Posted by Benjamin on: 04.11.2008 /
Yesterday in the news, Eli Estrada, a landscaper in Long Beach, California, found a Bank of America money bag with $140,000 in unmarked twenty dollar bills on the ground. The bag had been lost on March 11 by Brinks Armored truck drivers. Forty year old Eli said “I think I was nuts, but I know in my gut that to keep that money would be wrong.” He turned it over to the police, and later received a $2000 reward from Brinks.
So the big question is: what would *you* do if you found that much money?
Leave a Reply
Comment by: Rachel
1 04/11/08 7:43 AM | Comment Link |I definitely would return the money. It would torture my conscience if I tried to keep it.
But, after seeing the story covered on television, the more pressing question for me is this: Is Eli Estrada related to Erik Estrada of CHiPs fame? Cause I saw a pretty striking resemblance there!
Comment by: David H
2 04/11/08 5:36 PM | Comment Link |Anyone unsure as to what they should do with the money just needs to watch “No Country for Old Men.” Keep the money and run the risk of meeting a sociopathic killer.
Thats how my childhood moral instruction usually ran. Look how I turned out.
Comment by: Benjamin
3 04/11/08 10:47 PM | Comment Link |David,
Wow.
I really liked No Country for Old Men, but the moral lesson seemed to me to be a bit broader than that–more along the lines of “The world is an evil dark place and there’s not a thing you can do to really change that.”
Rachel. Wow–I used to watch CHIPs when I was *very* little. But I see what you mean.
I think there’s *no* way I’d give it back. Even if I didn’t keep it, I’d break it into smaller portions and give it in cash anonymously to various charities.
Or I might use the whole lot to set up a fund the proceeds of which would go to charity–I mean you could make 14K a year in interest off of that easily, right?
Comment by: martin gugino
4 04/12/08 11:13 PM | Comment Link |Yes.
Comment by: Staci
5 04/14/08 6:15 PM | Comment Link |How do you know the lost money wasn’t a deposit for one of the charities you would support?
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
6 04/15/08 1:08 AM | Comment Link |Staci,
Indeed. I guess I was operating on the assumption that I knew who had lost the money.
None of the charities I know of tend to have $140,000 in cash floating around.
I figured the armored car people lost it. So no doubt their insurance kicks in for it, and … probably the specific people who lost it lose their jobs or keep them regardless of whether the money is returned/found.
Do you know of any charities that would have that kind of cash in a bag?
Comment by: Staci
7 04/15/08 3:00 PM | Comment Link |Armored cars don’t generally own the money they transport. They pick up from businesses, atms, bank branches, etc. and deposit elsewhere. In all probability the money belonged to several people who all deposited money in, for example, an atm. I’m sure the armored car company’s insurance would have to cover it, but then their premiums would go up and they would pass the increase on to their customers who would pass it on to theirs, and on downhill. In some ways this is like the bottled water discussion. Sure, it is immediately convenient for the individual to keep the money (or use lots of plastic water bottles), but at what price to the larger community?
As an aside, I work with a not for profit and have seen donors give in some different ways, though never that large an amount in cash. I did once find a personal check - the small ones people carry in pocketbooks and write by hand - for $1 million in the regular US mail in the kind of envelope one would use for a letter. I couldn’t get it into the deposit bag fast enough because I was so afraid of losing it.
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
8 04/15/08 5:17 PM | Comment Link |Staci,
Yes, of course you have a point. Does the cost of the loss decrease or increase or stay the same as it goes through each level you describe? I’m not an economist, but I bet it decreases–it kind of smooths out. So yes the armored car corporation perhaps pays a slightly larger premium (but not that much larger, or they switch to a different insurance company). And they charge the banks, the grocery stores, and perhaps the non-profits a slightly higher rater for their services. But not that much higher (or their customers switch to the other armored car corporation). And the insurance company, who absorbs most of the loss, absorbs a relatively small blip in their generally largish profits.
Meanwhile, maybe another kid in Africa gets the AIDS drugs he needs. Or enough to eat. Or safe drinking water.
When you were a kid, Staci, did you think Robin Hood was a great hero, when he stole from the rich and gave to the poor? Or did you think he was just passing the cost on down to the very poor people he was trying to help, when he stole from the rich? I *do* hope I’m not coming across as rude. I’m genuinely curious. My lovely wife sometimes sings in her lovely Australian voice “Steal from the rich, give to the poor, Robin Hood, Robin Hood.” Things seem a lot more complicated as a grown up than they did when I was a kid =)