Quote:
Originally Posted by TwistedChief
People have compared my job to picking up pennies in front of a bulldozer, so I make a point of picking up coins found on the street (exceptions are subway platforms and restrooms).
But when it comes to change that’s left on the counter at a store, I’m ambivalent. I end up leaving it hoping that it ends up with someone who needs it just a bit more.
|
This poses a very interesting ethical question. If the found money is to be used for social equity, then theoretically a person with above median income (or wealth) should leave the change because there's a probability of more than 50 percent that the next person will need it more. Meanwhile, a person with below median income should take it, because the odds are less than 50 percent that the next person will need it more.
But it's more complex than that. If everyone is following the rules, then the person with an income in the 49th percentile will know that a higher-income person arriving next will NOT take it. So therefore, if the 49th percentile person leaves the change untouched, there's a 100 percent chance that the person who does take it will have greater need. So they should leave it.
Then the same becomes true for a person in the 48th percentile, then the 47th, and so on. In a perfect theoretical world, the change then remains in place until eventually the lowest-income person in the area comes to buy something, and then that person can rightfully take it.
But will they know that they're eligible? Probably not. So then they follow the same rules and nobody claims the money. Eventually, the change slot overflows, and customers have to pick their way through ever-growing mounds of change to even reach the self-checkout. I'm not sure what the endgame is.