The right way to deal with starving is to ask for help, not take what doesn't belong to you.

@jpmc26 I completely agree. However, some of us think that just because someone does the wrong thing it doesn't mean they don't deserve help. By the way, I meant to say that firing them could lead his family to starvation, not that they are starving already, so their situation is presumably not that dire (yet).

@jpmc26 sorry to say it bud, but if someone's starving, it does belong to them.

@Blueriver Don't get me wrong. We do have a moral obligation to help others. But those who need help have an equally weighty obligation to respect property rights, even if someone decides to withhold their help. Taking by force or deception from someone who decides to withhold their help is no more right than they withholding it.

are you telling me that if someone is starving, and i refuse to give them my surplus food, that they should not try to take my surplus food by force? that they should just die out of respect my abstract notion of property?

@dn3s Whether or not you believe that they are morally absolved from blame in such a case, you simply cannot leap to the conclusion that what they are about to steal "belongs to them". That's patently nonsense.

I think we're discussing the wrong issue. We're agreeing that the money doesn't belong to the employee and that taking it is wrong (even if some of us think in some cases such a thing might be justified or might be the best/only course of action, we still agree it's wrong). I think we also agree that the OP should give the money to the employee if the employee had never stolen it and had asked for it. So, the real question becomes whether the OP should give the money to the employee AFTER he's caught them stealing.

@dn3s This sounds like a great question to pose in philosophy exchange.

@jpmc26 Seriously? I think you would struggle to find anyone other than you, even amongst right-wing western capitalists, who thinks a parent stealing two dollars (300 PKR) to literally save their four kids from starving is "no more right" than that parent's boss refusing to chip in a little extra to prevent their deaths. Indeed, I think most people would not only forgive such a theft, but think they are the right thing to do. It is entirely possible to support property rights while not holding them so sacred that you think parents of starving children are obligated to leave them to die.

@MarkAmery The owner's refusal doesn't mean the children are obligated to die. It means the employee is obligated to find a legitimate way of saving them. This employee is paid much more than $2 per pay check. If their kids are starving, it's probably their fault for not prioritizing buying food over whatever the heck else they're spending it on. And if all they need is a little assistance, then ask, and if one person refuses, ask someone else, like, I dunno family? The world is full of people who are willing to help. Your dilemma doesn't give you the right to take whatever you want.

@jpmc26 you're right. that's why no one ever dies of starvation or other poverty-related hazards. unless you're suggesting that poor people are somehow so incompetent that they somehow die while never even considering asking for help from resources available to them.

Some poor people in my grandparents' village used to say to them: "If you don't give us part of your harvest so we don't starve, we'll come and take it in the dead of night and we'll be carrying axes. If you try to stop us, you'll die and we'll take what we need anyway. If we go to prison, they'll feed us there, so it's a win-win for us anyway". When the objective is for people to either starve to death or commit a crime, there's a chance that they'll do unspeakable acts just to get to live another day.

IMO you should also consider the cost of demoralizing your other employees who now know that stealing is OK. Personally, I would consider changing jobs just because my employer is OK with having petty criminals as employees.

@DmitryGrigoryev that's a great point, dealing with other employees. No information was provided about that in the question, but it should be taken into account as well.