You are confusing high profile art theft in Europe with low profile UPS theft in the US.
The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens. If those citizens lived in the EU, they would have free healthcare, free education, unemployment subsidies and housing. And so they would not be forced to steal our packages.
It's not that simple. Look at Sweden. We have all those things and delivery companies have stopped delivering to certain areas due to their trucks being robbed.
Actually relevant comment but before people say "oh, so it's just this scummy company overblowing things" - PostNord is the de facto postal service in Sweden and owned by the Swedish state.
However, they are also notoriously bad so the joke is spot on.
>The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens.
That isn’t clear to me at all. In Washington DC, for example, much of the recent increase in theft (grand theft auto especially) has been committed by unsupervised juveniles. AFAICT they do it because they’re bored, it’s easy, it’s exciting, and they generally escape punishment. Who’s to say it’s not a similar situation with these train robberies?
In Denver, we experienced a huge increase in bike theft because a massive crime ring was exporting them to Mexico and then reselling them for thousands. Sometimes crime isn’t desperation or opportunistic (though Denver still has plenty of opportunistic thefts), it can be organized too!
"The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens."
I don't think that's true. I think they are being robbed because it's easy to do so, with a low risk for any consequences. Similarly as to why shoplifting in LA is up.
Start shooting at the thieves and see how fast the train robbery trend reverses.
>I think they are being robbed because it's easy to do so, with a low risk for any consequences. Similarly as to why shoplifting in LA is up.
Ok, then why aren't you robbing or shoplifting if it's so easy and risk-free? Is it because you have too much to lose if you get caught?
My whole point is that if people have a minimal standard of living, the fear of losing it will prevent them from committing crimes much more effectively than some nut shooting at them
> Is it because you have too much to lose if you get caught?
Absolutely not, risking a first time shoplifting charge is well within my risk tolerance.
I'm not doing it because
1. I find crimes against person or property vile
2. It's not worth it. All things considered, it's probably a pretty abysmal hourly rate.
> My whole point is that if people have a minimal standard of living, the fear of losing it will prevent them from committing crimes much more effectively
I agree, however I don't see how it is my fault or why would I have to pay for someone else's minimal standard of living.
Teaching a man how to fish vs giving the man a fish.
Pretty sure you'd draw that line somewhere. Perhaps it wouldn't be a train, but I can assure you with absolute certainty that there would be a point where you would value your lawfully possessed property over an attacker's life.
Anyway, we kind of went off track (no pun intended), but my initial point was that since you can rob these trains with basically no reprecussions, would it still be true if there was a chance that you might get shot in the process? I'd think not.
Because they prioritize preventing the damage to society over their own personal gain. The point is that the decision to commit a crime boils down to putting the individual benefits over the harm being inflicted on others, which is why it is naive to say this kind of theft only happens because people’s needs aren’t met. Not only does this imply that all poor people are committing crimes (how could they not, when their needs aren’t met!), but it also implies that crimes aren’t committed among the non-impoverished population, both of which are clearly false.
Are you arguing that if we take away the bad parts of human nature, the economy would collapse? What useful function does greed, vanity, and materialism serve in the modern economy?
I am arguing the economy would change and probably look nothing like it does now. Market economies basically have taken the "bad" aspects of human nature and use them to drive price discovery, demand creation, and efficiency gains. There would be other ways to do these things, but working within the bounds of normal human behavior has it's advantages. The economy can function on "whatever works" not just our better angels.
The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens. If those citizens lived in the EU, they would have free healthcare, free education, unemployment subsidies and housing. And so they would not be forced to steal our packages.