that. I'd suggest that certain individuals were very much interested/involved and perhaps were even blinded by the short-term benefits they received from the practices that caused/catalyzed/worsened/constructed the "crash." Of course I think those that were fully aware of the consequences of their actions should be held responsible. They won't be, but that's a totally different thing.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
i know its wrong aint it
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I was all ready to steal with this hot chick and feel free and everything then at 4:00....and you lost me LOL.
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Big corporations shouldnt be so fucking greedy and selfish and people wouldnt HAVE to steal
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago 2
How are they greedy? Not trying to contradict your statement, I just want to know, that's all.
asfrguy 3 years ago
Ok cool. I just think theres a point when they should stop. Tesco for example, has a shop in every square mile of Britain.... but they want more. All the large corporations pass on minimum savings to the consumer, making the offers look amazing so we cant tell. Its just greed. When will they stop ruining small family businesses etc?
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
What is greed? Isn't it just as greedy for you to suggest that you should be able to obtain their goods and services more cheaply? What's wrong with Tesco having a lot of shops? If people like a business's products, what is wrong with that business expanding and serving more people? Small family businesses disappear because people choose to purchase goods and services from their competitors and not them.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
You are blind
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
Can you help me see?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
You should be able to see that most large corporations are corrupted. What happened to the word share? Equal? Fair? They dont apply
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
That seems a little ambiguous and vague. Could you be more specific?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
It's all about keeping the rich rich. Go figure it out
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
What is? Everything? Which parts? I'm not trying to be dense... I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind your point of view.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
The men at the top of the corporations don't care about the consumer. They will do anything to increase profit margins. For instance, Coca Cola builds factories in poor countries, to use the cheap labour, and then chucks its disgusting toxic waste straight into the local rivers! They use aspartame as a sweetener. (Really bad for you). The problem is that a corporation is treated in court as a person, when it displays none of the aspects of a human. Its not treated like a company/business.
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I think Coca Cola contracts out to factories in other countries more often than it actually builds its own, but anyway... I actually do not drink Coke products for the very reason that the company has some practices that I disagree with. Yes, corporations have developed legal privileges that they should not have, however I do not think that legally identifying a corporation as a "person" is one of them.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
In effect, a corporation being designated as a legal "person" only serves to identify the condition in which debts are contracted in the corporation's name and not the names of the shareholders. When Google tags "Inc." onto the end of its name, it is communicating to potential creditors that the shareholders do not accept 'unlimited personal liability' (in other words, a creditor must look only to a corporation's assets to fulfill their claims).
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
But this does not allow for some kind of waving of personal responsibility or immunity to suit. If one of the Google Street View cars runs over someone, the victim can sue the driver. If the driver is found guilty, then the employer/corporation is also held responsible. Corporations do not and cannot shield employees from personal liability.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
If a person or collection of people feel that their health has suffered as a direct result of Coca Cola's use of aspartame, they may pursue claims against the company. The same goes for Coca Cola's pollution of rivers. If the pollution is causing damage to people or property, then Coca Cola can be taken to court. The reason, I would argue, that Coke perhaps continues these practices is because the courts or the government are essentially allowing them to externalize the costs...
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
For instance, in the case of polluting rivers, my assumption would be that the rivers are state owned and thus suffer a kind of 'tragedy of the commons.' Once Coca Cola suffers the cost of polluting the rivers, it will likely stop. The examples you offered are consequences of states neglecting the enforcement of private property rights, and NOT the legal terminology of referring to a corporation as a "person."
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
That is one of the biggest problems of the world today. Individual rights being taken away. Also, people care FAR too much about money, and far too little about other people. The corporations are one of the biggest factors, not only corporations like coca cola, but also the establishments that you wouldn't know were corporations unless you were told. e.g. London, Bank of England, the Fed....
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I really don't think that people in general care far too much about money and far too little about people. I do not see that in my day-to-day existence. I'm sorry if that's what you see. I constantly see people looking out for one another and being kind (and I live in New York City). I think it is fully right to take up issue with the actions of individuals that make up certain corporations, but I honestly think that hostility toward the 'corporation' as an organizational entity is misplaced.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
the problem with the corporation is that they are not held accountable. They just switch heads.. .For example, if you murder someone, you go to jail. Now a coporation can quite literally murder hundreds (search "bayer aids" for example) and they only have to admit a failure, pay a fine, do something political etc. Then they are back to business as usual, and can even continue killing (cigarettes, pharmaceuticals, toxic chemicals etc). The corporation can be a murderer and pay to stay afloat
brainphreak 3 years ago
I agree that a big problem with the corporation is that they are not properly held accountable, but that is not an inherent problem with corporations; rather, it is a problem of the justice system. It is a myth that there is a legal pardon for personal accountability within a corporate structure. A corporation is subject to BOTH personal and financial consequences in law.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
No thats just it! the "corporation" does not EVER get subjected to "personal" consequences, only the employees of said company do.. employees come and go.. The "personality" or "practices" can continue as long as any individual in charge decides to allow the "business model" to continue. The more money they make, the easier to justify. Even stockholders and politics can further the agenda. Companies can continue to break laws and pay fines. Worst case scenario, they fire or scapegoat someone.
brainphreak 3 years ago
A "corporation" IS people. How would you suggest holding a corporation responsible for a certain action if not to hold the individuals who committed/ordered the action personally responsible? What incentive is there for anyone to continue certain "practices" that will destroy their legal record or land them in jail? What incentive is there for shareholders to put up with "practices" that lose them money?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Now, of course, the REASON that we see certain corporate practices being maintained is because certain corporations are not subjected to the costs or legal ramifications of their actions. This is largely due to either (a) jargoned, loopholed, and unnecessarily complex law (along with unconstitutional judicial measures) that favors those who can hire the 'best' (and most expensive) lawyers, and (b) a corporate-state alliance that fixes legislation to externalize corporate costs in many ways...
