She'd be better off giving the money to charity instead...
not sure if right sub forum, but a word problem it is. it's a bit tricky for me and would like some expertise. thanks
a friend of mine stole some clothes and wants a clean consiounce by repaying the store. she donated all the clothes. some of the clothes were 1-of-a-kind meaning that if a shirt was $60, the store lost $60 because the shirt is no longer on the rack and someone might have bought that exact shirt instead of spending money at a different store. for the non-1-of-a-kind clothes, she figures she only owes the store 1/3 (about how much the store paid the manufacturer for the shirt) of the retail price. suppose she stole $150 in 1-of-a-kind clothes and $150 of clothes that had many of the same color/size still in the store, without over/under paying back, what's the right amount to pay back the store and how should she go about paying the store? should she buy more clothes and leave/sneak them back onto the rack or donate them or what?! thanks
He's a catch to it i forgot to mention in the original post:
she happens to need to buy a bunch of clothes and would never shop in the store she stole from, so instead of taking her money elsewhere like where she would have if she hadn't stolen from this store, if she bought clothes from the store she stole from in the amount she stole, then she could have a clear consence, right?
I guess the only way to fully pay back the store is to buy something and sneak it back onto the shelf. because, if she bought something of equal price, someone else would have bought that anyway so the store still loses the cost of the original stolen clothes.if cash were anonymously sent, how would the store process funds in no barcode attached, and maybe someone in the mailroom would steal the cash if an anonymous letter were sent.
besides confessing and possibly getting arrested, I guess the only way to fully pay back the store is to buy something and sneak it back onto the shelf. because, if she bought something of equal price, someone else would have bought that anyway so the store still loses the cost of the original stolen clothes.if money were anonymously sent, how would the store process funds in no barcode attached, and maybe someone in the mailroom would steal the cash if an anonymous letter were sent.
this happened 15 years ago and on another forum they said:If you're going to make amends, why not do it right? Since you can't give them the $$ 15 years ago (because we live in the present), give them back what you took - i.e. the "future value" of the stolen amount.
One online calculator quoted the inflation since 1995 to be around 44%. also factored in possible investment of the money lost. but, still, it's not like the mojority of jobs are paying 44% more nowaday sthan they did 15 years ago. maybe she should pay the value it was 15 years ago and plus buy a bunch of clearance clothes,which would make more money for the company before they do this with it: http://www.walletpop.com/2010/04/02/...rs-cant-sell/4