Cabbie turns in $187,000 found in back of his cab....

[Acer]

Drug money. The mule tipped the finder out of his own pocket, and that was a good share of his fee as it was. The real owner of the money was not interested in expressing gratitude for a nearly-botched drop.

[davester]

N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
A reward equal to 0.05% of the returned money? It would have been less insulting to give no reward at all.

I don't understand this. If I had found and returned that money I would have refused any reward. In fact that exact thing has happened to me in the past (though not for as much money). I'm surprised that you feel that anyone is entitled to a reward simply for being honest. Perhaps I'm too idealistic, but for me the reward is knowing that you have done something worthy.

This might be a cultural thing. I tried to tip a barman at a pub in England a few years ago. He returned the money immediately, stating "Thank you sir, but that is not necessary". It was clear that he felt insulted to be offered additional money to cover something he felt was his duty to provide for the amount on the bill.

[August West]

I think that those tipping their noses up at a reward are in a minority. Rewards have been offered for time immemorial for the return of lost items. It is hardly an uncommon event in society. I think the hundred bucks is lame, but that's just me.

[GGD]

If it were just a lost backpack without knowing what was inside, wouldn't $100 be sufficient?

[N-OS X-tasy!]

davester wrote:
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
A reward equal to 0.05% of the returned money? It would have been less insulting to give no reward at all.

I'm surprised that you feel that anyone is entitled to a reward simply for being honest.
That is not at all what I said. Please re-read what I wrote:

N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
I'm not arguing that the finder should expect a large reward, or a reward of any size, for that matter. I'm arguing that if the rightful owner of the money was going to go to the trouble of providing a reward, that act of gratitude should have been commensurate with the magnitude of the finder's act of honesty.

The monetary amounts in the "five cent reward for returning $100" example I provided above were not randomly selected - the ratio between the returned sum and the reward offered in my example is approximately equal to that of the returned sum and the reward offered in this case. So I ask again: If you were to find and return $100 to someone, would you be more insulted if the person offered a nickel as a reward than if they offered no reward at all?

EDIT: For the record, I have also turned down a proffered reward for returning lost goods (a wallet with a number of credit cards and about $60 cash in it) for exactly the reason you stated: the act of returning the lost property was its own reward. The owner of the wallet offered me all of the cash inside of it as a reward, an offer I graciously refused. Had she decided to offer me three pennies as a reward for my honest act, however, I would have considered that a grievous insult.

[OWC Jamie]

The Boston.com ( like usual ) leaves a portion of the story out. ( although maybe this time for good reason )

The man with the cash claimed to be a homeless man living in a hotel. He supposedly left the cabbie hanging for a quick stop and never returned to the cab ( a stiff the cabbie trick which may or may not be what happened ) but he left his backpack in the cab. The cabbie went to the hotel that the guy said he was staying at and was the original fare destination but after a half hour or so of his time the guy never showed up. He then went thru the bag looking for a name so the hotel could leave it in his room and found the money. He went straight to the police station. It was the police that found the inheritance legal papers. It was the police that returned the money and backpack. It's not entirely clear whether the $100 is a "reward" or payment for the fare and the cabbie's time.
The police wanted to laud the cab driver for being honest and doing the right thing .

Arguing over what a possibly crazy person 's considerations and ethics should or shouldn't have been seems a bit crazy.
But carry on.
:popcorn:

[RAMd®d]

.

[modelamac]

N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
.............................
I'm arguing that if the rightful owner of the money was going to go to the trouble of providing a reward, that act of gratitude should have been commensurate with the magnitude of the finder's act of honesty.

Therein lies your problem.

[RgrF]

RAMd®d wrote:
I haven't seen the word "hackney" in years, and didn't know it had a division!

Hackney derived from 18th and 19-century horse drawn carriages that were for the most part private and not public. They later became available for public hire, primarily in old Esat Coast cities like Boston, NY, DC and Philadelphia. The regulation was usually given over to police, who then established a new revenue stream originally called the "Hackney Bureau or Department".

Once horses were replaced with licenses or "medallions" local police forces found themselves in possession of a new revenue stream that exists to this day and administered by a Hackney Bureau. Most West Coast cities came into being after such bureaucratic encumbrances became ingrained and thus avoided these, at least in name They went on to develop their own.

Uber and Lift are not favorably looked upon from these hallowed corrupt precincts.

[NewtonMP2100]

....funny 'cause most guys are always trying to give the ladies......their tip [ just the tip mind you ].........