If you happen to be at a hardware store with this Blog open, steal this computer.

THE MORALS OF STEALING seem to be an obvious thing: it's bad, and is only commited by those who are desperate or have no morals at all, and a very good escape plan.
For those who have no morals, it may just be a practice of convenience, because we all know that finding a way to obtain material goods without having to pay anything for them is something everyone wants, but most understand why it's necessary to have to pay. Without the requirement to pay, those who help manufacture the goods are not rewarded for there (usually) hard work.

Imagine, if you will, a world where everything is free. You could go to a grocery store and just get everything for free. Now, stop right there. That wouldent work. If people could take absolutley as many of everything as they wanted, there would be practically nothing, and chances are people would be fighting over who got the 40 frozen steaks. But now, imagine if you will, if there was a system set in place where there could only be 20 ro 25 items taken from the grocery stores daily by each seperate individual, and 25-40 items taken for each seperate family. It would guarantee everyone got something, and there would be no taking of everything in stock by a certain idividual. But now imagine, if you will, the people on the manufacturing end of the production lines. They would get nothing for there work. If everything was for free, how would the companies make money? Ok, now lets just say somehow we abolish the whole money system. Not only would everything in grocery stores be free, but everything in every store.
The problem is how many problems would be produced from this sort of mindset.
First of all: robberies would become more frequent, and the mindset of the thieves would be "they got it for free, so I took it for free." But then again, when you where robbed of a posession, it'd be much easier to replace then if you had to pay for a new posession.
Of course, again, the people on the workforce end of things wouldn't have any sort of motivation to work with the lack of reward. It would either have to be volunteer labourors, or slave labour, which I hope is certainly illegal or at least not discriminatory in this alternate fantastical inner-debate of mine.
Now, with money, life may be more complicated, and harder to coordinate, but how else would you be motivated to go to work every morning? How else would society be kept in place? I guess my final ruling on this subject would have to be that money may be an inconvenience to most, and a convenience to some, but it is a necessary part of society and civilization in general.