6 ms·

Yes, indeed, fortunately if you actually read even the first line of the article you'd understand that this isn't talking about theft.

michaelmrose 3y ago
Riddle me this. How was it impossible to locate any of the owners for these? https://www.unclaimedbaggage.com/collections/iphones https://www.unclaimedbaggage.com/collections/iphones
notatoad 3y ago
right, not theft, just the seemingly legitimate sale of items whose rightful owner is unknown. if you think this isn't used as an opportunity for fencing stolen items, you're deluding yourself.
- grayfaced 3y ago
  Do you have evidence of this single named company engaging in stolen items? Or just felt like throwing out accusations?
- r2_pilot 3y ago
  Please don't imbue your assumptions about legitimate business models without providing proof. The guidelines here are to make the effort to maximally be charitable in our interpretations.
  - totallymike 3y ago
    I mean you only have to ask yourself the first logical question about how any of this pays for itself to realize that it’s ethically questionable at best, so…
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Who is doing the stealing? Are you claiming that the business in the article is getting part of their inventory from some place other than the airlines or lost luggage?
dcx 3y ago
I think OP is right but hasn't fully unrolled what they mean. This seems like it creates a moral hazard [1], because it reduces the penalty to airlines for losing luggage. If airlines were prepared to accept X in costs from lost luggage before, and now get paid Y, they can now accept about X+Y in lost luggage costs. Meaning more lost luggage! After the system dynamics resettle, from a certain angle this is basically stealing: customers pay the same ticket price, but are paying some percentage more in expected lost luggage. And on top of that, this is just considering the financial cost - what is actually happening is that more travelers are being deprived of their personal belongings. These are worth more to people than insurance payouts! It's surprising, but when you zoom out this seems downright awful. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard
- chrismorgan 3y ago
  The obvious solution to the moral hazard is to require that the company not profit from the disposal of the lost luggage. Unfortunately this is difficult to achieve, even imperfectly. “Give the proceeds of the lot sales to charity” sounds like a straightforward solution, but who’s charity? Whoever ends up profiting now has incentive to cause more to be lost; the further they’re disconnected from the airline industry and the specific airline the better. Anonymous donation of proceeds would be best, if it can be managed.
  - mcny 3y ago
    It is not possible. This is the same problem I had with government fines such as traffic tickets. People can't afford to spend time away from work fighting stupid tickets So they pay to settle When the district attorney says pay and we will let you go. What happens when government lowers it's taxes and instead gets funded with fees and fines? I'd say airlines should not be allowed to sell any luggage. It is not theirs to sell. If they are caught selling items that don't belong to them, Put the CEO and the entire board in prison for life.
- lukevp 3y ago
  I mean… the grocery store can make more money by double scanning an item I purchase, or McDonald’s can skim some money by giving everyone one less pickle. At some point the service quality has to be intrinsically motivated by the company wanting to preserve their brand, right? How much could they make off stolen luggage that they’d legitimately lose more on purpose? Surely the payout they have to make of losing luggage both monetarily and indirectly through brand devaluation is greater than the amount of money they’d make selling the luggage?

michaelmrose 3y ago

Riddle me this. How was it impossible to locate any of the owners for these? https://www.unclaimedbaggage.com/collections/iphones https://www.unclaimedbaggage.com/collections/iphones

notatoad 3y ago

right, not theft, just the seemingly legitimate sale of items whose rightful owner is unknown. if you think this isn't used as an opportunity for fencing stolen items, you're deluding yourself.

grayfaced 3y ago
Do you have evidence of this single named company engaging in stolen items? Or just felt like throwing out accusations?
r2_pilot 3y ago
Please don't imbue your assumptions about legitimate business models without providing proof. The guidelines here are to make the effort to maximally be charitable in our interpretations.
- totallymike 3y ago
  I mean you only have to ask yourself the first logical question about how any of this pays for itself to realize that it’s ethically questionable at best, so…
scarface_74 3y ago
Who is doing the stealing? Are you claiming that the business in the article is getting part of their inventory from some place other than the airlines or lost luggage?

dcx 3y ago

I think OP is right but hasn't fully unrolled what they mean. This seems like it creates a moral hazard [1], because it reduces the penalty to airlines for losing luggage. If airlines were prepared to accept X in costs from lost luggage before, and now get paid Y, they can now accept about X+Y in lost luggage costs. Meaning more lost luggage! After the system dynamics resettle, from a certain angle this is basically stealing: customers pay the same ticket price, but are paying some percentage more in expected lost luggage. And on top of that, this is just considering the financial cost - what is actually happening is that more travelers are being deprived of their personal belongings. These are worth more to people than insurance payouts! It's surprising, but when you zoom out this seems downright awful. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

chrismorgan 3y ago
The obvious solution to the moral hazard is to require that the company not profit from the disposal of the lost luggage. Unfortunately this is difficult to achieve, even imperfectly. “Give the proceeds of the lot sales to charity” sounds like a straightforward solution, but who’s charity? Whoever ends up profiting now has incentive to cause more to be lost; the further they’re disconnected from the airline industry and the specific airline the better. Anonymous donation of proceeds would be best, if it can be managed.
- mcny 3y ago
  It is not possible. This is the same problem I had with government fines such as traffic tickets. People can't afford to spend time away from work fighting stupid tickets So they pay to settle When the district attorney says pay and we will let you go. What happens when government lowers it's taxes and instead gets funded with fees and fines? I'd say airlines should not be allowed to sell any luggage. It is not theirs to sell. If they are caught selling items that don't belong to them, Put the CEO and the entire board in prison for life.
lukevp 3y ago
I mean… the grocery store can make more money by double scanning an item I purchase, or McDonald’s can skim some money by giving everyone one less pickle. At some point the service quality has to be intrinsically motivated by the company wanting to preserve their brand, right? How much could they make off stolen luggage that they’d legitimately lose more on purpose? Surely the payout they have to make of losing luggage both monetarily and indirectly through brand devaluation is greater than the amount of money they’d make selling the luggage?