• Chozo
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What would you call taking or using something without paying for it, then? Resources are still being spent to transport the person who has not paid for them.

      • Chozo
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        The transportation authority who maintains the trains and stations.

        • @Prunebutt@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Only if the rides are a scarce resource. Which they aren’t. Nothing that some customer could have bought is removed by jumping a turnstyle.

          • Chozo
            link
            fedilink
            41 year ago

            Nothing that some customer could have bought is removed by jumping a turnstyle.

            Nothing? Not even the fuel required to transport the extra weight of somebody who hasn’t paid? Not even the wages for the employees who conduct and maintain the trains?

            You can argue that the amounts are miniscule, sure. But “miniscule” does not equal “zero”.

            • @Prunebutt@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              When you’re paying, you’re not buying the fuel nor are the salaries directly affected by one person is paying for riding a train.

              What you’re describing is called “marginal cost” and reducing this is the reason why the economics of any large scale business is actually working. You could argue with these marginal costs, but you’d be entering a completely different model/domain of economics. And no one uses this model which is abstract/non-abstract in any aspect that happens to make your point valid.

        • Vodulas [they/them]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I think I figured out the disconnect here. Yes, hopping a turnstile is against the law. It is still not considered theft. It is called fare evasion, and it is more akin to a traffic violation. The reason I was confused, and why I assumed you meant morality, is that nobody is saying piracy isn’t against the law. The article never said that either.