Rules are there for being broken or rules are there to be kept? My research area involves entrepreneurship in my dissertation. Some of the interesting elements in a individual entrepreneur is that he or she stresses the boundaries of the rules made for keeping order in the business world. Some succeed other fails and serve time in jail. You should think that if you served time in jail you would not do something illegal again but that is not true. Well we all know the habitual criminals who steel which is not those who I am referring to. I am referring to the habitual entrepreneur who doesn't seem to learn from serving time in jail. He or she do fail but they try again when being released and sometimes fail again which goes on in bad circle. However some also succeeds and become very successful with their business and creates huge benefits for the society in shape of jobs etc.
Criminals don't do anything good for the society, I think that is what is the general thinking in the society, including me. They do create jobs for people guards and other security areas so they could be seen as being beneficial in a far out there way. But what about the entrepreneur?
He too is sometimes a criminal, but when he succeed people seem to look beyond his past and more focus on his current situation due to the success. Not like other criminals where the past keep haunting them down by not being able to find a job. Why is crime so different?
So when is it okay to break the rules and when should they be kept? is it always a question which can only be answered based on the current situation or can it be made general?