I doubt it's as simple as this. People don't only steal because they could technically afford things. Just as people don't only kill in self defence.
Instead of cooperation under a system with a social safety net, we get a game theoretic weighting on defection without a social safety net.
There's a causal arrow in the other direction, IMHO: People like to believe in the 'law of the jungle' mentality and thus vote to cut the safety net. IME it's especially wealthy people for whom it's a kind of game, not trauma, deprivation (of education, health care, food, housing, safety) and survival, and who also get to pay lower taxes, Didn't Jamie Dimon talk about how he liked how 'animal spirits' have been awakened?
There is a safety net. Here's how I'd describe the situation:
There will be a number of people, fewer than the total who benefit from the safety net, who almost everyone would say it was good that they were helped.
There will be a number of people, fewer than the total who benefit from the safety net, who almost everyone would say it was not good that they were helped.
Most of politics around this topic is people's differing beliefs in the proportions of the above, and how bought in they are to minimising the latter count because they pay taxes.
I'm sorry, what? Only in the US helping someone can be sold as a bad thing. It's better to help a few more people that may not really need it than help a few fewer that actually did.
I think it's worth reading the complete comment and you'll see where what you said fits my wider point.
I enjoy stealin', it's just as simple as that
Oh well, it's just a simple fact
When I want something, man, I don't wanna pay for it
Obviously it varies location by location.
Remove from basket, scan, put in bag. Remove from basket, scan, put in bag.
The scale is the entire bagging area, and it detects when things were removed or added without being scanned, as far as I know that's all it does here. No specific weights.
Objectively false. Some stores in some areas do that. Most don't.
At Walmart if I only have a few items (most of the time I go to Walmart) I'll just grab the scan gun and scan everything without taking anything out of my cart. I'll bag when I get to the car.
It's especially annoying when I am waving an item furiously, trying to get the poorly printed barcode to scan, and when it finally accepts it, it double scans the item.
Then when I have to stand there waiting for someone to remove the item is usually where I get disgusted with the process and give up on shopping, especially when it happens multiple times.
Buying something for under 5 euro bucks in a shop where middle school kids buy their lunches is almost guaranteed check. More than one in three times.
A different shop and a bigger amount — checks almost never
I imagine everyone is still playing around to get the optimum ease-of-use vs shoplifting ratio right.
I live in the US and the only place I ever go to where they weigh the items you scanned is Costco. Everywhere else I go (my local Walmart, Target, two local grocery stores, CVS) the self checkout is mostly based on trust with one employee somewhat monitoring some machines. No random sampling.
The only issue I ever run into with the self checkouts is double scanning the product. You do need employee to void items.
If you don't get randomly selected for inspection, there is nothing stopping you from just walking out with groceries you didn't pay for worth a hundred dollars easy. People just don't. Another benefit of having a proper social safety net I guess.