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
...That is why I say that it is a problem of the legal system and government, and not the corporate entity in and of itself. Other non-corporate enterprises are able to manipulate and externalize their costs in the same way.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
AS IF THE PEOPE WHO WILL NEED TO CLAIM AR GONNA BE ABLE TO AFFORD A LAWYER AS GOOD AS COCA COLAS. What planet are you living on? They will always win. Why? Because they are LOADED, with all the other profit they have made, by causing human suffering to keep their profits high. As I said, they are treated in court as an individual human, when in fact, it acts nothing like a human. Its not fair and its not right
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I agree. The legal infrastructure is compiled with obscure loopholes and an unnecessary complexity that leans in favor of those who are able to hire the most expensive lawyers. However, we should note that juries are capable of turning this condition. Also, a side note, corporations do NOT always win. Hardly. If they did, they wouldn't make so many decisions that attempt to avoid suit in the first place.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
I am not trying to defend the policies and influence of certain corporations. My point is... The organizational structure that is defined as a 'corporation' is not the problem. There are plenty of non-corporate entities that are just as big and powerful and corrupt as some corporations. The PROBLEM is the mechanism by which corporations are able to externalize their costs and distort the market in their favor, and that mechanism is government.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Yeah, but that mechanism is purposely written into the way that the corporation is made. It was designed that way. Thats the problem, there are people out there who will make things that way.
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
A corporation, as in a 'limited liability' organization, is perfectly capable of existing through contractual obligation and does not necessitate the coercive arm of the state to exist.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
lots of big words that mean bugger all to the people whose rivers are poisoned. Just out of interest, do you run a corporation or something?
SpreadingAwareness 3 years ago
I do not run a corporation, nor am I employed by one.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
I agree with "SpreadingAwareness" on a moral level it feels wrong what the big corps are doing but what are we supposed to do? The option is to either not shop at the big corps and try to keep the Mom&Pops alive or use government force to remove the big corps....good luck with that and that is immoral in my opinion.
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
those are not the only options actually google "direct action"
Sammaelhain 2 years ago
Steal shit you need to survive like food and clothing. Not iPods or stupid consumerist shit.... you do that, you're a lifestylist and are no more a leech on labor than the capitalist.
icecreamtrepan 3 years ago
reminds me of Evasion.
SmokinBabies 3 years ago
well done
givemeshocktreatment 3 years ago
Only today I stole some food from a large corporation. I do it all the time. Best thing in the world to do man! I just ate my dinner which I cooked from stealing from Wal Mart. It always tastes extra nice knowing it was free.
eatcress 3 years ago
Why do you feel that people should not be compensated for their labor? Do you work for free?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
Labour shouldn't be given a monetary value. Those who lose money from shoplifters ARE NOT those who do the bulk of the work, those at the bottom of the economic food chain. Those that lose money are primarily the management. I have NEVER heard of pay cuts to employees due to rampant shoplifting. The only ones that lose money are the ones that leech off of other's labour to begin with, and force humanity to pay to live.
EsotericPsychedelic 3 years ago
Why should labor not be allowed a monetary value? Can you elaborate? What is the "bulk of the work?" How is the management not a part of the work?
"The only ones that lose money are the ones that leech off of other's labor to begin with, and force humanity to pay to live."
Hm. Can you explain this "leeching" to me, because I don't think I quite understand it? Can you show me the force?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
its not all that bad for a small film anessa did well in this. shes good at it
sargentlarson 3 years ago
The security guard looks like Paul Giamatti.
ManoftheBeret 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Classic: a person ignorant of economics and generally the way civilization operates rants about the 'evils' and 'unfairness' of capitalism while simultaneously benefiting from it like a parasite.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
i agree.. what a stupid video..
violence is bad.. but i will steal..
'forced into an exchange' wtf do u think taxes are??
67 ratings and it has 4.5 stars. bs.
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Thanks for the comment. I just noticed my comment rating and couldn't help but laugh. It's so interesting that people will give me an anonymous thumbs down, but then refrain from responding or telling me what they disagreed with or disliked about my comment.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
yea its pretty funny, the only guy who replys agrees with you...
... they must be afraid of truth?
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
Capitalism is parasitism.
MaleficMalice 3 years ago
Why do you think so?
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
buy a car, get a "good" job, start a family, and watch as a oil covered hand is slowly fisted up your ass and in your wallet.
"Those who do not remember history are damned to repeat it."
it happened before, and i swear it will again unless you do something. way to forget freshman social studies class jackass.
jvlad14 3 years ago
Economics 101: When supply is reduced relative to demand, prices increase. This is an important market function, because it helps to conserve resources. Remember the oil crises of 1979? Restrictions on the price of gasoline led to severe shortages and prevented many from finding gas at all. Price ceilings almost always lead to shortages. "Those who do not remember history are damned to repeat it." Indeed. The U.S. has some of the cheapest oil prices in the world.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
I love this romantic notion...
Sadly, the net result would be the big faceless corporate beast 'downsizing' it's staff (the poor little bastards at the bottom of the ladder)to cover the 'terrible losses' of shrinkage. despite getting over 120 times back over the 'festive season' sales.
Still like the whole ballsy notion of it thought...
scopeophile 3 years ago 2