Ok, I will post once and only once in this thread. If someone wishes to discuss my opinions or observations further, feel free to PM me.
I find it interesting that all these people are so quick to scream about ethics.
When you take a step back and look at any business, ethics don't really come into play as often as one would think. For instance, it costs 5 cents to make a product, it is then sold "wholesale" to a distributor at 50 cents. It is then sold to the consumer for $5.00. By the time it is in the consumers hands, it is already being sold at 100 times its actual worth. In the business world, that is simply called profit.
If it is looked at from an "absolute ethics" standpoint, it is wrong because it is drastically overpricing an object for the sole purpose of financial gain, or in the terminology style that has been used in this thread when referring to taking advantage of big businesses, these big businesses are "sticking it to the little guy" for as much money as they think they can get. Again, that is simply business. The so-called ethics of it are irrelavent.
I also find it funny when I see quotes saying things along the lines of "I would probably do the same thing if I were in his position, but I would feel guilty about it"
-"well golly mister, I shot your dog a couple of times in the head to try out my new bb gun, knowing full well that it was wrong, but I sure do feel awful guilty about it"
-"Well, gee young man, if ya feel guilty about doing it, I guess that makes it alright"
Now that sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it?
Of course my using this as an example in no way means I think that what the OP did was wrong.
Doing something and feeling guilty about it is probably what keeps catholic church confessionals so busy. And speaking of religion, I find it interesting when I see referances to a "higher moral authority". This, in my opinion, is simply passing the buck on to someone or something else, eliminating personal responsibility from the equation.
- I have these "high" morals because a book says that a supreme being says that I should have them.
Of course that book also says things such as "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot" (quoting exodus 21:24, which of course is commonly misinterpreted as a referance to revenge when it is more likely to mean an equivelant punishment for the crime) but when you think about it that way it is saying one who commits murder deserves nothing less than to be murdered which brings up such widely debated views on the death penalty and many other similar comparisons which would draw this too far off topic.
The OP met his obligation by informing the cashier of the questionable price accuracy. The employee is only able to go by what the computer says, and those who say that the OP took advantage of the cashier's ignorance of the value of the merchandise could compare it what every judge will tell someone who broke the law without knowing it. "ignorance is no excuse". A contract was formed (aka. the purchase) and both parties carried that contract out to its completion, yelding the closing of the contract (the receipt). Nothing more, nothing less. Posession went from A to B.
Some of these so-called moral high horse jockeys seem to give the impression that value or worth is not an issue and one must always do the "right thing". Of course, by following this point of view, if one were to find a quarter on the sidewalk, said person would feel a moral obligation to track down the original owner of that quarter because it was lost by said owner and the "right thing" to do would be to return it to them. They wouldn't be able to simply walk past the quarter either because inaction changes nothing for the better. They could not simply pick up the quarter and keep it because, according to the majority of the posts made by them, that would be stealing.
If you disagree with the OPs approach or simply the posting to begin with, you can express your disagreement without the namecalling or insulting. Regardless of whether it was done in a childish manner or not, it does nothing but provoke one to respond in a negative or hostile manner. Or, you can also simply choose to read the posting, form your opinions, and keep them to yourself. There is nothing obligating any member of this forum to post in any specific thread. Sometimes, the freedom of speech can be better exercised by what you choose not to say.
This is all, of course, simply my opinion. I do realize that there may be some who read this post who may take offense at the things that I have written. I will not say whether it was my intention or not to offend, because it is irellavent. Those who do feel insulted or offended may feel that this post accomplished nothing, or is wasted space, that is their right. It all boils down to the fact that everything I have typed is, as stated above, simply my opinion and its worth is relative to whomever reads it and whatever they take from it.
Red Dragon
