Sorry, but that is a guideline not a fact. That is something we use to decide when we stop engineering something. If it was literally true then I should be able to just buy a human life or avoid a murder sentence with a fine.

Morally, hurting people is categorically worse than stealing money.

> Morally, hurting people is categorically worse than stealing money.

That's also not a fact. It's just something people sometimes agree on. But it's not always a useful crutch.

See the other replies like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34789096 or https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34788866 They explain what I was trying to express better.

Regarding number 1 - in many countries, you still can! It used to be in the US you could too no problem, for both. Doesn't take going back very far in almost any country for it to be true.

Regarding number 2 - what happens when the money you steal was necessary for someone to survive, or causes such disruption and heartache to enough people, it adds up to more than if someone died?

Right now, things are abstracted enough, we just can't see the actual impact of these large frauds. But it's not uncommon for someone to commit suicide, marriages to end in divorce, kids to be severely impacted (sorry, no College fund for you anymore!), etc.

> Morally, hurting people is categorically worse than stealing money.

I Would rather be a victim of violence whose effects disappears after week (i.e. no long-term effects) than victim of theft of money equal to my yearly income.