So today, I was working in a different theatre and for lunch I went to the market to get a jacket potato from one of the independent stalls, the man who worked there was lovely and was chatting to me as he made my food, I gave him a 10 pound note and as we were taking I realised he'd handed me back 3.50 plus two 5 pounds notes as change. Clearly a mistake, but was I honest and inform him of the mistake? No, I felt guilty and considered what to do but while I was thinking about it I was already putting the money back in my wallet and I walking away. I ended up 3.50 better off and with free food. The question is, even though it was his mistake, was it morally wrong for me not to tell him about it? The truth is I probably only felt slightly guilty about it because it was a tiny market stall, not a big chain, and the man was lovely and friendly.
Linked in some very loose way is my new theory on how to segregate "unworthy" people from the gene pool. (I hope that doesn't sound too Hitler-like!)
Its a simple yet effective test, imagine you are in Tesco Express and are two separate cues, one for "normal" Service and one for "self" service, If there is no cue for the self-service mashines, and yet you stay in the normal cue (unless you are old, disabled, have a ton of shopping or have another good reason) then you are therefore deemed an idiot and should not be aloud to breed, and this cutting out the "stupid" gene. Simple yet effective I think! Stupidity is too widely excepted these days
that is all
Industrial_Alice
No comments:
Post a Comment