"There is this difference between
man and the higher animals: he is avaricious and miserly, they are not." -
Mark Twain.
"Pasadena:
Fights broke out and two people were cited Friday morning outside the Pasadena
Apple Store, where nearly a hundred people had been hired to stand in line for
a businessman who planned to resell newly released iPhone models."
As a "TaskRabbit", I get up to 200 posts a day in my email requesting
bids for odd jobs. Last week's posts, however, looked more like an
advertisement for Apple's latest iPhone and the subsequent greed which it
engendered. Indeed it was a new type of greed: paid substitute greed. Offers
ranging from $35 to $80 to stand in line (the $80 for overnight) were rampant
in the San Francisco Bay Area. Hundreds of surrogate "buyers" were
paid thousands just to stand, sit, sleep, in front of Apple stores.
Willing to pay up to $100:
"Find 32g AT&T gold iPhone (and/or ticket for standing in line) at an Apple
store within 30-45 minute drive for me to exchange my space grey 32g iPhone."
Self indulgent, yes, but, the color made all the difference you see.
I did not answer any of the posts to be a surrogate of self-indulgence, but
many others did. Many others had the time. Many others needed the money. The
TaskRabbit posts were legitimate and above board. The situation in Pasadena,
however, showed that greed can be considered legitimate, but need not be
ethical.
Surrogates For Self-indulgence
The Pasadena story almost beats the greed of buyers trampling
a Walmart clerk to death in
an ensuing sale. But the greed is by one man and he "trampled" scores
of homeless. He was also acting on the greed of others - under the cover of
________, a kind of "trickle-down greed" that pretends at times to
help the poor, but does nothing but exploit them. He employed surrogates for
self-indulgence and didn't pay them.
A Case for Judge Judy
Point #1: The unidentified "entrepreneur" engaged an entire group of
people to secure a place in line for him, promising $40 for the service of
standing in line for hours.
Point #2: Vans picked the people up and transported them to the iPhone store.
Point #3: The people stood in line for him.
Point #4: The store refused to sell the man more than a "handful" of
iPhones.
Point #5: The man refused to pay the people who stood in line for him.
Point #6: The people were left stranded at the Apple store without means of
transportation to get back to the shelter.
Did the man enter into any form of verbal contract with the homeless people?
By accepting the ride in a van did the people acceed to the terms of the
contract?
Did the man bother to find out if the store would sell him 80 iPhones no matter
how many vouchers he had?
Did the man take any responsibility at all for his actions?
Yes. Yes. No. No.
Pay up, mister. "I didn't do anything illegal" doesn't cut it. You
did. You broke a contract, you may have hijacked a group of people on false
pretenses. You intended to defraud Apple by presenting a lot of surrogate
vouchers.*
Greed Triumphs Over Justice
The man in question got police protection. And stark reality sets in after one
sees the video: the irate homeless were handcuffed, several were given
citations, and one man who may have been mentally ill was restrained.
Pasadena police are not investigating the incident, [Pasadena Police Lt. Jason]
Clawson said.
"It's not a police issue. It's a business issue," he said.
The business being exploitation based on
greed.
* All the TaskRabbit posts were for standing in line until the real buyer
showed up. Multiples were not requested, so no fraudulent vouchers were given
out. The fact that Apple did not specify only one phone per person does not
mitigate the dishonesty of the act of obtaining surrogates for vouchers. The
man was lucky to get his "handful" of iPhones.
1
1
1
