So then it must be a better outcome if you buy the maximum allowed amount of food, 70 dollars, and then throw it away? Better yet, buy that food, attempt to pawn it off, and then buy toothpaste.
To me, that feels like a much worse outcome, not a better one. I think this demonstrates you need some leniency in these things. Because pettiness breeds pettiness.
I'm not speaking to the point - I'm speaking to right and wrong.
If it's wrong to use it on a tube of toothpaste because that's stealing, then it must surely be right to instead buy the maximum food and throw it away. Therefore, people should do that.
If that sounds wrong to you, then the initial assumption might not be correct. Maybe it's not so bad to buy the tube of toothpaste.
Constraining yourself to extremely hard and fast rules seems like a good idea on the surface. But it's all about incentives. I can easily make the company bleed much more money while being within their rules. So why even bother?
A touch of leniency and common sense goes a long way.
>If it's wrong to use it on a tube of toothpaste because that's stealing, then it must surely be right to instead buy the maximum food and throw it away.
That makes no sense, One does not imply the other
I have a business card with a limit of $5k for buying work materials.
I might get forgiveness if the materials ended up being wasted.
That doesn't mean it acceptable to use my business card to go to Disneyland, or that it is "Right" to use it for wasteful purchases.
People's supposed issue, and Meta's, is that this was not spent on food. We can fix that.
> Zero sympathy for thieves
I often find that those who process information in such absolute ways are typically simple-minded. I can come up with infinite examples where thievery is not only excused, but the most moral choice.
There are much better ways Meta should have gone through this. And, ultimately, I put the blame on them for coming up with an exploitable and naive policy.
In what way the mega corp X is defrauded here, exactly? The sibling comment explains that arguably the IRS can be considered defrauded in this case, but the mega corp itself?
To me, that feels like a much worse outcome, not a better one. I think this demonstrates you need some leniency in these things. Because pettiness breeds pettiness.