I guess the logic might be that someone with money could argue they just forgot to pay, but if you do it without money there is no plausible deniability
It relates to intent;If you entered the store with no money your intent was to rob it, so it's considered burglary, whereas if you had money your intent on going in to the store could have been to shop amd you decided later to steal something.
Wait, stealing without money is a bigger crime than stealing with money? What is this, some kind of system that hates the poorest in society?
I guess the logic might be that someone with money could argue they just forgot to pay, but if you do it without money there is no plausible deniability
It relates to intent;If you entered the store with no money your intent was to rob it, so it's considered burglary, whereas if you had money your intent on going in to the store could have been to shop amd you decided later to steal something.