Unethical ways to save money

[Dicey]

A friend of mine worked with somebody who was in charge of inventory at their company. This person would figure out what wouldn't be missed (and not log it into the spread sheet). Then he would take it home and sell it on eBay. He did this for at least a decade before getting caught - to the tune of $200k.

Wow!

[Roadrunner53]

A friend of mine worked with somebody who was in charge of inventory at their company. This person would figure out what wouldn't be missed (and not log it into the spread sheet). Then he would take it home and sell it on eBay. He did this for at least a decade before getting caught - to the tune of $200k.

Good he was caught. Hope he had to pay back or go to jail!

[friedmmj]

A friend of mine worked with somebody who was in charge of inventory at their company. This person would figure out what wouldn't be missed (and not log it into the spread sheet). Then he would take it home and sell it on eBay. He did this for at least a decade before getting caught - to the tune of $200k.

Good he was caught. Hope he had to pay back or go to jail!

It's amazing that people working for a company would be dumb enough to sell those items directly on Ebay as if Ebay offered some sort of bullet-proof anonymity.  Every big company has investigators scouring ebay to look for this type of shady activity and from there it can't be that difficult to trace the issue back to the offender.

[Omy]

I guess after you get away with it for so long you get careless. I know he got fired...no idea if there were other consequences.

[DadJokes]

A friend of mine worked with somebody who was in charge of inventory at their company. This person would figure out what wouldn't be missed (and not log it into the spread sheet). Then he would take it home and sell it on eBay. He did this for at least a decade before getting caught - to the tune of $200k.

Good he was caught. Hope he had to pay back or go to jail!

It's amazing that people working for a company would be dumb enough to sell those items directly on Ebay as if Ebay offered some sort of bullet-proof anonymity.  Every big company has investigators scouring ebay to look for this type of shady activity and from there it can't be that difficult to trace the issue back to the offender.

In my own stupidity as an 18 year old, I bought high-end luggage with a steep employee discount and resold it on eBay. It turned out that doing so violated company policy and nearly got me fired. The store manager was aware of what I was doing and forwarded me some money for a share of the profits. I ended up receiving a fairly unpleasant visit from the district manager, who was more interested in the rumor that the store manager was involved in the plan (guessing another employee reported us both). I didn't throw the store manager under the bus, because he absolutely would have been fired, but damn was that a stupid idea.

[Omy]

At least you were buying the goods before reselling! At 18, you may not have been savvy enough to know it was violating company policy.

[rantk81]

There's a big difference between violating a company's internal policies... and outright stealing stuff.

[GuitarStv]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

[Roadrunner53]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

Could be a huge problem if you are carpooling and traffic comes to a halt for an hour due to an accident occurring on your way to work.

[Proud Foot]

I don't think this is unethical, so if  you think it is, explain it to me.....
I ordered 2 pairs of pants for DH a month ago when they were 15% off (they're an 'every day item', so they usually don't go on sale for any less - at least I didn't remember them ever being cheaper).
They were on sale this weekend for even less, so I ordered two more pair, with the intent of returning them using the first, higher priced receipt (I have 90 days to return).
Seconds after hitting checkout.....I realize they've sent me a promo code for an additional 15% off that I forgot to add.   They have a very stupid on-line system that won't let you cancel an order once submitted, so I order a third set of two pair.  Nor will they do a price adjustment for an on-line purchase.
I'm returning 4 pairs of pants, and it will save me an additional 30% off the original sale price, or more that $28 of after tax dollars.  In my tax bracket, that's certainly worth a 30 minute effort to return them.

I'd be curious to get some other opinions on this kind of tactic. It feels scammy, and definitely rubs me the wrong way, but I can't put my finger on why. One of those things that's on the 'cheap' side of the frugal-cheap spectrum, I guess. Is there an ethical time-limit on this? If you buy pants the day before a sale and return them, is it different than if you buy pants 90 days/max return cutoff before a sale?

What is the store's return policy? I have lost money doing this as the item was on sale for less than purchase price when I returned it. Most places I am aware of will only reimburse the amount of the original price or the current price, whichever is less.

[GuitarStv]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

Could be a huge problem if you are carpooling and traffic comes to a halt for an hour due to an accident occurring on your way to work.

That's purely a willpower issue.  Willpower and muscular control.

[dragoncar]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

Could be a huge problem if you are carpooling and traffic comes to a halt for an hour due to an accident occurring on your way to work.

Actually, pooping in someone else’s car on the way to work is a pretty good way to save time and money.

