[quote]pittbulll wrote:
http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/walmart-employee-fired-after-trying-to-help-woman-being-attacked-in-parking-log#ixzz2i5EHFNAS[/quote]
Even though he is being offered his job back, that is a really shitty policy in many workplaces nationwide that should change.
What kind of asshole employer wants to fire a person who feels compelled to do the right thing?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]doublelung84 wrote:
Varqanir,
To keep it simple; do you think what the shoppers did was morally right? Forget about the law, I can find two good attorneys to argue each side; it’s what they do. Hell in my line of work I have to argue for my clients in front of a board and sometimes it even goes my way. The difference is after walking out of the building, I do not continue to believe my bullshit.
I thought you stood on a higher moral ground then most, am I wrong?
[/quote]
I comment on the difference between homicide and murder and you call into question my moral judgement. Interesting.
Not seeing the connection, but I’ll answer your question.
I think that fraud is morally wrong.
I think that knowingly and intentionally defrauding a business constitutes theft.
I think that theft is morally wrong.
That said, if my family were starving, and I had the opportunity to defraud a multibillion dollar corporation (that profits from the slave labor of political prisoners in a communist country) out of a few hundred dollars of food by taking advantage of a technical glitch, at little risk of prosecution, I might choose to do the morally wrong thing, and not lose too much sleep over it. Thankfully, I am not in that position. [/quote]
Yes I was questioning your moral values; not stating that you had none. I wanted to know where you stood because although I have not always agreed with some of your posts, I do find them thought provoking and had thought you were a man that would do the right thing regardless of the situation. Please understand that was not an attack, just confirm.
Like you I am not in the situation that I would need to take something that is not rightfully mine but I would not judge someone who truly needed to feed his or her family. Personally, when I donated to a just cause I do so thankful that I am not in that given situation but hopeful that if I was, someone would be there for me.
[quote]doublelung84 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
What’s the point of this, another race baiting, thread? To show that people…I mean, “those” people…will try and take advantage of free money? Warren Buffet’s son takes advantage of farm subsidies. Most people, rich or poor, educated or not, will accept money they didn’t earn even if they know it’s wrong, as long as they think they can get away with it.
We wouldn’t have the term white collar criminal if only “those” people committed fraud. Some govt contractor selling a hammer for 500 dollars is no better, and is probably worse, than someone getting foodstamps. [/quote]
I can not say if CD is a raciest or not, never sat down with the dude for a beer but I will say he is thought provoking. Racism and baiting can exist separately; he may just be trying to get you to think.
Assuming you are right about Warren Buffet’s son takes advantage of farm subsidies, I’m sure it is done within the law. If you don’t like the law, change the law; do not use it to justify another wrong doing.
I am sure there were many honest people who did not take advantage of this glitch in the system. But then we don’t hear much about the honest people. Let me put it a different way; how would you feel if you took something that was not yours, knowing it would not be there for someone that really needed it? I bet most people would do the right thing. That’s just another disconnect we have when the government takes from one to give to another.
[/quote]
You wrote:
“I’m sure it is done within the law. If you don’t like the law, change the law;”
Maybe you are missing some information.
The rich write the laws so they have no need to change them.
“others” do not have the power to do so.
If my memory is correct about 30 years ago there was a huge mess created by the something valdez. Exxon was fined about 25 Billions$. They did not need to obey the law, they were rich. They appealed and about 20 years later the fine was dropped to 25 Millions$ because it was an old file and forgetting it was the “right thing to do”.
When is the last time some “other” heard a judge say you earned 25 years in jail but you lost 5 days in court so we call it sentence served.
Here a few months ago a train created a big mess with petroleum products. The reason it keeps on happening is because the rich act with just about no consequences.
Look at the WallStreet mess. There was less than 1% who should have gone to jail that did.
Just a bit ago WallMart top people said they were sure they never bought from a factory in Bengladesh that killed 1,000 “others” by forcing them to work in a building absolutely unsafe and 5 minutes later when showed the papers proving that was a lie they said we never really know where things come from.
If they never really know why did they affirmed the contrairy minutes earlier?
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/walmart-employee-fired-after-trying-to-help-woman-being-attacked-in-parking-log#ixzz2i5EHFNAS[/quote]
Even though he is being offered his job back, that is a really shitty policy in many workplaces nationwide that should change.
What kind of asshole employer wants to fire a person who feels compelled to do the right thing?
[/quote]
Employers tend to be more concerned about liability than right or wrong. Even if an employee acts in self defense He/She is more than likely going to be fired. I can still remember the orientation videos from when i worked at Walmart in college, corporate policy dictates that under no circumstances is a employee allowed to lay hands on a customer.