Even though I'm gloating over my good fortune, I feel guilty over a purchase I made yesterday. I'd been looking for canister filters (which are expensive -- typically hundreds of dollars each) and I spotted a Craigslist ad for a bunch of aquarium stuff which included two canister filters. Everything was $100.00. I made a date, drove out there, and saw a ton of stuff -- all of which had me drooling. The seller (a college age male) wasn't even there, and his affluent, busy dad had taken charge, as the stuff had been in the way, and he wanted it out. He realized I was getting a good deal, but didn't seem to care at all. So I concealed my delight as I paid him, piled everything in my car and took off lest he change his mind.

I'm not going to bore readers by listing every item, but it's all top quality stuff, including the filters, lighting, tank, stand, pumps, powerheads, a python, a protein skimmer, a box of expensive rocks, and it would retail for well over $1000.00. (And that's conservative; the pair of lights alone sell for $230 each.)

As far as I'm concerned I stole it. Except no crime was committed. These people were clearly the owners, so I did not receive stolen goods.

When I worked as an auto mechanic, my boss (who used to routinely buy perfectly drivable cars for less than $50.00 from clueless sellers) once said something I'll never forget: "If someone offers me a dollar for a quarter, why shouldn't I offer him a dime?" Me, I don't operate that way. I'll gladly pay the quarter. (Well, yesterday I paid a dime, but that's because they were only asking a dime.)

While I did nothing dishonest (and these people appeared to know what they were doing), I think there might be instances where not saying something can border on dishonesty. Suppose someone is having a garage sale, and clearly does not understand the value of something. An elderly widow has a box of books and miscellaneous bric-a-brac (marked "$5.00 FOR WHOLE BOX"), and one of the items happens to be a folding album containing her husband's collection of rare gold coins. That would clearly be a mistake on her part, for no rational person would knowingly sell gold that way, so I think it would be dishonest to buy them without saying anything.

Or would it? (I have to be fair to both sides, including my dark one....)

But suppose a seller knew he was selling gold coins, but priced them incorrectly, for less than the known market value of the gold? Suppose a proprietor has old prices from five years ago written on the gold coins, has not bothered to update them because he knows the current values anyway, but he goes on vacation leaving his shiftless and uninterested son in charge of the store. If he sells them to a customer at five-year-old prices, is the customer being dishonest by buying gold for a quarter of what he knows to be its value, or is he a savvy buyer, taking advantage of a super opportunity?

I will never forget buying collectible cash (old paper money) at an antique auction for less than the face value of the cash -- simply because no one was interested in bidding. It would have been better for the seller to deposit it in the bank. But a professional auctioneering house is neither a clueless widow nor a neer-do-well son. If they wanted to do that, it was their problem.

One of the craziest situations I've ever seen involved an extremely eccentric old man who was literally throwing money around in a New Orleans gay bar:

There was an ancient queen -- really old, really effeminate, and obviously on his last legs. Except he wasn't even on his last legs, as he was in a wheelchair. The man's face radiated pure joy, and I swear to God, he was passing out huge amounts of cash! Hundreds, twenties, fifties -- it did not matter to him. He was having the time of his life just giving money away to attractive young men. Watching carefully, I could see nothing remotely sexual about this behavior, and I doubt that the man was capable of sexual gratification. But even if he was, that was not his goal; he just wanted to see young men happy in a gay bar with his cash!

Altruism?

This behavior irritated the hell out of a young military-looking guy, who was following at the "wheels" of the old man, angrily attempting to stare down all takers, his face contorted into the angriest, most Calvinistic scowl of moral authority he could muster. In some cases, he succeeded in taking back the money (sometimes grabbing it as was dropped guiltily to the floor by those he shamed) and handing it back to the old queen. The old queen laughed at him and tried to hand him the money back -- as if this too was all part of his "fun."

Clearly, most decent people (certainly most altruists) would maintain that an old man like that should be placed in a home and cared for. But I don't know about that. He looked quite happy to me -- and he certainly did not appear senile.

At the risk of sounding like a hopeless moral relativist, I guess when you get something for nothing, it's better to feel guilty than entitled.