[GuitarStv]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

Could be a huge problem if you are carpooling and traffic comes to a halt for an hour due to an accident occurring on your way to work.

Actually, pooping in someone else’s car on the way to work is a pretty good way to save time and money.

If there are windows that roll down, there's really no reason to poop in the car while commuting.

(Cautions should be exercised if the weather is sub-zero of course - both for the trajectory of frozen effluent ejected from the window and for the high risk of frostbite.)

[ketchup]

Is holding it so you can always have to poop at work unethical?  Could be viewed as stealing toilet paper, water, and time.

Could be a huge problem if you are carpooling and traffic comes to a halt for an hour due to an accident occurring on your way to work.

Actually, pooping in someone else’s car on the way to work is a pretty good way to save time and money.

I believe the proper term is "Chicago sunroof."

[Linea_Norway]

My DH feels a bit unethical about something he did, while I have no problems about it at all. The issue was that DH was unrightly fired from a company. But as by contract, he was still deployed the last three months after him getting the message to be fired. During that 3 month period, the company announced that the employees could buy employee shares in the company, agaist an price under market value. DH signed in for a good nuch of them, like 12.000$ or so. You have to sell them when you leave the company and the only possible buyers are your colleagues. DH received the shares and sold them quite soon after that. He made a good profit from it. He himself sees this as botherline unethical, as he was already fired (not because he did anything wrong). I think he was still an employee at the company and followed the normal company rules. And that he made a good profit was only good for him, being treated to badly by the employer.

[Roadrunner53]

This is kind of unethical but not really. The last time I was unemployed the requirement was you had to apply to a minimum of 3 jobs per week. They could require that you prove that you complied with that requirement and you would have to have prove where you applied. I was eligible for 73 weeks unemployment at that time due to the high unemployment rate in the USA. There were very few jobs that were of interest to me and it was a struggle to send 3 resumes to real jobs. So, I looked up all the little companies in the area that had an address, fax number and I would just send them my resume and inquire if they had any job openings. Some of these companies were like 2 man operations operating out of rented garage type places. I had no intention of working at any of these places but to comply, I applied for jobs! LOL! I actually got called from one place and the guy sounded really old and just a nice guy. He told me that they had no openings! I guess you never know what opportunity might pop up from doing that but I was not about to lose my unemployment check if they audited me! Hahaha, they never did make me prove anything.

[solon]

Using the trash dumpsters at work to dispose of home remodel trash, instead of renting your own dumpster just once.

[SwordGuy]

I do not quite understand this wording of the question. The main thing is that everything be legal, and morality is already a subjective matter, and even unnecessary under capitalism

I have learned thru experience that there is a very strong correlation between "people who hold this opinion" and "people I should never trust".

[Bloop Bloop]

I do not quite understand this wording of the question. The main thing is that everything be legal, and morality is already a subjective matter, and even unnecessary under capitalism

I have learned thru experience that there is a very strong correlation between "people who hold this opinion" and "people I should never trust".

If you go around distrusting a lot of people, that will set back your career and ability to network, and probably harm your overall optimism and quality of life. I prefer to be open-minded in my approach, and give people the benefit of the doubt. For example, I could at least trust the first poster to act legally, which is more than I can say for some people.

From a game theory point of view, even if you believe that someone is amoral (but rational), there would still be easy ways of establishing whether he or she is trustworthy in the sense of being co-operative and reciprocal in dealings with you. After all, even amoral agents can show local reciprocation, when it's the rational choice - which it usually is (co-operation usually has a higher EV than defection, in repeated games).

[sun and sand]

Holding your poop until you get to work is a HORRIBLE idea. This can cause bowel cancer.

[dragoncar]

Holding your poop until you get to work is a HORRIBLE idea. This can cause bowel cancer.

Wow, I am interested in reading the study that supports this claims.  I plan to read it on the toilet.

[GuitarStv]

Holding your poop until you get to work is a HORRIBLE idea. This can cause bowel cancer.

Wow, I am interested in reading the study that supports this claims.  I plan to read it on the toilet.

 . . . at work.

[SwordGuy]

I do not quite understand this wording of the question. The main thing is that everything be legal, and morality is already a subjective matter, and even unnecessary under capitalism

I have learned thru experience that there is a very strong correlation between "people who hold this opinion" and "people I should never trust".

If you go around distrusting a lot of people, that will set back your career and ability to network, and probably harm your overall optimism and quality of life. I prefer to be open-minded in my approach, and give people the benefit of the doubt. For example, I could at least trust the first poster to act legally, which is more than I can say for some people.

