Obviously only from those who have excess. If you’re Christian, this is literally in the Bible. If you aren’t, it’s obviously just the right thing to do, for those with excess to give to the needy, willingly or not.
If something is a profitable (and for-profit) food-selling organization, I’d say they have an excess. Which would almost automatically include any grocery chain. Which doesn’t make them all evil, of course, nor does it necessarily imply they have huge profits or great excess.
Maybe start with the millions of pounds of food the UK throws out every year? Getting mad about food that was never going to be in your empty stomach is wild to me. Says a lot about your morals.
This. When I lived in housing cooperatives in college 20 years ago we would lie in wait at various places (Trader Joes, Whole Foods, Einstein Bros., Roma Pizza, etc.) and grab ridiculous amounts of good food they would throw away at closing time. We actually got enough perfectly fine food that way that we were able to completely subsizide all of the food costs of the single parents and poor members of our community. I don’t think folks can even do this anymore as now places have locked dumpsters or even keep the entire dumpster enclosed in the building itself.
But I suppose, your point is different from the OC:, you are suggesting to steal food based on moral views.
Which is problematic, as morality indeed is subjective.
Personally, I struggle to conjure a moral ground to steal food if I know where the food banks are. Or if said food is of a treat / luxury category.
The point is, stealing from the wealthy to feed the poor is, in my opinion, a moral good. I would say most people agree with this. That’s why we have so many stories where this is what the hero does.
Which is problematic, as morality indeed is subjective.
I said it is, and you agree, but it’s also important to keep in mind some people do subscribe to a system of universal morality.
Personally, I struggle to conjure a moral ground to steal food if I know where the food banks are.
But this takes limited resource from the food banks that they could use to feed others. I think, as a hypothetical, food banks should be able to take money from the wealthy to fund their work. They aren’t allowed to do this, and it would negatively effect their efforts if they did it and weren’t allowed, so I still see it as a moral good for people capable of taking from the wealthy to do so, before consuming limited resources that could help others.
Or if said food is of a treat / luxury category.
That partially depends on your definition, but that’s fine. Is lobster a luxury? What about steak? What about a salad? What about bread? They’re all providing sustenance. Why does the cost effect the morality? If it’s moral to steal at all for food, where does cost come into that? Personally, I think people arguing that poor people should only get the absolute worst to survive aren’t being considerate of those people. I think they deserve to eat something enjoyable sometimes.
Who cares. Only worriedos and fascists that’s who.
Are you allowed to steal food from anyone or only from certain categories of people / organisations?
Obviously only from those who have excess. If you’re Christian, this is literally in the Bible. If you aren’t, it’s obviously just the right thing to do, for those with excess to give to the needy, willingly or not.
I don’t know the verse you’re referring to. Of course I’m not a Christian either, technically speaking.
And Jesus said “if you think Malachai has too much, go on and take a little. He won’t miss it”
How to determine if that person or organisation has an excess?
When the media starts calling them a trillionaire.
In that case you are permitted to eat that person itself too, IMO.
First, you see if they have enough free time to be sea-lioning.
That’s not the case.
Dude made a pretty radical assertion. And I want to see, how it all works in their eyes.
If something is a profitable (and for-profit) food-selling organization, I’d say they have an excess. Which would almost automatically include any grocery chain. Which doesn’t make them all evil, of course, nor does it necessarily imply they have huge profits or great excess.
Finally a proper answer. Thank you.
Maybe start with the millions of pounds of food the UK throws out every year? Getting mad about food that was never going to be in your empty stomach is wild to me. Says a lot about your morals.
This. When I lived in housing cooperatives in college 20 years ago we would lie in wait at various places (Trader Joes, Whole Foods, Einstein Bros., Roma Pizza, etc.) and grab ridiculous amounts of good food they would throw away at closing time. We actually got enough perfectly fine food that way that we were able to completely subsizide all of the food costs of the single parents and poor members of our community. I don’t think folks can even do this anymore as now places have locked dumpsters or even keep the entire dumpster enclosed in the building itself.
Capitalism is, indeed, a plague. And I don’t see any viable cure for it in the observable future.
That’s up to you. We aren’t writing laws here. Morality is subjective.
Excess isn’t a moral term.
But I suppose, your point is different from the OC:, you are suggesting to steal food based on moral views.
Which is problematic, as morality indeed is subjective.
Personally, I struggle to conjure a moral ground to steal food if I know where the food banks are. Or if said food is of a treat / luxury category.
What? What does that even mean? There aren’t “moral terms.” There’s morality and ethics. Those are argued in normal language. For example, here is an discussion about a very similar topic from a Kantian perspective. It’s just normal language.
The point is, stealing from the wealthy to feed the poor is, in my opinion, a moral good. I would say most people agree with this. That’s why we have so many stories where this is what the hero does.
I said it is, and you agree, but it’s also important to keep in mind some people do subscribe to a system of universal morality.
But this takes limited resource from the food banks that they could use to feed others. I think, as a hypothetical, food banks should be able to take money from the wealthy to fund their work. They aren’t allowed to do this, and it would negatively effect their efforts if they did it and weren’t allowed, so I still see it as a moral good for people capable of taking from the wealthy to do so, before consuming limited resources that could help others.
That partially depends on your definition, but that’s fine. Is lobster a luxury? What about steak? What about a salad? What about bread? They’re all providing sustenance. Why does the cost effect the morality? If it’s moral to steal at all for food, where does cost come into that? Personally, I think people arguing that poor people should only get the absolute worst to survive aren’t being considerate of those people. I think they deserve to eat something enjoyable sometimes.
I’ll address one point for now and the rest - later (sorry, I’m in a hurry)
It’s not the cost, it’s intention. If you are hungry - steal bread, not some Jamón Ibérico .