<b>100% is more like it. The philosphy of ethics.</b>
<B><FONT SIZE=2><P>He should not have said it just because it is offensive. </P>
<P>But what did he mean?<BR>
</B>I say it means 80% of Dominicans are in a situation where stealing is the better option amongst choices. Or that 80% of Dominicans do not give much weight to personal ethics when considering to steal or not to steal.<BR>
This is not indicative of character. It is indicative of situation.</P>
<B><P>100%.<BR>
</B>100% of Dominicans are thieves and liars and cheaters. <BR>
100% of Americans lie, cheat, steal, and feel no remorse.</P>
<B><P>It doesn't matter how the dictionary defines it</B>. <BR>
We all conjure up our own idea of what a thief is. In my book, a thief is someone whose situation <B>frequently</B> finds stealing as the best of options. What is stealing? Taking something that isn't yours? Who's to say it isn't mine, or that it is stealing? You? The govt.? Ha ha. The government has been lying and stealing from me since I was born so don't give me that legal, moral, and sanctimonious crap. One person's stealing is another person's "spread of democracy", "immanent domain", "taxation", fines, and fees.</P>
<P>Anybody and <B>everybody will lie, cheat, and steal if that is their best option. </B>It's just not possible to behave in any way other than the best option. Maybe their evaluation is flawed or they have bad data, but nobody does it because they are evil.</P>
<B><P>It's not a morality issue. Those that don't steal are not more righteous. </B><BR>
The only way to curb this kind of stealing is to make it the worse option. Penalties and punishment, public scorn, or even instilling a deep sense of personal failure at the act. All acts of theft come with their rewards and penalties. You want to stop the thievery? Make it the worse option. Perhaps alleviate the condition that makes the theft rewarding. Make the person feel bad (scorn) about it. ?</P>
<B><P>You've stolen So have I.</B> <BR>
We only differ in the frequency of the act of stealing, the scale, the audacity, and whether or not our personal feelings (ethics)weigh in heavily as a deterrent.</P>
<P>Consider this. If I was a thief at that moment, at what moment am I exonerated of the label? 1 minute, 1 day, 1 year, 20 years? When the government says? When the law says? Ha ha ha. Go back and read the post on the origin of laws.</P>
<B><P>What keeps us from lying, cheating, or stealing? <BR>
</B>When those acts are the less desirable option. Period. I don't care if the "down side" is public ridicule, jail, torture, fines, "living with myself", feelings for the victim, or the loss of the ability to feel "sanctimonious" and holy.</P>
<B><P>If I don't steal now, it's because it is not the best option.<BR>
</B>It is irrelevant whether the reason is damage to my reputation and personal integrity should I get caught (risk factor), or if the reason is because I cannot feel good about myself (ethics), consideration for the victim (feelings), or if it's because I want to set a good example. It is still based on selfish reason, not sanctimonious holier-than-thou altruism. Altruism doesn't exist without self-defining one's limits. Defining when the payback for making a decision doesn't count as selfish, as in when an act is done because it makes YOU feel good to have helped.</P>
<B><P>Me too.<BR>
</B>You never stole a pencil from work? Never lied in your life? Never left work 1 minute early yet still charged your employer for the time? Never padded an expense report, never popped a grocery store item into your mouth and then failed to declare it, never stole someone else's girl or man, never stole the life of an insect because you felt like putting your foot down right then and there?</P>
<P>It's relative, and everybody and anybody will steal when it is the better option. It's just that some people place more weight on how they feel about themselves after having done wrong. So maybe <B>Hipo should say 80% of Dominicans are not deterred from stealing based on ethics.</P>
</B><P>It is still just a matter of the degrees and each person's perspective and personal ethics. Desperate people do desperate things. Those living the cushy life don't need the detriment that comes with a given fraud. So the don't do it.</P>
So, <b>Golo, a man who prides himself on being able to milk the most out of the "system" </b>with the least amount of effort (this is known as financial sucess), is a better man because he followed the rules, the law, at least the one with regard to stealing? <b> Better at the game maybe.</B>
It least he did when it suited him. Of course, because if there was a practical way to circumvent the rules, he'd be foolish not to, as in using connections to avoid penalties for violating laws. As in bribing to get things done. As in deciding which laws to obey and which ones not. Don't get me wrong, I agree. Me too. <b> He's the smarter man for it.</b> And he does weigh the risk/reward factor on each decision - follow the rules or to hell with them.
The credit card thieves aren't bad, just bold. And now they shall pay the price of the risk they took. They wanted big reward, they took a big risk, and they lost. To jail with the lot of them. Not for punishment, but to <b>not</b> send them off is to take away the deterrent.
<b>So off to jail with the bunch of them. Not with malice, but with indifference</b> Like a casino clearing the board of lost bets. It's not personal, it's the system.
</FONT