From a game theory point of view, even if you believe that someone is amoral (but rational), there would still be easy ways of establishing whether he or she is trustworthy in the sense of being co-operative and reciprocal in dealings with you. After all, even amoral agents can show local reciprocation, when it's the rational choice - which it usually is (co-operation usually has a higher EV than defection, in repeated games).

Being able to work with someone and be civil to them whilst doing so --  and trusting them -- are two different things.   But thanks for the advice.

Trust them?  Hell no.  Not one whit.    They'll screw you over -- legally -- for a penny if they think it will best serve their interests.   

Laws are generally made AFTER enough people like that screw enough other people over.   And people like that are often looking for new ways to screw people over for profit that aren't illegal YET.

The only virtue the ones who are competent at it have over those who aren't is that you can predict when they'll try to screw you over.   The incompetent ones with that philosophy will screw themselves over when they screw you over.

 

[A Fella from Stella]

As a writer myself, it's a bummer to see people ok with pirating books. There is a person or persons behind every thing out there that labored on the item you want. I feel this is a "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" thing. If you wouldn't work for free, why would you insist someone else work for free?

Please post a link to something you've written, if available.

[golfreak12]

Using the trash dumpsters at work to dispose of home remodel trash, instead of renting your own dumpster just once.

I'm slightly guilty of this.
We moved into a new neighborhood and there are continuous construction everywhere so there are plenty of dumpsters to use for quite a few years.

[SwordGuy]

As a writer myself, it's a bummer to see people ok with pirating books. There is a person or persons behind every thing out there that labored on the item you want. I feel this is a "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" thing. If you wouldn't work for free, why would you insist someone else work for free?

Please post a link to something you've written, if available.

What, and out themselves on an anonymous forum where they've shared their financial info?

To what purpose, please?

[Bucksandreds]

My DH feels a bit unethical about something he did, while I have no problems about it at all. The issue was that DH was unrightly fired from a company. But as by contract, he was still deployed the last three months after him getting the message to be fired. During that 3 month period, the company announced that the employees could buy employee shares in the company, agaist an price under market value. DH signed in for a good nuch of them, like 12.000$ or so. You have to sell them when you leave the company and the only possible buyers are your colleagues. DH received the shares and sold them quite soon after that. He made a good profit from it. He himself sees this as botherline unethical, as he was already fired (not because he did anything wrong). I think he was still an employee at the company and followed the normal company rules. And that he made a good profit was only good for him, being treated to badly by the employer.

Your DH would benefit from a slightly more cynical view of the world. His company fired him to boost THEIR profit. Whatever he does to LEGALLY boost HIS profit at that point is completely ethical.

[dragoncar]

I do not quite understand this wording of the question. The main thing is that everything be legal, and morality is already a subjective matter, and even unnecessary under capitalism

I have learned thru experience that there is a very strong correlation between "people who hold this opinion" and "people I should never trust".

If you go around distrusting a lot of people, that will set back your career and ability to network, and probably harm your overall optimism and quality of life. I prefer to be open-minded in my approach, and give people the benefit of the doubt. For example, I could at least trust the first poster to act legally, which is more than I can say for some people.

From a game theory point of view, even if you believe that someone is amoral (but rational), there would still be easy ways of establishing whether he or she is trustworthy in the sense of being co-operative and reciprocal in dealings with you. After all, even amoral agents can show local reciprocation, when it's the rational choice - which it usually is (co-operation usually has a higher EV than defection, in repeated games).

Being able to work with someone and be civil to them whilst doing so --  and trusting them -- are two different things.   But thanks for the advice.

Trust them?  Hell no.  Not one whit.    They'll screw you over -- legally -- for a penny if they think it will best serve their interests.   

Laws are generally made AFTER enough people like that screw enough other people over.   And people like that are often looking for new ways to screw people over for profit that aren't illegal YET.

The only virtue the ones who are competent at it have over those who aren't is that you can predict when they'll try to screw you over.   The incompetent ones with that philosophy will screw themselves over when they screw you over.

 

If I followed this correctly, it seems like you are discussing two different definitions of trust.

Swordguy wont trust someone to have swordguys interests at heart (like you might trust a parent)

Bloop bloop is saying you can often trust someone to act consistently, which may incidentally still serve your interests, even though that’s not their motivation.   But honestly that’s not the colloquial usage of trust

[Bloop Bloop]

Yeah, spot on.

