I think that the famous musician who left his $4 million Stradivarius violin on the back seat of a taxi was a tad tightfisted when he gave the driver $100 and a couple of free tickets to a September concert.
Hang on, though. Did he pay millions for it or was it a family heirloom or even a lucky cheap purchase? It's a bit like this government's mentality of setting council taxes based on value not what was paid. I certainly can't afford my house now.
Hang on, though. Did he pay millions for it or was it a family heirloom or even a lucky cheap purchase? It's a bit like this government's mentality of setting council taxes based on value not what was paid. I certainly can't afford my house now.
I don't think that it matters much. It was worth $4 million and he would have lost it if the taxi driver had not been honest. I believe in honesty and I would have turned it in regardless of the reward, myself. But if I had lost it, I would have thought that the relief of getting it back was worth more than $100.
Even the thought of my wife's wrath, if I lost something like that, would make me more generous.
This thread isn't about the honesty of the taxi driver, is it?
I am only commenting on how much he gave anyway. What if $100 was a lot to him. Maybe he owes a lot of money or is going through an expensive divorce or something. Two sides to every story.
I think that the famous musician who left his $4 million Stradivarius violin on the back seat of a taxi was a tad tightfisted when he gave the driver $100 and a couple of free tickets to a September concert.