[Quintus Curtius]

^^^

Good point.

Brings up another thought experiment.

How would we "price" the service the cabbie performed here?

Should it be based solely on the time he spent doing the "work"?

Or should it be based on the "value" that the homeless guy received ($187k)?

Sometimes this kind of question comes up in the law when trying to fix a fair price for a service. Sometimes it's simply based on the hourly rate of the person doing the work. For example, the cabbie's hourly rate.

The legal term for that is "quantum meruit."

Other times, maybe you can say that his "fee" should be based on the "value" that he gave to the other party, which might come down to some percentage of the total recovered.

Interesting question, anyway.

.

[BortimusPrime]

You have to look at the relative value provided as well. I'm going to assume the backpack full of money is this homeless guy's net worth, so what would you guys give to somebody who essentially prevented you from losing all your money in the world when it would have been so easy to just keep it?

I'd say that's worth a few grand for a reward.

At any rate, I'm not surprised that a vagrant would be ungenerous. Generally the working poor are pretty generous (good tippers) because they can sympathize with service personnel, but folks that live off charity and scavenging dumpsters typically preach generosity but don't practice it. Everyone's had at least one mooch friend right? They tell you all about their hippie theory of generosity to get you to give them food and a couch that they need, and then make a big production out of sharing their stuff with you, things which happen to be of no value to you but that somehow makes everything even in their mind.

[britchard]

(07-13-2016 04:36 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 03:08 PM)britchard Wrote:  

I don't see what's wrong here? The 'homeless' guy didn't have to pay him anything- no one is entitled to money just because they do a good deed. Isn't that the whole point of a good deed, that you do it out of kindness?

Yeah, but gratitude also matters. This was a miracle. A miracle is worth more than $100. I can't imagine ever forgetting about $187K in cash, but if I did lose it, I'd give the Good Samaritan a hell of a lot more than $100 bucks. A hell of a lot more.

I'd also give him far more, I was just pointing out that people shouldn't feel entitled to money just for doing a good deed.

[HOD]

Finally a good story to believe in.

Back in the day, I once found a man's passport and wallet in a hotel I was staying at, I didn't look inside his wallet, because its private property. I gave it to the hotel staff, without hesitation.

The hotel later inform me, they have found the owner.

I didn't want a reward, nor do I expect one.

There are no rewards in life, that is just a false entitlement belief.

When I was alot younger, I was a life guard, and rescued many retarded swimmers, do I deserve a reward, definitely not. I did what was expected, of a decent man.

The only reward I would want is to slap the owner in the face for being a dumbass and losing his passport or to slap a kid in the face for swimming too far from the shore.

I always made it a point to chew out people who fuck up, because I essentially bail there ass out.

[Conscious Pirate]

(07-12-2016 10:41 PM)Hannibal Wrote:  

Now we know why the homeless guy has $187k. He doesn't tip for shit.

Actually, I think we now know why the motherfucker is a bum.

[Seadog]

(07-14-2016 01:21 AM)britchard Wrote:  

I'd also give him far more, I was just pointing out that people shouldn't feel entitled to money just for doing a good deed.

I agree with this, and a sincere thank you, a hand written thank you note, or even taking the guy out to a great dinner while you go on about hobo life and the romance of riding the rails would be a thousand time better than $100. For all intents and purposes, $100 is a negligible amount of money that wont materially change one's life one way or the other, compared to say, 187K which would be a game changer to 95% of people.

Giving $100 says "I feel you deserve to be financially compensated for your good deed, but I'm not going to do so to a point that materially affects me". It's like someone tipping 3% on a meal.

[Phoenix]

As an interesting comparison, the system in Japan is called "shareikin" -- a finder is automatically entitled to 10% of the total sum found, upon the owner reclaiming it. However because they are so polite they usually waive their right to the finder's fee, simply by not providing their contact details.