There are very few people that I innately trust in an unqualified way. But I trust - in the looser sense - about 80% of people I come across. They are easy to figure out. Most people are not malicious and do not intend to hurt anyone. In that sense they can be understood and trusted.

[carolina822]

Bloop bloop is saying you can often trust someone to act consistently, which may incidentally still serve your interests, even though that’s not their motivation.   But honestly that’s not the colloquial usage of trust

As Samuel L. Jackson said in Jackie Brown, "You can't trust Melanie but you can trust Melanie to be Melanie."

[dragoncar]

Bloop bloop is saying you can often trust someone to act consistently, which may incidentally still serve your interests, even though that’s not their motivation.   But honestly that’s not the colloquial usage of trust

As Samuel L. Jackson said in Jackie Brown, "You can't trust Melanie but you can trust Melanie to be Melanie."

As Samuel l Jackson said in snakes on a plane “I’ve Had it with these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane”

[GuitarStv]

Any Samuel L Jackson quote that is not written all in caps is incorrect.  Someone told him early in his career that yelling was the same thing as acting, and he really ran with it.

[afox]

is taking flowers from a graveyard instead of buying them unethical? they just sit there and rot after people leave.

[Davnasty]

is taking flowers from a graveyard instead of buying them unethical? they just sit there and rot after people leave.

Thanks for getting us back on topic, this is what this thread was made for :)

Although first we need to answer the question, would it be stealing? And from whom?

[Omy]

Sarcasm, I hope?

[afox]

my mom used to live across the street from a graveyard and did this regularly. She made a pretty good argument that people just stopped by and dropped flowers on the graves and they would just wither away....

[Davnasty]

my mom used to live across the street from a graveyard and did this regularly. She made a pretty good argument that people just stopped by and dropped flowers on the graves and they would just wither away....

Oh. I thought this was just a joke.

Well then, on the one hand my gut reaction is definitely unethical. The intended purpose of the person who left the flowers was that they stay on the grave. On the other hand, the person who placed the flowers still gets the satisfaction of that symbolic gesture and after that doesn't know the difference, so maybe not?

Then again, there may be more purpose behind placing flowers than just the satisfaction of the gesture. Perhaps the intent is to let others know that this person was loved and has left behind friends/family who are still alive. In that case you would be taking something away from the flower placer.

Or, if you really wanted to reach for justification you might argue that replacing flowers you would have otherwise bought with grave flowers is good for the environment. Less wasted resources to grow more flowers. Just make sure you change the name tag before you give them to your girlfriend.

[SwordGuy]

my mom used to live across the street from a graveyard and did this regularly. She made a pretty good argument that people just stopped by and dropped flowers on the graves and they would just wither away....

Oh. I thought this was just a joke.

Well then, on the one hand my gut reaction is definitely unethical. The intended purpose of the person who left the flowers was that they stay on the grave. On the other hand, the person who placed the flowers still gets the satisfaction of that symbolic gesture and after that doesn't know the difference, so maybe not?

Then again, there may be more purpose behind placing flowers than just the satisfaction of the gesture. Perhaps the intent is to let others know that this person was loved and has left behind friends/family who are still alive. In that case you would be taking something away from the flower placer.

Or, if you really wanted to reach for justification you might argue that replacing flowers you would have otherwise bought with grave flowers is good for the environment. Less wasted resources to grow more flowers. Just make sure you change the name tag before you give them to your girlfriend.

There's always a justification to be found for stealing something from someone else.

Some people drive by the cemetary and can see the plot and therefore that the flowers have been stolen, so you'll definitely hurt them.   Others may visit the grave on frequent basis.  Same thing.

Google "is taking flowers away from graves stealing?" and you'll see a number of articles where the police and the law do, in fact, consider it stealing.

[afox]

Asking for a friend: How about sending your kids to the lost and found to get a new pair of gloves when their fingers are cold instead of buying them a pair, is that unethical? Most of those gloves are never returned to their owners anyway...

[ketchup]

Asking for a friend: How about sending your kids to the lost and found to get a new pair of gloves when their fingers are cold instead of buying them a pair, is that unethical? Most of those gloves are never returned to their owners anyway...

Phone charger at a hotel is another in this vein.

[dragoncar]

Asking for a friend: How about sending your kids to the lost and found to get a new pair of gloves when their fingers are cold instead of buying them a pair, is that unethical? Most of those gloves are never returned to their owners anyway...

Only unethical if you have no idea how long it's been there.  If you spy a pair of gloves and see them still there say a month later, I'd say go for it.  There's definitely some time period after which it's not reasonable to expect that they would be returned to the owner, perhaps a month is too soon... no idea.

Now on the other hand, you could argue that whoever has collected the item and kept it safe for a few weeks now deserves first dibs.  So best to just ask the people running the lost+found first.

[Bloop Bloop]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

[dragoncar]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

Is it ethical to take karma off the karma truck if the karma truck is left unlocked?

[Gremlin]

I'll preface this with "it may not be true but..."

We live not far from a cemetery.  There is someone selling flowers from a van outside the entrance to the cemetery.  Rumour (or urban legend) has it that a couple of decades ago there was someone else fulfilling this service and was busted selling the same flowers more than once.  A profitable business model right up until the point that it wasn't.

[SwordGuy]

I'll preface this with "it may not be true but..."

We live not far from a cemetery.  There is someone selling flowers from a van outside the entrance to the cemetery.  Rumour (or urban legend) has it that a couple of decades ago there was someone else fulfilling this service and was busted selling the same flowers more than once.  A profitable business model right up until the point that it wasn't.

Do the google search I recommended and you'll see newspaper accounts of just such a crime.

[Linea_Norway]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

Maybe the person putting the flowers there, should stick to self-picked wild flowers. Problem solved.

[dragoncar]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

Maybe the person putting the flowers there, should stick to self-picked wild flowers. Problem solved.

Hol up.  Picking wild flowers is DEFINITELY an unethical way to save money unless you've got some kind of flower...field on your property.

[Linea_Norway]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

Maybe the person putting the flowers there, should stick to self-picked wild flowers. Problem solved.

Hol up.  Picking wild flowers is DEFINITELY an unethical way to save money unless you've got some kind of flower...field on your property.

No, just wild flowers that grow along the road and other deserted places, or your own garden. Not from official parks, but wild areas. We have lots of those places and it is not unethical to pick there at all. Fully allowed by law as well.

[dragoncar]

Taking flowers from graves seems like something you would do if you really wanted to be hit by the karma truck.

Maybe the person putting the flowers there, should stick to self-picked wild flowers. Problem solved.

Hol up.  Picking wild flowers is DEFINITELY an unethical way to save money unless you've got some kind of flower...field on your property.

No, just wild flowers that grow along the road and other deserted places, or your own garden. Not from official parks, but wild areas. We have lots of those places and it is not unethical to pick there at all. Fully allowed by law as well.

But then the people driving on the road see fewer flowers.  Sad.

[GuitarStv]

my mom used to live across the street from a graveyard and did this regularly. She made a pretty good argument that people just stopped by and dropped flowers on the graves and they would just wither away....

Oh. I thought this was just a joke.

Well then, on the one hand my gut reaction is definitely unethical. The intended purpose of the person who left the flowers was that they stay on the grave. On the other hand, the person who placed the flowers still gets the satisfaction of that symbolic gesture and after that doesn't know the difference, so maybe not?

Then again, there may be more purpose behind placing flowers than just the satisfaction of the gesture. Perhaps the intent is to let others know that this person was loved and has left behind friends/family who are still alive. In that case you would be taking something away from the flower placer.

Or, if you really wanted to reach for justification you might argue that replacing flowers you would have otherwise bought with grave flowers is good for the environment. Less wasted resources to grow more flowers. Just make sure you change the name tag before you give them to your girlfriend.

There's always a justification to be found for stealing something from someone else.

Some people drive by the cemetary and can see the plot and therefore that the flowers have been stolen, so you'll definitely hurt them.   Others may visit the grave on frequent basis.  Same thing.

Google "is taking flowers away from graves stealing?" and you'll see a number of articles where the police and the law do, in fact, consider it stealing.

Ethics are weird.

The energy cost of growing exotic flowers, culling the ones that don't look pretty, throwing out the ones that don't sell, powering the building that sells them (refridgeration, climate control, lights, etc.) and then transporting them to the grave site is substantial.  That's a lot of environmental damage for very little real gain.

Therefore, I'd actually argue that buying cut flowers for any reason at all is unethical.  But this is particularly true if you're buying them just to drop at a bit of stone in a field somewhere and let rot.  So, I kinda feel like taking flowers from a gravestone is a form of recycling and thus less ethically wrong than leaving the flowers at the grave site in the first place.

But people tend to support anything that is a tradition and will therefore disagree with me on this . . . even when doing so flies in the face of logic.