There’s an argument to be made that grocery consolidation has led to de facto monopolies on the food distribution business and that these grocery chains have already broken the social contract by charging more than fair value through their monopolistic positions.
Canada needs to give the Competition Bureau more power to break up the telecommunications industry, the groceries industry, and to shut down cooperation in our airline industry. Instead of policies that protect consolidation, Canada should look towards protectionist policies to protect against US expansion.
I don’t see an effective argument here for breaking criminal law.
Religious people are doubly damned: thou shalt not steal, right?
Yeah. Monopolies are bad. They were bad 10 years ago and they never stopped being bad. But at best the “steal from monopolies because they’re evil” is vigilantism, and still a crime.
We do not get to pick and choose the laws we follow. If we could, then we give the monopolies every justification to keep going, and effectively some dirt bag thief subjugates all our rights.
You are blaming the individual for the lack of social supports in the society you speak of.
Certainly one can go to the food bank, or a Church as you said; however, they are not always operating and often provide only one meal. Then one has to make their way to another location to get something else when they’re hungry again, which could be a long way, and if that person is homeless that will take a lot of time away from trying to get off the street just so they don’t starve.
The article says much the same thing:
“At CFIB [Canadian Federation of Independent Business], we’re calling on all levels of government to work together and take more accountability to address all of these underlying societal issues that contribute to these problems: Housing, mental health and addiction, the cost of living."
“These are things we think we can work together on better.”
You’re still doing something wrong. There’s a definite need for food, but stealing says you’re more important than society, and that’s a bad start.
Leverage churches. They care for the hungry, of anyone does, right?
There’s an argument to be made that grocery consolidation has led to de facto monopolies on the food distribution business and that these grocery chains have already broken the social contract by charging more than fair value through their monopolistic positions.
Canada needs to give the Competition Bureau more power to break up the telecommunications industry, the groceries industry, and to shut down cooperation in our airline industry. Instead of policies that protect consolidation, Canada should look towards protectionist policies to protect against US expansion.
I don’t see an effective argument here for breaking criminal law.
Religious people are doubly damned: thou shalt not steal, right?
Yeah. Monopolies are bad. They were bad 10 years ago and they never stopped being bad. But at best the “steal from monopolies because they’re evil” is vigilantism, and still a crime.
We do not get to pick and choose the laws we follow. If we could, then we give the monopolies every justification to keep going, and effectively some dirt bag thief subjugates all our rights.
This is not the way.
If society does not provide for you, then you have no moral obligation to prop it up.
If prayer and visiting church were to be made illegal tomorrow, would you stop?
There are multiple aspects and layers to this issue. Both of your points can be true at the same time - and I think they are
You are blaming the individual for the lack of social supports in the society you speak of.
Certainly one can go to the food bank, or a Church as you said; however, they are not always operating and often provide only one meal. Then one has to make their way to another location to get something else when they’re hungry again, which could be a long way, and if that person is homeless that will take a lot of time away from trying to get off the street just so they don’t starve.
The article says much the same thing: