Seems like a relevant sub thread.
I get that the topic is relevant to you and you want to argue the point, but that's a different question.
Your median wage thief probably steals way more than the median shoplifter.
We have to moderate effects (or likely effects), not intent. Effects are observable while intent often isn't, and of course it's effects which actually make a difference on the site, whether intended or not.
Intent doesn't communicate itself, especially on flammable topics, so the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate it. One way to do this is to write thoughtfully and add information. Your reply here is already much better than your GP comment. This often happens in response to moderation—people respond by explaining some of the background that was in their mind but which they didn't say earlier. The thing to do is to include more of that in the first place, and then it will be clear that your intent is substantive discussion rather than provocation.
Here are some previous explanations in case they're helpful:
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
I understand leniency if a hungry person is stealing food.
Why not make wage theft a criminal offense?
There’s nuance, and that nuance is critical to the discussion.
We deserve a better quality of life than this. There is absolutely no reason to tolerate people behaving in this way in society. These are adult human beings with agency who should face consequences for their actions. The problem isn’t lack of investment or infra, the problem is incentivizing behavior that is destructive to a functioning society.
Edit: once you see all the ways in which our justice system protects capital, it's kind of hard to un-see...